Jump to content

Bruce Almighty: Catch, Possession, Control and Release

Lindsay
 Share
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 3998 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

sdix00
sdix00

I imagine myself seeing this in real time.   The ball falling out less than one second after it hits the glove.   The burden of proof lies with the fielder to prove a catch.  There is no proof require

Thunderheads
Thunderheads

that's voluntary release all day long

JaxRolo
JaxRolo

That was a good call! Voluntary release? Never had full control!

JaxRolo

JaxRolo

Posted
Posted

 

He got lazy with it. Pay the consequences! :meditation:

You honestly don't have voluntary release here?  Don't look at in slo-mo, look at it in regular speed one time .....

 

Even at fast or slow speed I see no full control or voluntary release. IMHO

 

Heck, even mattingly didn't go ape $hit over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JHSump

JHSump

Posted
Posted

Looked like voluntary release to me.  But, F7 was a bit too nonchalant about it --- and it bit him.  I'll bet Mattingly had a word with him afterwards.

 

BR running all the way ended up at 2B --- good for him!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

go to :34 on this video ......  Mattingly doesn't go ape-crap because he's got a misunderstanding of what he thinks the rule is .........

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=26909135&topic_id=vtp_manager_postgame&c_id=mlb&tcid=vpp_copy_26909135&v=3



OK Jeff, explain how you have voluntary release.

Mike, look at what I just posted ......

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

 

 

OK Jeff, explain how you have voluntary release.

Mike, look at what I just posted ......

 

Which doesn't explain why you think it is voluntary release

 

True! SORRY! :smachhead:   It doesn't does it! :shakehead: it's early still :wave:

 

Mike, it's simple, he caught the ball....the mitt securely closes, his mitt is brought back after the ball is caught slightly towards his ear ....his mitt and hand then come together in a 'transfer' type fashion and because of the trajectory of his glove to his hand, the ball falls out in a downward fashion (which is why I don't personally feel you can live by that viewpoint 'all the time' ........if the ball falls downward it's not voluntary release .... ) ....

 

So .... that's what I have

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JaxRolo

JaxRolo

Posted
Posted

I don't believe there is a "on transfer" on a fly ball like that. You have to Catch it, control it, and have voluntary release. Maybe he voluntarily released it to the ground. :wave:  :smachhead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

Well he never gained (or maintained) control with his throwing hand, did he?

No...I didn't see that, however I don't recall that as being in the criteria for the definition of a catch

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike Prince

Mike Prince

Posted
Posted

 

Well he never gained (or maintained) control with his throwing hand, did he?

No...I didn't see that, however I don't recall that as being in the criteria for the definition of a catch

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

The definition of catch does say (among other things) that "If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball should be adjudged to been caught.  In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional".

 

You see it as a transfer issue, Jax and I see it as not maintaining control long enough, and that's OK.  If it was your call and I was on your crew and we got together, I'd have information and you would choose not to use it (and that's OK too).

 

Aside from the interp on this, if he hadn't tried to be so nonchalant with the catch, this never would have happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

 

 

Well he never gained (or maintained) control with his throwing hand, did he?

No...I didn't see that, however I don't recall that as being in the criteria for the definition of a catch

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

The definition of catch does say (among other things) that "If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball should be adjudged to been caught.  In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional".

 

You see it as a transfer issue, Jax and I see it as not maintaining control long enough, and that's OK.  If it was your call and I was on your crew and we got together, I'd have information and you would choose not to use it (and that's OK too).

 

Aside from the interp on this, if he hadn't tried to be so nonchalant with the catch, this never would have happened.

 

CONCUR! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Umpire in Chief

Umpire in Chief

Posted
Posted

Tough call either way. I'm going to go with no catch.

 

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.

 

 

IMO he hasn't demonstrated complete control of the ball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tldavis19

tldavis19

Posted
Posted

It's definitely borderline. I see the glove close on the ball, but when he opens it to retrieve it, it falls out. Falling out is not voluntary. Voluntary in my book is ball in throwing hand ready to throw. He dropped it from the glove to the ground. Never controlled it completely. While I agree with the call, I would've gotten an out here most likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sdix00

sdix00

Posted
Posted

This is exactly why the fielder must demonstrate control to me.  

 

I have no idea what is going on inside that glove.    For all I know, he could have palmed the ball, which isn't control unless he demonstrates that it is, which he didn't do.I 

 

I will allow him to "drop" the ball in to his throwing hand.   But I won't allow him to "drop" the ball to the ground (unless he has already demonstrated control some other way).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

guys, although I understand it's a different situation, but there have been many times where while turning a double play you see guys doing the transfer and the ball not getting into the throwing hand and it's called 'voluntary' ..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...