Mike Trout tips ball over fence

[Sayhey]

Centerfielder Mike Trout tipped a ball over the fence after the ball struck the face of the outfield centerfield wall. The ball must go over the fence in flight to be a 4 base award. If a ball hits the top of the fence and goes over it is considered a h.r.

This ball did not hit the top of the wall and it did not hit Trouts glove until after it hit the wall . That should be a two base award, not a home run.

Was this "homer" reviewed. I only saw highlights.

[Thunderheads]

did you look on MLB.com/video?

[Thunderheads]

I think your assessment is wrong

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=26797353&topic_id=&c_id=mlb&tcid=vpp_copy_26797353&v=3

[Sayhey]

In slow motion the ball goes over Trout's glove untouched. The ball strikes the face of the outfield fence and then is tipped up on top of the fence and rolls over the top onto dead ball territory. When the baseball struck the face of the fence in flight it could never be a home run. It must fly over the fence in flight. Technically, a ball striking the top of the fence and going over is not in flight, but historically, it has been ruled a 4 base award. This ball did not strike the top of the wall. It struck the face of the wall and then was tipped over the wall onto dead ball territory.

[Thunderheads]

Ok, I can see where you see that but .........

 

If the ball doesn't touch Trout's mitt ....and hits the 'facing' of the wall, .......physics-wise, how does the ball bounce "up" ??

 

There's a ledge on that wall and it hit the top of that ledge/flange there ....  I think

 

If it's extraordinarilly hard to see in super slo mo ........fuhgettaboutit real time

[noumpere]

Unless the umpires can clearly see the ball come back and then get deflected over, they are going to assume and rule a home run on this.  Only reviewed if asked for and Im not sure that would be conclusive.

[Sayhey]

I watched it frame by frame and the ball appears to strike the "face" of the wall first and then it is deflected up and over the fence. I only saw M.L.B. network highlights. Was this reviewed(replay)? Only trying to stimulate discussion about the rule. This could only be seen in review. This would be the purpose of replay. Do you agree that it can not be a homer if it strikes the face of the fence first?

[noumpere]

I watched it frame by frame and the ball appears to strike the "face" of the wall first and then it is deflected up and over the fence. I only saw M.L.B. network highlights. Was this reviewed(replay)? Only trying to stimulate discussion about the rule. This could only be seen in review. This would be the purpose of replay. Do you agree that it can not be a homer if it strikes the face of the fence first?

If the horizontal direction changes from "out" to "in" then I agree in what the rule says.  And if could have been reviewed I think, but if the manager doesn't ask for it ...

[BalkHawk]

I think you're assessment is wrong.

I think your grammar is wrong! I agree, however, that "physics-wise" the ball can't bounce upward off of the face of the wall.

[Thunderheads]

 

I think YOUR assessment is wrong.

I think your grammar is wrong!

 

There, I changed it for you, Mr. Perfect

[Umpire in Chief]

How is it any different than this HR?

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=13109513&topic_id=&c_id=mlb&tcid=vpp_copy_13109513&v=3

[noumpere]

Different in the level of obviousness

[Lindsay]

If the ball doesn't touch Trout's mitt ....and hits the 'facing' of the wall, .......physics-wise, how does the ball bounce "up" ??

 

There's a ledge on that wall and it hit the top of that ledge/flange there ....  I think

 

If it's extraordinarilly hard to see in super slo mo ........fuhgettaboutit real time

 

It has to do with the padding added to the outfield wall; the padding doesn't extend all the way up the wall, allowing for that ledge. Not only is the padding clearly in play, a ball striking the padding and flying over the fence (physically possible due to the 'forward' energy) is ordinarily ruled a home run pursuant to Rules 6.09 and 2.00 regarding FAIR TERRITORY ("...bottom of the playing field fence and perpendicularly upwards"). Key point: bottom of the playing field fence. The padding rarely if ever extends to ground level, meaning even the back of the padding "ledge" is in play.

 

MLBUM on 6.09, "fly ball striking top of outfield wall": Ball striking the top of the outfield wall and bouncing back = in play; ball striking top of wall and bounding over it = home run; ball striking and remaining on the top of the outfield wall (including the padding ledge) = "ground-rule double" (MLBUM language)

[Sayhey]

Very simple. Ball hits face of wall. Ball then hits centerfielder's glove and or hand and ricochets over the wall. Ground rule double. Was this reviewed?

