1955 MLB Rule Question/Trivia

[buckyswider]

Hi there, someone brought up an umpire question from a 1955 Topps baseball card.  It's very curious....

the question:  "In the American League, is it a Homer if the ball hits that foul pole"?  And the "answer":  "Yes, if it bounces into the stands fair.  Otherwise:  a double".

  

 

This is a new one on me.  Anybody know the history of this rule and when it changed to what we all know today??  

[Senor Azul]

So far I have found just one article online about foul pole rules--at baseballscouter.com. It states that the National and American leagues did indeed have different rules concerning foul poles. 

The AL ruled that balls that hit a foul pole above the fence but then landed foul are ground rule doubles. On the other hand, the NL ruled such batted balls are home runs. Unfortunately the article gave no details as to when the two leagues agreed to the rule we know today or when they started to rule differently.

I have rule books for every year but they are not available to me at the moment. Sometime soon I will have them and I will do more research.

[834k3r]

I'm curious as to why it says "[i]n the American League." Did the National League have a different rule?

[Jay R.]

1 hour ago, 834k3r said:

I'm curious as to why it says "[i]n the American League." Did the National League have a different rule?

The leagues had different offices through the 1990s, though power consolidated slowly in the commissioner's office, culminating the leagues' dissolution as legal entities in late 1999. (That's why the AL was able to adopt the DH, and the NL didn't have to follow suit.) The leagues maintained their own rosters of umpires, too. 

[ErichKeane]

I don't see anything here: https://www.baseball-almanac.com/rulechng.shtml

Perhaps just in incorrect card?  Shame on the rules expert at Topps?

[Velho]

The brevity of the text makes it ambiguous. (Assuming we're not talking about a major rule change) there isn't enough room to fit:

 "Is it a Homer if the ball hits that foul pole"?  

"Yes, if it hits the foul pole in flight and then goes in the stands. But, if bounces in fair territory, then hits the foul pole and goes into the stands - it's double"

 

Way it is now, it seems to read that "A batted ball hitting the foul pole in flight and going into foul territory is not a HR" (no to mention the "otherwise double" is wide open to interpretation).

 

[Aging_Arbiter]

"Yes, if it hits the foul pole in flight and then goes in the stands. But, if bounces in fair territory, then hits the foul pole and goes into the stands - it's double"

 

To me, this would imply that in the "old days" the foul poles (in question here) were inside of the outfield fence/wall.  Which would stand today if the ball doesn't leave the playing field in flight.  If the foul poles are beyond the fence/wall, then the ball has already left the playing field, and is considered a home run.

[buckyswider]

2 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

So far I have found just one article online about foul pole rules--at baseballscouter.com. It states that the National and American leagues did indeed have different rules concerning foul poles. 

The AL ruled that balls that hit a foul pole above the fence but then landed foul are ground rule doubles. On the other hand, the NL ruled such batted balls are home runs. Unfortunately the article gave no details as to when the two leagues agreed to the rule we know today or when they started to rule differently.

I have rule books for every year but they are not available to me at the moment. Sometime soon I will have them and I will do more research.

Awesome, thanks!  I did find that article; here is the direct link:  https://baseballscouter.com/what-happens-in-baseball-if-the-ball-hits-the-foul-pole/

Interesting in that the 1955 rule book I just procured has no mention of this.  But I did notice that there were many, many variation of rule books published by different entities back then- the one I have is published by "The National Baseball Congress of America", "reprinted by special permission from OFFICIAL BASEBALL RULES COMPLETELY REVISED 1955".  So maybe this book is only a subset of what is contained in the latter?  Wilson, The Sporting News, Kessler, Baseball Digest, etc., all have their own publications.  Maybe one of yours has the full set which contains our topic of discussion?  I wish I could find a copy of that "OFFICIAL BASEBALL RULES COMPLETELY REVISED 1955"....