[greymule]

There were two problems with "higher than the batter's head." The first was that it wasn't a determining criterion and was thus not necessary. The rule made perfect sense without it.

The second was that it was inaccurate and thus misleading. A spinning bloop that F2 dove to her right to catch was obviously an out, even if it hadn't gone higher than the batter's head. And a pitch that was over the batter's head but was swung at and nicked directly back into F2's outstretched glove was also clearly not an out but a foul tip.

Had this one last Sunday in the district junior college FP tournament in Georgetown, Delaware:

The batter swung and nicked a 1-2 pitch, and the ball went directly off the catcher's hand and lodged behind her chest protector. The catcher reached under her protector and plucked the ball out. The offensive coach immediately yelled that it wasn't a foul tip, because the ball had to go directly into the hand or glove. Of course, he was right that it wasn't a foul tip, but for the wrong reason.

In certain SP, outs on fouls to the catcher may be more common than you might think. Especially at high levels, some catchers do not squat behind the plate but instead, to give the umpire a better view, stand directly behind the batter's box opposite the batter, leaving the plate wide open to view. (Remember that the softball box is as wide as both batter's boxes.) In that position, catchers stand a much better chance of snagging fouls for outs.