[BalkHawk]

Fair ball leaves playing field in-flight.

[Lindsay]

On 7.05(h): If a fair fly ball is deflected in flight (fair territory) = home run; if a fair ball not in flight = two bases.

 

The key is the definition of "in flight" and the interpretation by PBUC that a ball hitting (or "deflecting") nothing but a fielder is considered to have "cleared the fence in flight." Similarly, per the above, a ball hitting nothing but the top of the outfield wall before leaving the fair field is likewise considered to have "cleared the fence in flight." Therefore, the question becomes whether a ball, hitting two objects both considered as things that do not necessarily cause a ball's "in flight" status to terminate, shall be ruled "in flight" if said ball hits both of these objects. On its own, neither individual event causes the ball to lose "in flight" status. Together—that is the question.

 

For the purposes of the below equations, assume the ball's status is fair:

(1) fly ball => hits top of wall => leaves playing field = in-flight = HR

(2) fly ball => deflects off fielder (e.g. Canseco's head) => leaves playing field = in-flight = HR

And now we have...

(3) fly ball => hits top of wall => deflects off fielder = ? = ?

(4) fly ball => deflects off fielder => hits top of wall = ? = ?

[maven]

Fair ball leaves playing field in-flight.

If it hits the fielder, it remains in flight and may be caught for an out.

 

If it hits the wall, it is no longer in flight and may not be caught for an out. But if it hits the top of the wall and goes over, it is a HR by interp, not by rule. MLBUM interp already posted by Gil above.

[Sayhey]

As a Giants fan I enjoyed Ian Kinsler's frustration when his fly ball in the 2010 World Series struck the top of the outfield fence in San Francisco, and then settled on top of the fence. What are the odds? Crew ruled a two base award. I'm guessing that this was not reviewed since no one has said they were watching the game and yes, it was reviewed. I saw highlights on M.L.B. network.

As soon as I saw the highlight I questioned the 4 base award. In slow motion I thought I had conclusive evidence that the baseball struck the face of the outfield wall and then was deflected up and over the wall. When I read some of the responses it seems like some of you fine working umpires are not really reading the post because you keep mentioning the top of the wall. Lets talk about the face of the wall. Have a great weekend and I hope you have wonderful games.

[Rich Ives]

As a Giants fan I enjoyed Ian Kinsler's frustration when his fly ball in the 2010 World Series struck the top of the outfield fence in San Francisco, and then settled on top of the fence. What are the odds? Crew ruled a two base award. I'm guessing that this was not reviewed since no one has said they were watching the game and yes, it was reviewed. I saw highlights on M.L.B. network.

As soon as I saw the highlight I questioned the 4 base award. In slow motion I thought I had conclusive evidence that the baseball struck the face of the outfield wall and then was deflected up and over the wall. When I read some of the responses it seems like some of you fine working umpires are not really reading the post because you keep mentioning the top of the wall. Lets talk about the face of the wall. Have a great weekend and I hope you have wonderful games.

 

You aren't listening.  What people are saying is that on this play it could NOT hit the face of the wall and deflected UP.  Basic physics.  Therefore it hit the top of the wall.

[Lindsay]

I'll also point out as a sample a few ballpark-specific ground rules that should indicate where MLB is trying to go with this. All language is verbatim with my comments in italics.

 

 

Boston Red Sox - Fenway Park

- Batted ball in flight striking left center field wall to left of line behind flagpole and bounding into seats on top of center field wall: Home Run.

!! The Fenway ground rules furthermore specify three cases of a batted ball in flight striking the right foul pole extension:

- - Ball in flight striking extension: Home Run.

- - Ball hitting the top of outfield wall then extension: Home Run.

- - Bounding ball (off of playing surface) striking the extension: Two Bases.

!! The phrase "off of playing surface" is key and establishes that a ball off the upper wall bounding out of the park is indeed a Home Run. The playing surface is routinely defined as the actual field of play. For instance, MLBUM #31 re: 6.09 uses the precise phrase "playing field" as a required place the ball must go to in order to be considered in play after striking the top of a wall.

