Did he double him up? Voluntary release?

[Thunderheads]

let me try this again..............

 

http://wapc.mlb.com/play?content_id=27744021

[JaxRolo]

What's your Question?

[BigUmpire]

No.

[Thunderheads]

What's your Question?

Sorry Rolando,....wrong video 

 

go check it out again........

[Fittske24]

Out or safe.....that's his judgement..... But voluntary release? Certainly not.

[scrounge]

Oh, that's unfortunate. A good example to teach the value of slowing down the timing, though.

[johnnyg08]

Nope, too quick.  

 

Not firm and secure possession.

[JaxRolo]

I've been told by a MLB Ump that on that type of play all you need is possession while touching the bag. Once you have that and you fall and the ball comes out it doesn't matter. Out!

[Thunderheads]

I've been told by a MLB Ump that on that type of play all you need is possession while touching the bag. Once you have that and you fall and the ball comes out it doesn't matter. Out!

maybe that's the signal I'm seeing him do before the screen moves away?

[maven]

That's a great call.

 

First: 'voluntary release' is a concept for a CATCH, the act of gaining possession of a batted ball. It has no application in this play.

 

Second: the fielder had possession of the ball while contacting the base. Out!

 

Sure it was a sno-cone. Possession is possession. The ball popped out when his glove hit the ground. The play was already over.

[JaxRolo]

That's a great call.

 

First: 'voluntary release' is a concept for a CATCH, the act of gaining possession of a batted ball. It has no application in this play.

 

Second: the fielder had possession of the ball while contacting the base. Out!

 

Sure it was a sno-cone. Possession is possession. The ball popped out when his glove hit the ground. The play was already over.

 

Pretty much what I said!

[Mike Prince]

That's a great call.

 

First: 'voluntary release' is a concept for a CATCH, the act of gaining possession of a batted ball. It has no application in this play.

 

Second: the fielder had possession of the ball while contacting the base. Out!

 

Sure it was a sno-cone. Possession is possession. The ball popped out when his glove hit the ground. The play was already over.

 

Disagree with the bolded part, the definition of a catch speaks about gaining possession of a ball, the words batted or thrown are not even referenced.

 

Agree that it was a good call.

[maven]

Pretty much what I said!

Sure, but I numbered my points.

[maven]

 

That's a great call.

 

First: 'voluntary release' is a concept for a CATCH, the act of gaining possession of a batted ball. It has no application in this play.

 

Second: the fielder had possession of the ball while contacting the base. Out!

 

Sure it was a sno-cone. Possession is possession. The ball popped out when his glove hit the ground. The play was already over.

 

Disagree with the bolded part, the definition of a catch speaks about gaining possession of a ball, the words batted or thrown are not even referenced.

 

Agree that it was a good call.

 

 

Mike: the applicable rule is not the definition of CATCH but rather of TAG. OBR 2.00

[johnnyg08]

There is a difference between a catch and a gloved ball.

It's the "long enough" principle.

[noumpere]

Hes giving the voluntary release signal which clearly at least to me isn't correct.

 

Whether you need to maintain possession thruout this play is among some disagreement between the experts with some (I think JR) saying know --just possession at the time the base is tagged and some saying still need to make another baseball play or voluntary release.

[Mike Prince]

 

 

That's a great call.

 

First: 'voluntary release' is a concept for a CATCH, the act of gaining possession of a batted ball. It has no application in this play.

 

Second: the fielder had possession of the ball while contacting the base. Out!

 

Sure it was a sno-cone. Possession is possession. The ball popped out when his glove hit the ground. The play was already over.

 

Disagree with the bolded part, the definition of a catch speaks about gaining possession of a ball, the words batted or thrown are not even referenced.

 

Agree that it was a good call.

 

 

Mike: the applicable rule is not the definition of CATCH but rather of TAG. OBR 2.00

 

 

Agree (but thanks for the OBR definition reference LOL), I guess I should have read your post a little more closely.  Just pointing out that a catch and the related concept of voluntary release can be on any ball, not just one off of a bat like you stated.

 

 

I also agree with the outcome of the play in question.

