View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 17, 2010, 07:28am
bob jenkins bob jenkins is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie View Post
Dash wrote: "It all makes sense if: a) with respect to a dropped (moving) bat contacting the ball (2.5.1.E), the point of contact determines fair/foul status.."

So from 2.5.1 (E), am I hearing that if the (unintentionally) moving bat contacts the ball in fair territory, then rolls untouched into foul territory and touches a fielder or just plain comes to rest in foul territory, it's a fair ball?

I always thought the "point of contact" in this situation determines first whether the ball is still live or dead, then comes fair/foul. For example, (1) moving bat contacts the ball in fair territory - the ball is still live (not necessarily fair, that's yet to be determined by a fielder or the foul line); moving bat contacts the ball in foul territory, the ball is dead right away (foul ball), regardless of who afterwards touches it or where it then rolls!
I've heard some try an explanattion similar to Dash's to try to reconcile the two cases. I don't buy it.

I agree with you in how it should be called, and think that the case which says otherwise is wrong (either a wrong ruling or it's missing some information).
Reply With Quote