When does a pitch end?

[noumpere]

Is there a case where it matters whether a caught ball was or would have been fair or foul?  I think its a symantics argument that doesn't matter even in the arcane world of umpiring and Im as big a believer in using the right terms as anyone on an umpire site.

[Rich Ives]

1) Watch the MLB umps. They will point foul when the ball is touched/caught.

 

2) Now to update my ignore list.

[Thunderheads]

Had an interesting play the other day that revolved around this question. Whatever rule code you wish to use is fine.

Please define this situation and stop this thread from straying ............

 

What happened in your play?

[mstaylor]

I know I show fair/foul then catch/no catch. Do me a favor and stick to the arguments and PM  the editorial comments. 

[Richvee]

 

 

 

This is pretty silly

Have you noticed a few of BalkHawk's recently expressed beliefs? Yes. But this belief trumps them all, IMO. These weak and fallacious arguments are thinly veiled argumentum ad hominem. This is a millenias-old troll tactic. If my argument is weak, you should have no problem refuting it. If it is silly, you might consider not wasting your keystokes. If you think it's cool to jump on JM's back because he is a stronger umpire than yourself and hurl pop shots without giving any reason, I say you are a coward.

Ad hominem

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument.[2]Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as an informal fallacy,[3][4][5] more precisely an irrelevance.[6]

I will respond to Richvee's previous post:

I believe the definition of a foul ball makes a reference to the ball touching a player (or umpire) instead of the player touching the ball on purpose. In the definition of a catch, there are two references to a fielder touching a ball (with his glove) when, in Rich's opinion, the writers could have just as easily said 'ball touches player' (BUT THEY DIDN'T SAY THAT!!!)

A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing he does not use his cap, protector, pocket or any other part of his uniform in getting possession. It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his contact with the ball, he collides with a player, or with a wall, or if he falls down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drops the ball. It is not a catch if a fielder touches a fly ball which then hits a member of the offensive team or an umpire and then is caught by another defensive player. If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught. In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional.

Rule 2.00 (Catch) Comment: A catch is legal if the ball is finally held by any fielder, even though juggled, or held by another fielder before it touches the ground. Runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball. A fielder may reach over a fence, railing, rope or other line of demarcation to make a catch. He may jump on top of a railing, or canvas that may be in foul ground. No interference should be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk.

If a fielder, attempting a catch at the edge of the dugout, is held up and kept from an apparent fall by a player or players of either team and the catch is made, it shall be allowed.

 

wow. 

[PonyUmpire]

Jkumpire needs to post the actual play. I'm dying to know what happened.

[NFUA_44]

 

 

 

This is pretty silly

Have you noticed a few of BalkHawk's recently expressed beliefs? Yes. But this belief trumps them all, IMO. These weak and fallacious arguments are thinly veiled argumentum ad hominem. This is a millenias-old troll tactic. If my argument is weak, you should have no problem refuting it. If it is silly, you might consider not wasting your keystokes. If you think it's cool to jump on JM's back because he is a stronger umpire than yourself and hurl pop shots without giving any reason, I say you are a coward.

Ad hominem

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument.[2]Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as an informal fallacy,[3][4][5] more precisely an irrelevance.[6]

I will respond to Richvee's previous post:

I believe the definition of a foul ball makes a reference to the ball touching a player (or umpire) instead of the player touching the ball on purpose. In the definition of a catch, there are two references to a fielder touching a ball (with his glove) when, in Rich's opinion, the writers could have just as easily said 'ball touches player' (BUT THEY DIDN'T SAY THAT!!!)

A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing he does not use his cap, protector, pocket or any other part of his uniform in getting possession. It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his contact with the ball, he collides with a player, or with a wall, or if he falls down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drops the ball. It is not a catch if a fielder touches a fly ball which then hits a member of the offensive team or an umpire and then is caught by another defensive player. If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught. In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional.