[johnnyg08]

I think the "on the transfer" mechanic is not the proper mechanic in this situation.

 

If seen guys called safe on far more questionable instance of firm and secure possession.  

 

Personally, I think he missed it.

 

 

[Fittske24]

The definition of a catch applies to both batted and thrown balls. This is simply designated in the definition of CATCH by “ball in flightâ€. In order for a CATCH to be completed, one must demonstrate voluntary release. In this play the 2nd basemen falls to the ground which causes the ball to come out of his glove. Per the definition of CATCH this is NOT voluntary release.

 

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.

 

 

Furthermore, there is no "time" component to a completed catch. It does not matter how long a player holds the ball. if he does not release the ball voluntarily, be it a batted ball or thrown ball, it is NOT a CATCH. 

[Haid D' Salaami]

 

 

That's a great call.

 

First: 'voluntary release' is a concept for a CATCH, the act of gaining possession of a batted ball. It has no application in this play.

 

Second: the fielder had possession of the ball while contacting the base. Out!

 

Sure it was a sno-cone. Possession is possession. The ball popped out when his glove hit the ground. The play was already over.

 

Disagree with the bolded part, the definition of a catch speaks about gaining possession of a ball, the words batted or thrown are not even referenced.

 

Agree that it was a good call.

 

 

Mike: the applicable rule is not the definition of CATCH but rather of TAG. OBR 2.00

 

Thats not voluntary  release ..read the definition of a tag..

 

Rule. 2.00 Tag

 

It is not a tag, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his touching a

base or touching a runner, the fielder drops the ball. In establishing the validity of the tag,

the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball

[Fittske24]

 

 

Mike: the applicable rule is not the definition of CATCH but rather of TAG. OBR 2.00

 

 

This is an appeal play. See 7.08 (d)

[Umpire in Chief]

Thats not voluntary  release ..read the definition of a tag..

 

Rule. 2.00 Tag

 

It is not a tag, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his touching a

base or touching a runner, the fielder drops the ball. In establishing the validity of the tag,

the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball

This is what I was thinking too. Yes, you only need to have possession while tagging the base, but he didn't fulfill the "adequate possession" (as it was explained to me once) aspect.

I also agree, that Marquez using the voluntary release was either not needed or confusing. But I do think he needs some method of selling that he sees the ball on the ground and is going to rule "adequate possession" for the tag. I cant think of another way to do this.

[mstaylor]

My understanding is on a tag of a base, you have to hold it until you clear it and the that play doesn't cause the ball to come loose. Here, the base is tagged, then he falls down and looses it coming back up. 

[maven]

 

 

 

Mike: the applicable rule is not the definition of CATCH but rather of TAG. OBR 2.00

 

 

This is an appeal play. See 7.08 (d)

 

 

How is that relevant to the discussion? The issue concerns whether the fielder held the ball long enough to constitute a TAG, which is required by the appeal.

[johnnyg08]

JEA "In Flight"

 

 

IN FLIGHT describes a batted, thrown, or pitched ball which has not yet touched the ground or some object other than a fielder.

Cross References: 2.00 Catch, 2.00 Fair Ball, 2.00 Fly Ball, 6.09(d, f, h), 7.05(a)

In flight appeared in the original list of definitions in 1950.

A pitched ball must pass through the strike zone in flight before it can be deemed a strike. In other words, a pitched ball that bounces has no chance of being called a strike. Any pitched ball that strikes the batter entitles him to first base provided that he makes an attempt to avoid the pitch.

Rules which involve thrown balls do not distinguish between balls in flight or balls having touched any other object including the ground.

Important rule differences exist concerning batted balls which are in flight or have touched some other object other than a defensive player.

A legal catch can only be made on a batted ball that has NOT touched (1) the ground, (2) something lying on or attached to the ground, or (3) an offensive player or umpire.

Batted balls in flight which touch any defensive player are considered still in flight and may be caught for a legal putout.

A batted ball that is in flight is determined fair or foul by its initial striking point on the ground at or beyond first or third base. A batted ball which has touched the ground prior to reaching first or third base is considered fair or foul by its position relative to the base when passing it.