Ball lodged in glove: FED interpretation

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by Dave Hensley
from page 67 and 68 of the October 2004 issue of Referee Magazine:

Play 13: With (a) no runners on, or (b) R1 on first, B1's line drive to the mound smacks into F1's glove, but the force of the hit rips the glove from f1's hand. The glove lands on the ground with the ball lodged in the webbing. F1 recovers the glove and prepares to throw the glove with the lodged ball to first base. Ruling 13: In (a) and (b), the ball is dead when the umpire sees the lodged ball. B1 is awarded first base. In (b), R1 is awarded two bases.

Can anyone explain why Referee believes the batter would only be awarded first base, and not second? As I understand it, the Stevens article clearly states the interpretation is to award two bases to the batter, as well as any runners.

I've seen the same ruling elsewhere, just can't recall where at the moment [I'm gonna look]. It doesn't seem logical, I agree; unless you are subtracting the base B1 WOULDN"T have had if the glove wasn't "ripped from F1's hand" from the award?

[Atl Blue]

Dave:

Once again, Referee Magazine is wrong. If you look at the Bases Awarded chart in the FED rulebook, it clearly shows that BOTH the batter and the runner are awarded two bases on a lodged ball.

I was one of the original subscribers to Referee Magazine back when I was a pup. It didn't take me long to realize that their editing leaves a lot to be desired, particularly in the area of FED rules.

Their poor record on rules interpretations as well as their actions in a Wisconsin court have convinced me long ago not to send them any of my money. They had my support, and lost it with their poor performance.

[bob jenkins]

It strikes me that the FED could eliminate much of the confusion, and "safety" red herrings if they'd remove the "lodged in a glove" rule and use the "displaced equipment" rule instead. Once the player removes the glove with the ball in it during playing action, the thrown ball is touched by displaced equipment -- award two bases.

All the outs in WCB's plays stand, because the glove wasn't displaced.

[Atl Blue]

Bob:

This is basically what I suggested in my "interpretation" above. I realize mine is not the current rule, but what I think it should be. As long as the person that caught the ball is the one attempting further action (tagging a base, tagging a runner, etc) with the glove still in its proper place, play on. Kill the play when the fielder removes the glove to toss it to another player, to try to tag a runner with the glove while not wearing it, or removing it to try to dislodge the ball. At that point, we have a problem. Up until then, it's just a player with the ball in his glove. We should not care if it is "held" or "lodged", all we should care about is that it is in his possession (I was ging to say "possessed", but that takes us down a whole other line!).

[WindyCityBlue]

From the fingertips of the Wizard:

I say you shouldn't worry about an umpire's inability to sell the FED interpretation. In 15 years they've played about 36,000 games or so in the major leagues; and a batted ball has been stuck, uh, I mean "lodged," three times. We only know of its happening ONCE in a high school game in who knows how many hundreds of thousands of games.

– – – – – –Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*– –Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*-Â*- - -

To which, I respond:

Who is this "we" you refer to in the last sentence?
Those of us in Illinois, know it happened in a State Championship game five years ago. Those in Colorado shared the same experience in their state championship a few years ago. That would be two times - in the biggest high school games of the season - and both of them were mentioned in that rag you've often maligned. Will this play happen again? The answer is very likely. The play I described (regarding a lodged ball, not discovered until the end of playing action) might be more unlikely. But we have rules that govern line drives that directly hit the pitching plate and rebound out of play and other rarities. Why shouldn't we have clarity to this issue, as well? The fact is that the Fed boofed this one. But, I'm beginning to understand why they do it this way. Next year they'll have a reason to do it again. It's kind of like going to the mechanic's and he only fixes one thing at a time. That way he can perpetuate his existence. This wasn't a bold move on their part or some radical discovery of an issue that needed refinement. They have once again decided that the NCAA and OBR are wrong and that they know better.

[scyguy]

what if the glove is ripped off pitcher's hand, but infielder catches glove (with lodged ball) before it hits the ground?

Now, I am behind the plate, I see ball hit pitcher's glove, glove and ball go flying into the air, F5, dives and catches glove, I immediately see that the ball is a) lodged b) not lodged but sitting in the pocket of the glove.

A--dead ball, two base award?

B--live ball catch?

[mcrowder]

A - dead ball, 2 bases (and eject the HC when he explodes).
B - you have nothing. Ball has not touched the ground; ball is not yet secured by the fielder - this you could treat just like the ball is being bobbled.

[scyguy]

I will award the out on the line drive and leave ball live. I will justify by saying that the ball may have been lodged, but the glove was not removed and tossed.

Continue with your scenario, what if R3 tags, sees ball is lodged in F3's glove and runs for home. F3 cannot retrieve ball from glove so a) he gets out of glove but run scores ahead of throw, or b)tosses glove to catcher in time for a tag at plate.

