Ball beat runner, but dropped on tag

[Murcer2008]

There was nobody on the bases, the ball was hit to the shortstop and thrown to first, the first basemen stepped on first then stepped off the bag to tag the runner going to first. When he tagged the runner he dropped the ball. I was wondering if the base runner was safe or out.

[JonnyCat]

Well, if the first baseman stepped on the bag and got the runner out that way, then the runner was out if the umpire called an out.

Anything after that is immaterial.

Is there more to the situation?

[Senor Azul]

As described it was a successful tag of the base and the batter-runner is out. The reason:  F3 had possession of the ball and once he steps on first the batter-runner is out, as long as F3 is not bobbling the ball as he steps on the bag.

The following text can be found in the 2016 BRD (section 537, p. 349):

From Hunter Wendelstedt...when a base is tagged, the momentum of the tagging action continues as long as contact with the base is sustained or any subsequent action of the fielder occurs because of contact with the base. For example, if a fielder attempts to tag a base by diving or sliding, the momentum of that dive or slide must end. However, if he is touched by a runner after tagging the base, and that causes the ball to be knocked out, the tag has been proved.

[maven]

If F3 fielded the throw and was subsequently in touch with 1B—even accidentally—that's a tag of the base, and the BR is out. Nothing else matters.

If F3 came off 1B to field the throw and then attempted to tag the runner without first tagging 1B, and if the ball came out of the glove during the tag, then that's no tag, and the runner would not be out.

The ball coming out of the glove during the tag is evidence that it was not held securely. Thus it's no tag by interpretation, all codes. 

[ArchAngel72]

So let me bring this into play.

 

A catch has to have a voluntary release, yes?  Is the idiot er I mean 1st baseman not in control of the ball and losing the tag of 1st base based on the drop of the ball?  even though he attempted a tag?

 

 

I mean I get it they tagged the bag with control of the ball..  To me the tag is a "separate play"   which is completely unnecessary.   How ever the language around what is or is not a catch and the maintaining control of it.. that to me is what "kinda muddies the water" 

[Jimurray]

18 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

So let me bring this into play.

 

A catch has to have a voluntary release, yes?  Is the idiot er I mean 1st baseman not in control of the ball and losing the tag of 1st base based on the drop of the ball?  even though he attempted a tag?

 

 

I mean I get it they tagged the bag with control of the ball..  To me the tag is a "separate play"   which is completely unnecessary.   How ever the language around what is or is not a catch and the maintaining control of it.. that to me is what "kinda muddies the water" 

There is no “catch” in a tag. Secure possession is required but voluntary release is not although NCAA mentions it as evidence of secure possession. The other codes do not even reference voluntary release for a tag. 

[ArchAngel72]

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

There is no “catch” in a tag. Secure possession is required but voluntary release is not although NCAA mentions it as evidence of secure possession. The other codes do not even reference voluntary release for a tag. 

 

No but the caught ball from the throw had no voluntary release.  He slapped someone with the glove and dropped the ball.

 

[maven]

11 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

No but the caught ball from the throw had no voluntary release.  He slapped someone with the glove and dropped the ball.

When F3 receives the ball, it's not a CATCH under the rulebook definition. For one thing, a CATCH must involve a batted ball in flight, but the throw to F3 can bounce in. 

Instead, it must satisfy the rulebook definition of TAG (which includes tagging the base or tagging the runner). And this term includes secure possession in hand or glove, but does NOT include voluntary release.

Many tags are preceded only by a fielder fielding a ground ball. The fact that many tags involve gaining possession of a thrown ball does not entail that the definition of CATCH now applies to a tag. It does not. That's why 'voluntary release' is not part of the definition of TAG.

All that said, if a fielder does voluntarily release the ball, that's evidence that the ball was held securely through the tag. And secure possession IS necessary (hence the NCAA guidance).

[ArchAngel72]

17 minutes ago, maven said:

When F3 receives the ball, it's not a CATCH under the rulebook definition. For one thing, a CATCH must involve a batted ball in flight, but the throw to F3 can bounce in. 

Instead, it must satisfy the rulebook definition of TAG (which includes tagging the base or tagging the runner). And this term includes secure possession in hand or glove, but does NOT include voluntary release.

Many tags are preceded only by a fielder fielding a ground ball. The fact that many tags involve gaining possession of a thrown ball does not entail that the definition of CATCH now applies to a tag. It does not. That's why 'voluntary release' is not part of the definition of TAG.

All that said, if a fielder does voluntarily release the ball, that's evidence that the ball was held securely through the tag. And secure possession IS necessary (hence the NCAA guidance).

