|
"did the ball go to the glove or did the glove go to the ball)."
I am not sure that I can buy the argument that the catcher can execute a visible "play on the ball" on a 50 - 60+ mph pitch that is slightly deflected.
If the ball hits the glove, then the glove probably moved very slightly to the ball path. Maybe 16 YO reflexes are quick enough to get to the ball, but I don't believe that I would even see it. Ask yourself - when that ball deflects directly at your face - do you duck - or get hit? (If you can successfully duck, then why wear the mask?)
I have no problem that a ball can travel a straight line (NHFS word is "direct") from the bat to the glove, even if glove moved, and be called a foul tip.
For a FP catcher to make a perceptible movement to the ball, the ball must have been slowed significantly by the bat - and it probably no longer travels in a straight line. Thus "Arc." And thus foul fly (if caught) or foul ball (if uncaught).
I suspect that ASA will need to keep their definitions due the preponderance of SP play, which allows for catcher movement "to the ball." In that NFHS is primarily FP, their definition makes sense to me.
WMB
|