I see A as a run scored, live ball situation. Now, I see B as an immediate dead ball when glove is flying thru the air, with R3 awarded home, R2 awarded home and R1 awarded third.

At this point, unless told differently by the FED, if glove is tossed, two bases, if ball gets lodged, then dig it out--live ball.

[Atl Blue]

scyguy:

What you said is logical, but by the current wording, it's not the rule. This is why the great debate, and those of us that want NFHS to clarify the rule, the ruling, and add a case play to illustrate.

[scyguy]

I understand, but for now, I need a gameplan. If I do a game tomorrow and it happens, I must make a ruling. What are you going to do if it happens to you?

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by scyguy
I understand, but for now, I need a gameplan. If I do a game tomorrow and it happens, I must make a ruling. What are you going to do if it happens to you?

scyguy;

You understand perfectly. You are a practical umpire who does not get hung up on third world plays and other minutia that is the stomping grounds of rules nerds.

What is going on here is interesting for people who like to have intellectual discussions about rules. However, real umpires solve real problems with real world solutions that will keep them out of trouble. You have scored an A in that department. You are ready for the next level. You have figured out that it is often more important to convince others on a baseball field that you are right than to actually be right.

Common sense and fair play will generally carry the day. It is also important to know the real rule in order to finesse yourself through the minefields.

Peter

[Atl Blue]

What are you going to do if it happens to you?

If you see what I suggested about two pages ago, you will see that my answer is basically the same as yours: the person that caught it can still do anything with it (tag runners, tag bases, etc.) as long as he has it in his glove. Just because I see it between the fingers of his glove doesn't mean it's "lodged". It isn't a problem until he takes off the glove to give it to someone else or to tries to tag a runner with the detached glove.

As HHH says, you have to sell it, and I'll add that you have to accept the fact that a well versed coach may protest your ruling. Great, let him protest. If I lose the protest, it will be my first in 35 years.

I'll take my chances.

[jumpmaster]

Originally posted by His High Holiness

Common sense and fair play will generally carry the day. It is also important to know the real rule in order to finesse yourself through the minefields.

Peter

Common sense from the FED? About as likely as you saying believing that LL umpires are real umpires That is that is the problem with the interpretation - it doesn't go far enough, it stops at the safety issue of equipment flying around the field.

Common sense would say, play ball until such time as the ball is determined to be lodged - at that time apply FED 8-3-3d: one base for a batted ball carried into dead ball territory unintentionally.

[scyguy]

8-3-3d refers to a pitch or any throw by the pitcher from his pitching position becomes lodged. I read further (and this may be what you are refering to) "batter hits a fiar or foul ball which is caught by a fielder, who then leaves the field of play by stepping with both feet or fallig into a bench, dugout ..." Again, I assume you are addressing the scenario about the umpire not realizing that the ball was lodged in the glove until the player reached the dugout.

I think using 8-3-3d is a far reach. If I am umpiring a game when a ball is lodged in the glove of an infielder who steps on a bag for a force out or tags a runner, we will have an out--not a two base or one base award.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Dave Hensley
This whole thread has, for the most part, just given me tired-head, but would someone care to reconcile the new FED interpretation, as reported on this site in both this forum and in Tim Stevens' article on the paid portion of the site, which defines a lodged ball as a dead ball in which the award, to both batter and runners, is two bases, with this play from page 67 and 68 of the October 2004 issue of Referee Magazine:

Play 13: With (a) no runners on, or (b) R1 on first, B1's line drive to the mound smacks into F1's glove, but the force of the hit rips the glove from f1's hand. The glove lands on the ground with the ball lodged in the webbing. F1 recovers the glove and prepares to throw the glove with the lodged ball to first base. Ruling 13: In (a) and (b), the ball is dead when the umpire sees the lodged ball. B1 is awarded first base. In (b), R1 is awarded two bases.

Can anyone explain why Referee believes the batter would only be awarded first base, and not second? As I understand it, the Stevens article clearly states the interpretation is to award two bases to the batter, as well as any runners.

Dave:

I posed your question to Tim Stevens, who posed the same question to Elliot Hopkins, who said: "That's wrong. The interpretation language won't be finalized until January." Elliot affirmed the ruling Tim published at Officiating.com: Everybody gets two bases if the ball is actually lodged. The umpire is to kill the ball when: (1) the fielder simply throws up his hands in horror; or (2) he tosses (starts to toss) the glove to another fielder for a tag/force out. (email to me, 5 Oct)

Referee jumped the gun, relying on second-hand information from the summer rules committee meeting. There will, no doubt, be a correction and apology in the December issue.

I wouldn't want to be the person responsible when Barry finds out about the mistake.