Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SAump
Ball is touched over fair territory by defensive player, fair says everyone.
Ball hits bat; fair says Bob Jenkins.
Ball hits helmet; fair says CoachJM and just about everyone else.
Ball hits detached equipment, veers and settles foul; foul says Rich Ives and possibly CoachJM.
That doesn't settle well with my divot example.
|
OK on the first one SA but
GONG! Nice try on the rest but . . .
Bob Jenkins Post:
Originally Posted by TheWhiteShadow
2.16.1.D has almost the exact same scenario but it is ruled foul and it states that the "bat is considered to be part of the playing field".
To which Bob Jenkins said:
“Yep .. and I think this is the "correct" ruling.”
So Bob said it’s foul.
CoachJM Post 3:
foul, foul, and foul were his opinions. (Second one was hits helmet)
Coach JM post 7:
“I would be inclined to rule that any piece of equipment or clothing which is lying on the field of play and not properly attached as a "foreign object.
Absent any intent, if a fair batted ball hits it in fair territory, play on.”
He did not say it was fair, he just said play continues. If the ball subsequently becomes a foul ball, it is foul. That's why his opinions were foul, foul, and foul.