|
Guys:
I may not have your experience, but any time the fielder puts his throwing hand on or near the gloved ball, you have the voluntary release the rules contemplate. So in Bob's "sitch," you have a voluntary release despite the inadvertent collision that may have contributed to the release.
Just because I am a lawyer doesn't mean I want to sound like one. But for officiating ease and clarity, I believe we amateur umpires should equate the way we officiate a catch/no catch with the way we officiate the tag of a base or runner. Accordingly, if a fielder gloves a ball, tags a base, and then changes directions and running speed, he has proved that he has held the ball securely in his glove even if he subsequently drops it without other voluntary-release characteristics. But if the fielder gloves the ball and after tagging the base or runner drops the ball without changing direction and speed or without voluntary release, it's no tag just like it would be no catch. He has not proved that he held the ball securely in his glove.
In my mind, it's the same concept that J/R describes with respect to "relaxed and unrelaxed action." It's what lawyers call "analogous" situations. The fielder should securely hold the ball after the tag during unrelaxed action.
Consistency in officiating catch/no catch and tag/no tag lends to our credibility, just like consistency does with our strike zones. As Garth always says, "Just my opinion."
|