Fair or foul?

[KR23]

Fly ball in the infield lands fair before a fielder can touch it, but then bounces toward foul and is touched in foul territory while it's still in the air, before it touches the ground in foul territory.  Is this fair or foul?  It was a fly ball and only touched ground in fair territory.  Here is a clip hopefully that works.
https://fb.watch/nM4j5aKxCd/

[BigBlue4u]

3 minutes ago, KR23 said:

Fly ball in the infield lands fair before a fielder can touch it, but then bounces toward foul and is touched in foul territory while it's still in the air, before it touches the ground in foul territory.  Is this fair or foul?  It was a fly ball and only touched ground in fair territory.  Here is a clip hopefully that works.
https://fb.watch/nM4j5aKxCd/

MLB (Same in all codes)  It's a foul ball.  "A foul ball is a batted ball that settles on foul territory between home and first base.......or that, while on or over foul territory, touches the person of an umpire or player....."

[maven]

A batted ball before it reaches 1B or 3B is fair or foul depending on where it is first touched, regardless of where it lands. If the entire ball is over foul territory when first touched, that's a foul ball. If any part of the ball is over fair territory when first touched, that's a fair ball.

A batted ball beyond 1B or 3B is fair or foul depending on where it first lands, regardless of where it is touched.

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, maven said:

A batted ball before it reaches 1B or 3B is fair or foul depending on where it is first touched, regardless of where it lands. If the entire ball is over foul territory when first touched, that's a foul ball. If any part of the ball is over fair territory when first touched, that's a fair ball.

A batted ball beyond 1B or 3B is fair or foul depending on where it first lands, regardless of where it is touched.

I agree that's how we call it and should call it before 1B. I think the OP is clearly foul. OBR and I think the other codes have a problem with their definitions while @BigBlue4u cited the foul ball definition he should have asked where in relation to the foul line was the ball touched. And the where is up for discussion, where the ball was or where the touch was. What's interesting is that MLB/OBR realized their wording makes a fly ball foul if not landing  half or more over the foul line but has not addressed fair foul before 1B. Time for @beerguy55 to opine. And the MLBUM should put your interp in and give you credit for it🙂

[noumpere]

Couldn't watch the clip, but in FED, if the ball landed past a line between first and third (before the backspin took it foul), then it's a fair ball.

[Richvee]

9 hours ago, Jimurray said:

MLBUM should put your interp in and give you credit for it

and if they did, unfortunately, at this time, we'd never get to see it. 

[beerguy55]

11 hours ago, Jimurray said:

I agree that's how we call it and should call it before 1B. I think the OP is clearly foul. OBR and I think the other codes have a problem with their definitions while @BigBlue4u cited the foul ball definition he should have asked where in relation to the foul line was the ball touched. And the where is up for discussion, where the ball was or where the touch was. What's interesting is that MLB/OBR realized their wording makes a fly ball foul if not landing  half or more over the foul line but has not addressed fair foul before 1B. Time for @beerguy55 to opine. And the MLBUM should put your interp in and give you credit for it🙂

LOL - thank you sir.

The challenge in the current wording, taken literally, is a ball not yet passed first/third that is still moving is NEITHER foul or fair (this is fine...umpires know to wait)...and that a ball that bounds over first/third base, or settles, halfway over fair/foul territory is BOTH fair and foul.

I will just requote myself to two possible solutions to correcting the rule book conflict between the FAIR and FOUL definitions...

 

A FOUL BALL is a batted ball that settles completely on foul territory between home and first base or between home and third base and has not first touched fair territory beyond first or third base, or that bounds past first or third base completely on or over foul territory, or that first falls completely on foul territory beyond first or third base, or that, while completely on or over foul territory, touches the person of an umpire or player, or any object foreign to the natural ground.

OR

A FOUL BALL is a batted ball that is not FAIR.   

New umpires should have this guidance: Until a batted ball settles, is touched, or bounds/lands past first/third it is neither fair nor foul.

[ArchAngel72]

"FOUL"

[834k3r]

Reading the comments on that video was depressing.