 

Houston Astros - Minute Maid Park

- Batted ball in flight strikes yellow line on fence or top of railing in left center field and bounds into stands: Home Run.

!! Establishes a ball may strike fair territory, deflecting into the stands, and still be considered a Home Run; however, this specific rule is irrelevant to LAA since this is not a case of yellow line deflection.

 

Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim - Angel Stadium

- Ball striking the top of the outfield wall and rebounding onto the playing field: In Play.

!! Again, the "onto the playing field" designation is present.

 

Minnesota Twins - Target Field

- Batted ball in flight striking right field wall and going out of play in fair territory: Home Run.

!! This rule makes no mention to "facing" vs. "top" of wall; accordingly, this establishes that a ball hitting the wall on the fly and going out of play in fair territory can be a Home Run. Similar to HOU, though, this is an otherwise irrelevant yellow line play.

 

Arizona Diamondbacks - Chase Field

- Batted ball in flight strikes fence of right field corner wall and leaves the field: Home Run.

!! Again, a batted ball need not strike the top versus "facing" of the wall (e.g., fence of right field corner wall which is located significantly below the top of the wall) in order to be considered a Home Run.

 

Los Angeles Dodgers - Dodger Stadium

- Batted ball hitting bullpen gate in either left or right field and bouncing into the seats: Home Run.

!! The bullpen gate crossbar here, like the fence in ARI, is located significantly below the height of the top of the wall, yet balls deflecting into the stands as a result of striking the bullpen gate are ruled Home Runs.

 

 

Again, there is no distinction between "facing" vs. "top" of the wall other than the language "top of the wall" appears in the Interpretations and Ground Rules, possibly because the term "facing" is not even addressed nor considered.

 

The above stadium-specific ground rules establish that a ball can indeed hit a part of the outfield wall that may otherwise be described as a "facing" and still be a home run; the key is the ball's status of "in flight" and the provision and interpretation that "in flight" status, as it relates to a four-base award, does not necessarily change upon the ball striking an outfield wall and subsequently bounding out of play.

 

As for Trout, it is evident the ball never came to rest atop the padding.

[Sayhey]

Let me restate my question. Forget about Mike Trout and this play. Imaginary game. First pitch of the game is driven to deep centerfield and flys over the centerfielder's glove and strikes face of the centerfield fence first and then is deflected off the glove or body of the centerfielder over the fence onto dead ball territory. Whaddaya got?

[maven]

2 bases for a fair ball that leaves the field not in flight.

 

That wasn't the ruling in the OP.

[BT_Blue]

Yes but wouldn't the ball have to touch the ground?

Side question and one that I got asked in a game (by a rat that likes to go fishing). Ball over F8's head, bounces at the base of the wall and is intentionally knocked over the fence so that the BR would only get two bases. (Lets say this is a very deep park and hit could have become a triple or better.) What would you have? Seems the consensus is either two from the time of infraction or the umpire basically gets to go to fantasy land and place the BR where he sees fit.

[maven]

Yes but wouldn't the ball have to touch the ground?

Side question and one that I got asked in a game (by a rat that likes to go fishing). Ball over F8's head, bounces at the base of the wall and is intentionally knocked over the fence so that the BR would only get two bases. (Lets say this is a very deep park and hit could have become a triple or better.) What would you have? Seems the consensus is either two from the time of infraction or the umpire basically gets to go to fantasy land and place the BR where he sees fit.

1. No, it need not hit the ground to be no longer in flight. A ball that strikes a base, the bat on the ground, the wall, or any other non-ground part of the field is no longer in flight. Fair or foul, such a ball cannot be caught for an out.

2. If you rule that he intentionally knocked the ball OOP, then it's like throwing the ball out. Two base award from the TOT. If the BR has reached 1B by the TOT — which is likely in the big park you describe — then he would be awarded 3B (and any preceding runners would score). If he's reached 2B, the BR too would score.

 

BTW, "time of infraction" is not an option for a ball out of play and applies mainly to some kinds of INT.

[BT_Blue]

I know. I just used "time of infraction"as a basis for when the award would begin.