Rule 2.00 (Catch) Comment: A catch is legal if the ball is finally held by any fielder, even though juggled, or held by another fielder before it touches the ground. Runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball. A fielder may reach over a fence, railing, rope or other line of demarcation to make a catch. He may jump on top of a railing, or canvas that may be in foul ground. No interference should be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk.

If a fielder, attempting a catch at the edge of the dugout, is held up and kept from an apparent fall by a player or players of either team and the catch is made, it shall be allowed.

 

 

Yes, jkumpire please save us.......

[jkumpire]

Gentlemen, 

 

Good to speak to you again, I've been out in the cold and everything else recently. I just thawed out yesterday.

 

Thanks to all who posted, I appreciate your posts, some for the information and frankly some for the entertainment value.

 

I am sorry to say the reason for my question is much less entertaining than the thread conversation, it probably involves multiple brain cramps.

 

R3, R1, 1 out, 0-1 count, NAIA game. F2 at the plate for the home team, and you would think he knows the signs by now. R1 is off on the pitch and the batter puts his bat out to bunt, then pulls it back as the pitchout comes home. The ball is 8 inches off the plate, defense's F2 steps out of the box to the the throw and sends a rifle to 2B, stepping from the LH batter's box.

 

Our intrepid hitter now realizes he needed to swing as the bat sits on his shoulder. As the F2 is releasing the ball to 2B, the hitter says a quiet word of frustration (take your choice) and starts a half hearted swing of frustration finishing his swing at the ball is in F4's glove. Me, being the slow timing plate umpire waits until the ball leaves F2's hand, says "Ball! No he didn't go" as the hitter stars swinging.

 

You can figure out what happens next, manager is crying for me to check with BU, who of course says 'NO', and here comes the manager. I didn't dump him immediately because he deserves an explaination on this. I did not express myself too well on the argument (great thread starter for another day), but the point got through; the hitter hadn't started a swing until after the ball was released, no interference since he didn't try to contact F2 or throw the bat in front of him, so all we have is a ball and an idiot for an F2 (maybe PU?).

 

My partner and i discussed it after the game, and he agreed with my call ("you didn't have much of a choice" he said) and it was one of the screwiest plays I've had in a season with about six situations out of the Twilight Zone. 

 

The easy solution is of course to change the ball call to a strike call, but I made the call, it's all mine, and unless I'm nuts it's correct. To me the point is once the pitch is oiver and F2 is making a play there is a time where the batter can do something silly like this and as long as he doesn't interfere with a play, he's legal to be stupid.

 

Now of course I'm wrong already on one thing, I should have held the stop sign up on the defense's manager and/or dumped him for arguing the call. But since he didn't make an idiot of himself and the play looked so strange he deserved an explanation of what I had.

 

Second, the easy play is to change the call, but when do change a bat pulled back on a bunt to a strike when he swings 2 seconds later? IMO, it's the easy but wrong call.

 

I covet your opinions, and please be advised I already burned the new uniform undershirt I wore that day because somebody filled it with bad Karma.

[UmpJM]

jk,

 

If I'm picturing the sequence correctly, there was no offer.

 

The batter either made a "practice swing" in preparation for the next pitch or attempted unsuccessfully to interfere with the F2's attempt to retire the advancing runner.

 

I'm not saying anything other than "Ball." on the pitch.

 

Concur with your "legal to be stupid" comment.

 

JM

[UmpRandy]

Hi all.  New here and posting for the first time. . . 

 

Thank you to all who participate as it's very helpful to me as a first year ump!

 

Girls 10/11 fast pitch game.  Short backstop.  Pitched ball is wild, catcher can't catch it, ball rebounds off the wood backstop and hits the bat.

 

Foul ball or ball?  

[Thunderheads]

Hi all.  New here and posting for the first time. . . 

 

Thank you to all who participate as it's very helpful to me as a first year ump!

 

Girls 10/11 fast pitch game.  Short backstop.  Pitched ball is wild, catcher can't catch it, ball rebounds off the wood backstop and hits the bat.

 

Foul ball or ball?  

This should probably be posted as a question in "Ask the Umpire" ....but ............    ball