Foul Tip?

[goody14]

The umpire gives a foul tip mechanic and calls the guy out. My question: this is not a foul tip is it. It is not "sharp and direct" to the catcher's glove.

Now, in this play it does not matter as the count is 2-2. But, I have an out on this catch even without 2 strikes.

I imagine the play is so rare and the catch was so surprising the umpire got ahead of himself on the mechanic. Or, maybe I am missing a nuance of a foul tip.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Umpire in Chief

[johnnyg08]

By definition the ball initially did go sharp and direct to the mitt.  It just didn't stay there.  

Great call and I now have a video clip of this.

[Thunderheads]

By definition the ball initially did go sharp and direct to the mitt.  It just didn't stay there.  

Great call and I now have a video clip of this.

​Yes! By defininition, yes, the  ball hit his mitt first ......still a "foul-tip"

[goody14]

You know - you guys are right. It did hit the glove first. I totally missed that.

I watch MLB clips on mute because the announcers are bad - this time they were right. I give credit where it is due.

At first glance, I thought this just spun off the bat weakly.

[grayhawk]

I'm not 100% sure it hit the mitt.  F2 reaches out and snaps his glove, but did it actually hit the mitt?  The last replay sure makes it look like it didn't.

[Thunderheads]

I'm not 100% sure it hit the mitt.  F2 reaches out and snaps his glove, but did it actually hit the mitt?  The last replay sure makes it look like it didn't.

​you can see the mitt "flip" just before it pops up in the air .....

[grayhawk]

​you can see the mitt "flip" just before it pops up in the air .....

I saw that, but I think that's just F2 snapping his mitt in anticipation of catching the ball. Take a close look at the view from behind and it appears it never hit the mitt. 

Edited June 1, 2015 by grayhawk

[Thunderheads]

I saw that, but I think that's just F2 snapping his mitt in anticipation of catching the ball. Take a close look at the view from behind and it appears it never hit the mitt. 

​You can't see his mitt from behind .........

[Umpire in Chief]

Here is another great Foul tip video. I will keep this one saved as well..

[grayhawk]

​You can't see his mitt from behind .........

​I understand, but at the same time, we don't completely lose sight of the ball either, which makes it look to me like it didn't hit the mitt.  I wish there were less than two strikes so there were have been a difference in the potential outcome.

[Thunderheads]

​I understand, but at the same time, we don't completely lose sight of the ball either, which makes it look to me like it didn't hit the mitt.  I wish there were less than two strikes so there were have been a difference in the potential outcome.

​ok .... then what does it, or could it have hit?

[grayhawk]

​ok .... then what does it, or could it have hit?

​I am not 100% sure it hit anything.  I just watched it for the first time with sound, and it does seem like there is a sound after it hit the bat.  It would be great if they had provided a super slo-mo zoomed in.

[MadMax]

Both Maldonado and McCann had the foul-tip smack on the fingerwall padding of their catchers gloves – that part at the end of the fingertips. Most of the energy is dissipated by the padding, and in these two cases, the ball just seems to float out there... and caught by a catcher with opportunistic reflexes.

[Thunderheads]

​I am not 100% sure it hit anything.  I just watched it for the first time with sound, and it does seem like there is a sound after it hit the bat.  It would be great if they had provided a super slo-mo zoomed in.

​Come on now, ...physics doesn't support that

[maineump]

Good calls - I am guessing that the ump did see the glove hit, as the catchers at that level are catching the ball out in front. Great heads up catching.