Tell me if I'm wrong

[DG]

Based on the original post, and assuming that the pitch did not hit the batter's hands (which the poster did not mention), then I have a FOUL BALL. Having 4 umpires don't matter. There is only one who has this call. He might confer with one of his partners, but the other two have no view of this play.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by DG
Based on the original post, and assuming that the pitch did not hit the batter's hands (which the poster did not mention), then I have a FOUL BALL. Having 4 umpires don't matter. There is only one who has this call. He might confer with one of his partners, but the other two have no view of this play.

How do you have a foul ball? This is a judgment call by the umpire. Unless you were there and you had a great view of the play, you have no idea what the call was.

[DG]

Originally posted by LDUB

How do you have a foul ball? This is a judgment call by the umpire. Unless you were there and you had a great view of the play, you have no idea what the call was.

I am only responding to what was posted. The poster is not looking for a judgement call, but looking for a rules interpretation. If the ball touched a fielder in foul territory before reaching the bag, it is foul. Beyond the front of the bag, it could be fair ball, if it bounded over the top of the bag, but I did not get the impression from the post that this was the case, since it was not mentioned.

[jicecone]

JRSOONER
"but when your sons team is facing elimination you want these types of calls".

"I and everyone else thought it was clearly foul but as LDUB says I didn't have a good a look down the line as the ump did".

DG
"The poster is not looking for a judgement call, but looking for a rules interpretation"

DG, cut to the chase here, what the poster wanted was a place to vent because he thought his son's team may have gotten a raw deal on what MAY have been an incorrect call.

Wether it was a good call or not, lets not read anymore into this than necessary.

[mcrowder]

I was trying to get poster to describe what he saw, and without saying it in as many words, make him realize that SURELY the umpire standing ON the foulline, 10-20 feet away at most, had a better view of whether that ball was touching the foulline when it was kicked than one would have sitting in the stands.

My point - it may be "obvious" from the stands, but the umpire has a MUCH better line of sight on the ball, and umpire is also aware that if ANY part of the ball is in fair territory (not the majority ... ANY) when it's touched, it's FAIR.

This one sounds like a fair ball to me, even based on the poster's description.

Fields obviously vary from place to place, but I measured last night and put my foot where poster suggested - barely on dirt, parallel to the line, and rolled a ball up against my foot. It was barely foul - by less than an inch. My foot was perfectly parallel and barely off the grass. If fielder's foot was any more than a hair off the grass or anything other than perfectly parallel, there's no room for a ball to be foul when it hits a foot (at least on the field where I did this).