[ArchAngel72]

So now watching more of the video 

 

I now see Interference on R1 and BR with regards to F1 fielding the flyball

 

[KR23]

Thanks to all who replied.  I found this one the most helpful and sounds like it comes right out of the rule book.
 

Until a batted ball settles, is touched, or bounds/lands past first/third it is neither fair nor foul.

 

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, KR23 said:

Thanks to all who replied.  I found this one the most helpful and sounds like it comes right out of the rule book.
 

Until a batted ball settles, is touched, or bounds/lands past first/third it is neither fair nor foul.

 

No rule book that I know of - I pulled that out of my ass.

[KR23]

2 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

No rule book that I know of - I pulled that out of my ass.

That's awesome!  It sounded so official!

[Jimurray]

3 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

So now watching more of the video 

 

I now see Interference on R1 and BR with regards to F1 fielding the flyball

 

Interesting sit. First decision: IFF if fair or not ordinary effort low pop up. Second decision protected fielder  F1 or F3 or one and then the other. If you protect F3 then R1 interfered and will be out. Because the ball was foul it doesn't matter if IFF was judged but the timing of the INT call depends on the IFF call. Batter gets a strike added.

If you protect F1 and judge INT by the B-R he is out and runners return. You would have to judge F1 pulled up to avoid getting trucked by the B-R. At the MLB level the calls I've seen were no calls with a sit like this. I think they require F1 to continue to the ball and get trucked.

ADVICE: Watch the video but do not peruse the comments.

[umpstu]

11 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Interesting sit. First decision: IFF if fair or not ordinary effort low pop up. Second decision protected fielder  F1 or F3 or one and then the other. If you protect F3 then R1 interfered and will be out. Because the ball was foul it doesn't matter if IFF was judged but the timing of the INT call depends on the IFF call. Batter gets a strike added.

If you protect F1 and judge INT by the B-R he is out and runners return. You would have to judge F1 pulled up to avoid getting trucked by the B-R. At the MLB level the calls I've seen were no calls with a sit like this. I think they require F1 to continue to the ball and get trucked.

ADVICE: Watch the video but do not peruse the comments.

A bunch of people on FB aren't familiar with rules, I guess.

 

[beerguy55]

32 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

If you protect F1 and judge INT by the B-R he is out and runners return. You would have to judge F1 pulled up to avoid getting trucked by the B-R. At the MLB level the calls I've seen were no calls with a sit like this. I think they require F1 to continue to the ball and get trucked.

At the very least, I think they'd want to see F1 a LOT closer to the B/R...getting trucked would do that, but I think they'd want to see at least the glove hand reaching into the path of the runner, rather than pulling up 10 feet away from the base line.

[ArchAngel72]

Well 

17 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Interesting sit. First decision: IFF if fair or not ordinary effort low pop up. Second decision protected fielder  F1 or F3 or one and then the other. If you protect F3 then R1 interfered and will be out. Because the ball was foul it doesn't matter if IFF was judged but the timing of the INT call depends on the IFF call. Batter gets a strike added.

If you protect F1 and judge INT by the B-R he is out and runners return. You would have to judge F1 pulled up to avoid getting trucked by the B-R. At the MLB level the calls I've seen were no calls with a sit like this. I think they require F1 to continue to the ball and get trucked.

ADVICE: Watch the video but do not peruse the comments.

I have no IFF as there is no routine play.   I do have INT on R1 and BR on F3.  I admit I did miss the possible INT on F1. In the end though, Me having replay and slow mo.   Just call it "foul" at least at the LL level. 

 

 

[beerguy55]

47 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Well 

I have no IFF as there is no routine play.   I do have INT on R1 and BR on F3.  I admit I did miss the possible INT on F1. In the end though, Me having replay and slow mo.   Just call it "foul" at least at the LL level. 

 

 

Interesting...I have IFF "if fair", and this is what the Plate ump called...he simply missed it going foul.

I have INT on R1 as well...and yes, I could say that both R1 and BR interfered with F3...and I believe without that INT (by either or both) it's a routine catch...which leads me back to my original thought of IFF.

In the end, for me, R1 out, runners return, strike added to batter's count.