 

Ok huh?  Maven Im asking cause I'm confused..  Not trying to be a dink just ironing out some odd things in my head.

 

So if a ball thrown from F1 to F3 is dropped by F3 the runner not having beat the ball there is still out?

 

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, ArchAngel72 said:

 

Ok huh?  Maven Im asking cause I'm confused..  Not trying to be a dink just ironing out some odd things in my head.

 

So if a ball thrown from F1 to F3 is dropped by F3 the runner not having beat the ball there is still out?

 

 Was there a tag?

 

[GiantEngineer]

2 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

So if a ball thrown from F1 to F3 is dropped by F3 the runner not having beat the ball there is still out?

As long as F3 has control of the ball in his hand or glove when tagging the base, the runner is out. If he is bobbling or drops the ball before the tag, then the runner is not out, assuming they beat F3 recovering the ball.

[NavyBlue]

I'm eating an Oreo right now, so I'll call this the Oreo principle.  

We don't care how the fielder gets the ball (one side of the cookie), and we don't care what happens to the ball after the tag of the base (other side of the cookie).  We are only concerned with the creme filling...did the fielder have secure possession of the ball when he tagged the base.  

Sometimes immediately after F3 gains secure possession of the ball while in contact with 1B the BR collides with him and the ball falls out of F3's glove.  Coaches and fans will scream, "Safe!  He dropped the ball when the runner collided with him."  Don't care.  If you judge that F3 had secure possession of the ball for even just an instant while in contact with the base, the BR is out.

Always have milk with Oreos.

[BigBlue4u]

5 hours ago, maven said:

For one thing, a CATCH must involve a batted ball in flight, but the throw to F3 can bounce in. 

This is not correct.  There is no mention of a batted ball in the definition of a catch.

"A catch is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in the hand or glove of a live ball in flight and firmly holding it."  (all rule sets)

[Senor Azul]

The NFHS definition of the term "Catch" is found in rule 2-9-1. What you posted is indeed in the very first sentence of the definition. But you need to read the Note that follows the definition:

When a batted ball or a pitch is involved, the above definition of a catch applies. For any other thrown ball, the term is used loosely to also apply to a pick-up or to the trapping of a low throw which has touched the ground...

[Senor Azul]

Although unofficial, the 2017 Jaksa/Roder manual (p. 27) says in its definition of "Catch:"

Only batted or pitched balls that are airborne can be caught. By definition, batted and pitched balls that are not airborne--and any thrown ball--cannot be caught, but can be "gloved." A ball is gloved when a fielder gains possession of the ball in his hand or glove, other than in a catch.

 

[Jimurray]

23 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

Although unofficial, the 2017 Jaksa/Roder manual (p. 27) says in its definition of "Catch:"

Only batted or pitched balls that are airborne can be caught. By definition, batted and pitched balls that are not airborne--and any thrown ball--cannot be caught, but can be "gloved." A ball is gloved when a fielder gains possession of the ball in his hand or glove, other than in a catch.

 

Thank you @Senor Azul. I always wondered where I learned to call certain "catches" a gloved ball. I thought it was CC but he might have gotten it from J-R. All the codes have conflicts. Anybody want to tell me why a batter would be out in OBR if his line drive was gloved/caught? But that only would be a problem with no R1. R1 might allow 1 or 2 outs depending on what he and the batter did and someone with no knowledge of baseball read the book and tried to umpire.

[beerguy55]

14 hours ago, BigBlue4u said:

This is not correct.  There is no mention of a batted ball in the definition of a catch.

"A catch is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in the hand or glove of a live ball in flight and firmly holding it."  (all rule sets)

While this statement is technically accurate, context matters.  And while the definition of "in flight" applies to batted, thrown and pitched balls, context matters.

A fielder is not required to make a rulebook-defined catch to apply a tag...that is, the fielder does not need to get secure possession of a ball in flight.  He can short-hop/trap the ball...a fielder can make  an intentional one bounce throw to another fielder.  The thrown ball can bounce off a runner's helmet, or a bat, or an umpire, and still be possessed by the fielder to complete the tag.

Knowing all that, common sense would dictate that all the parameters of a "catch" pertaining to a batted ball do not...CANNOT...apply to a thrown ball.  As such, it only serves to confuse people to determine whether or not a fielder "caught" a thrown ball.

A tag only requires secure possession of the ball in hand/glove...it doesn't require a catch.  And so, yes, by definition, fielders make lots of catches of According-to-Hoyle in flight thrown balls...and, frankly, it doesn't matter.  I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I cannot think of a single situation where a fielder is required to catch a thrown ball in order to make an out.