bunt foul or caught for out?

[bluejerred]

1 out. R1, R3, 2-1 count.  Batter attempts a bunt.  Bunt hits top of the bat, goes up to about his head, and catcher makes the catch.  R1 attempts steal to R2 prior to the ball being caught.  Appeal made at first.  What do you guys have?

[SoCal Lurker]

Well, the one thing it can't be is a simple foul.  The real umpires can fill in the details, but

• If, in the opinion of the umpire, the ball went straight and direct to the catcher's glove, it would be a foul tip, which would be a strike and a live ball R1 would be at risk of being out on a tag only;
• If, however, in the opinion of the umpire, the ball did not go straight and direct, it would be a caught foul fly ball, the batter would be out, the ball would be live, and the runner would be at risk of bieng out on appeal for leaving before the ball was caught.

[grayhawk]

Sounds like a double play to me.  A ball that goes up to the batter's head is not sharp and direct.

[FlaUmp22]

Sounds like a double play to me.  A ball that goes up to the batter's head is not sharp and direct.

 

Agree with @grayhawk here can't think of anyway to justify it being a foul tip

[SoCal Lurker]

 

Sounds like a double play to me.  A ball that goes up to the batter's head is not sharp and direct.

 

Agree with @grayhawk here can't think of anyway to justify it being a foul tip

 

 

While Is suspect that is the case, I'm always warry to make assumptions based on general descri[ptions.  If the bunt attmempt was at a high pitch with the ball up at his head already, someone might write the description in the OP on a ball that went sharp and direct to the catchers' glove at head height -- head height doesn't matter, per se, but rather the path of the ball after it hits the bat. 

[FlaUmp22]

 

 

Sounds like a double play to me.  A ball that goes up to the batter's head is not sharp and direct.

 

Agree with @grayhawk here can't think of anyway to justify it being a foul tip

 

 

While Is suspect that is the case, I'm always warry to make assumptions based on general descri[ptions.  If the bunt attmempt was at a high pitch with the ball up at his head already, someone might write the description in the OP on a ball that went sharp and direct to the catchers' glove at head height -- head height doesn't matter, per se, but rather the path of the ball after it hits the bat. 

 

 

That is true but the OP also says the bunt goes up to about his head. I guess it could be possible I just can't see a ball going up while still being sharp and directly in a catchers glove

 

it would help if we had a clarification on the OP for sure though

[bluejerred]

 

 

 

Sounds like a double play to me.  A ball that goes up to the batter's head is not sharp and direct.

 

Agree with @grayhawk here can't think of anyway to justify it being a foul tip

 

 

While Is suspect that is the case, I'm always warry to make assumptions based on general descri[ptions.  If the bunt attmempt was at a high pitch with the ball up at his head already, someone might write the description in the OP on a ball that went sharp and direct to the catchers' glove at head height -- head height doesn't matter, per se, but rather the path of the ball after it hits the bat. 

 

 

That is true but the OP also says the bunt goes up to about his head. I guess it could be possible I just can't see a ball going up while still being sharp and directly in a catchers glove

 

it would help if we had a clarification on the OP for sure though

 

It was definitely not sharp to the glove.  The ball went up off the bat, reached an apex, came down to the catchers glove.  The ball just didn't get much altitude but there was definitely a change in direction. 

[JaxRolo]

Sounds like a double play to me. A ball that goes up to the batter's head is not sharp and direct.

Agree with @grayhawk here can't think of anyway to justify it being a foul tip While Is suspect that is the case, I'm always warry to make assumptions based on general descri[ptions. If the bunt attmempt was at a high pitch with the ball up at his head already, someone might write the description in the OP on a ball that went sharp and direct to the catchers' glove at head height -- head height doesn't matter, per se, but rather the path of the ball after it hits the bat. That is true but the OP also says the bunt goes up to about his head. I guess it could be possible I just can't see a ball going up while still being sharp and directly in a catchers glove it would help if we had a clarification on the OP for sure though It was definitely not sharp to the glove. The ball went up off the bat, reached an apex, came down to the catchers glove. The ball just didn't get much altitude but there was definitely a change in direction. Caught foul fly ball. Double DP

[bluejerred]

Thanks for the feedback gents!  The call I made during the game was caught foul and out at 1st for the appeal.  I was working the game solo and it all happened pretty fast.  I felt that I made the right call but it's good to get some expert opinions to either validate my call or get instructed on the right interpretation.

[Larry in TN]

reached an apex, came down to the catchers glove

 

I think that is the key.  Up then down is not "sharp and direct".  Just up could be sharp and direct.

[noumpere]

 

reached an apex, came down to the catchers glove

 

I think that is the key.  Up then down is not "sharp and direct".  Just up could be sharp and direct.

 

In theory that might be true but in practice its not.  By the time the ball gets to the bat the glove needs to be in a position to catch the ball so any significant change in direction would mean that the ball wouldn't be caught.

 

its like on that other foul tip thread where we said the action is the same as a missed wing (with the two exceptions) -- in practice even the catchers actions (beyond a few inches) are the same.

[blue23ll]

Can't have an "apex" and be a foul tip.

[Larry in TN]

By the time the ball gets to the bat the glove needs to be in a position to catch the ball so any significant change in direction would mean that the ball wouldn't be caught.

 

I think that you're right about that and that illustrates why the situation presented was a caught fly-ball, not a foul-tip.  For it to have been a foul-tip the catcher would have had to do something that is probably impossible.

[mstaylor]

If it goes up and down then you are probably good. However, it is possible for it to hit the bat, go in a straight line to a head height position and be caught by the catcher. It could also be an up pitch that goes straight back. So you can't no just by the location, you have to know the trajectory. 

[JaxRolo]

Can't have an "apex" and be a foul tip.

Why not??!

[Rich Ives]

 

Can't have an "apex" and be a foul tip.

Why not??!

 

 

I suppose there could be a miniscule one somewhere but not a visible one.  Wouldn't be "sharp and direct" if there was. 

 

I suppose there could be one AFTER it hit/deflected off the catcher's glove but that's after the determination.

[BigUmp56]

Just a small distinction for anyone who may not understand this. Most of the crew here already know this, but the ball doesn't have to go sharp and direct to the catcher's mitt only. It's a subtle difference, but the correct interpretation and language of the rule is that the ball must go sharp and direct to the catcher's "hands." I've never seen it happen, but it's possible that a batted ball could move sharply and directly to a catcher's throwing hand and be caught, or even bobbled and eventually secured for a foul tip.

 

 

Tim

[Texas Manny]

1 out. R1, R3, 2-1 count.  Batter attempts a bunt.  Bunt hits top of the bat, goes up to about his head, and catcher makes the catch.  R1 attempts steal to R2 prior to the ball being caught.  Appeal made at first.  What do you guys have?

1. Plate Umpire has a very quick "Fair or Foul" to decide. Ball is alive and in play since it was caught.

2. Batter is out for a fly ball.

3. R1 is responsible for tagging up. IF appeal is made before he returns to 1st, R1 is OUT!*

 

* If appeal is made after the first pitch to the next batter, R1 is entitled to second base and cannot be put out.

[Texas Manny]

 

Can't have an "apex" and be a foul tip.

Why not??!

 

A FOUL TIP is a batted ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to the catchers hands and is legally caught. It is not a foul tip unless caught and any foul tip that is caught is a strike, and the ball is in play. It is not a catch if it is a rebound, unless the ball has first touched the catchers glove or hand. (Bold emphasis added).

 

Apex not allowed, since it can neither be sharp or direct.