[Jimurray]

10 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

Interesting...I have IFF "if fair", and this is what the Plate ump called...he simply missed it going foul.

I have INT on R1 as well...and yes, I could say that both R1 and BR interfered with F3...and I believe without that INT (by either or both) it's a routine catch...which leads me back to my original thought of IFF.

In the end, for me, R1 out, runners return, strike added to batter's count.

So I protect F1 at first, then protect F3 when F1 gives up. Do I have INT on R1 or INT on B-R?

[beerguy55]

4 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

So I protect F1 at first, then protect F3 when F1 gives up. Do I have INT on R1 or INT on B-R?

I guess you'd have INT on B/R at that point, he's out instead.

And then I guess you technically have OBS on F3 before that...though R1 really can't go anywhere with R2/R3 in front of him...the OBS was on him returning to first...though initially hindered, he got back to first, and the ball ended up foul anyway.  So nothing to administer there.

[834k3r]

Since we've moved into the "deeper analysis of the video" portion of the program, why does the PU have so much hesitation, then appear to check with U3 before making a weak IFF point (it's not pointing "1 out" as suggested by the video commentary)? Odd mechanics for a LLWS umpire.

[beerguy55]

1 minute ago, 834k3r said:

Since we've moved into the "deeper analysis of the video" portion of the program, why does the PU have so much hesitation, then appear to check with U3 before making a weak IFF point (it's not pointing "1 out" as suggested by the video commentary)? Odd mechanics for a LLWS umpire.

Maybe U3 signaled IFF first? And PU reacted to it?

[834k3r]

1 minute ago, beerguy55 said:

Maybe U3 signaled IFF first? And PU reacted to it?

I guess I'm really surprised at what appears to be a lack of confidence. The BR is past F3 when the ball is touched in foul territory, so I'm at a loss as to why he didn't come up with a loud and hard "FOUL!" call. Certainly a HTBT, but it's not a good look.

[beerguy55]

13 minutes ago, 834k3r said:

I guess I'm really surprised at what appears to be a lack of confidence. The BR is past F3 when the ball is touched in foul territory, so I'm at a loss as to why he didn't come up with a loud and hard "FOUL!" call. Certainly a HTBT, but it's not a good look.

I'd speculate a lack/loss of focus.  Lots of people cheering/yelling, caught up in the moment.  Human stuff.  He's watching to see if it's caught, or lands foul...he doesn't necessarily have IFF at that time (or isn't even registering the possibility)...then - and I'm purely speculating....just imagining a potential chain of events - he hears U3 come up loud with "infield fly if fair"...now he's distracted..."really?  OK...I guess so" and then sees it land fair, and he's still thinking about the IFF call, and simply forgets himself on watching for fair/foul.  Too much information to process at once, and he freezes.  It happens.

[ArchAngel72]

Rule 2.00

Quote

Rule 2.00 defines the Infield Fly as, “a fair fly ball (not including a line drive or a bunt) which can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, when first and second, or first, second, and third bases are occupied before two are out. The pitcher, catcher, and any outfielder stationed in the infield on the play shall be considered infielders for the purpose of this rule.” It goes on to state that “[t]he ball is alive and runners may advance at the risk of being caught or retouch and advance after the ball is touched, the same as on any fly ball. If the hit becomes a foul ball, it is treated the same as any foul ball.”

 

I do not see that as play of ordinary effort.  Its a bloop pop up in "no mans land" that either F1 or F3 would have to make a heck of a play in order to catch most likely diving or close to it.  So to me no not IFF worthy.   My eyes my 2 cents 

[beerguy55]

43 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Rule 2.00

 

I do not see that as play of ordinary effort.  Its a bloop pop up in "no mans land" that either F1 or F3 would have to make a heck of a play in order to catch most likely diving or close to it.  So to me no not IFF worthy.   My eyes my 2 cents 

That's fine...not sure why you felt the need to quote the rule.

"Ordinary effort" is a judgment call.  You don't see it, I do.   I think this catch is mind-numbingly easy for either F1 or F3 to make, at this level.  You don't.

That's it that's all.