Ball lodged in glove: FED interpretation

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Jim Mills
Carl, a lot of dissatisfaction has been expressed about case plays being issued (or at least contemplated) that run counter to the rule's plain language. The case plays seem to indicate that the NFHS does not want the ball dead immediately if it lodges in a fielder's glove. Rather, it wants us to judge subsequent events. IF that is the case, the point is that they should make this a delayed-dead-ball offense instead of issuing case plays that are at odds with the black-letter law of the rule, which calls for an immediate dead ball.

Jim:

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.

Anyway, you're missing the simple point -- but that's only because, like some others, you don't think it the right ruling. On the other hand, I've never expressed my opinion about the propriety of this ruling. All I've said is the FED interpretation is exactly how I envisioned their meaning when they changed their rules for 1994.

In other words, I'm not defending the Committee's work; I'm only arguing that it's perfectly clear what they want an umpire to do.

As most everyone now agrees: The ball isn't dead until the umpire discovers it's lodged. He doesn't discover it's lodged until the player tries to throw the glove/ball. Logically speaking, that is when the ball becomes dead. It certainly cannot be a delayed dead ball. That would take it back to the moment it lodged and deprive the defense of a legitimately fielded batted ball.

The chances are you call a little OBR. Here's a passage from an interpretation in the MLBUM:

When a live ball enters a player's uniform or the catcher's gear, the ball is to be ruled dead and no subsequent outs can be obtained by the defense. The umpire is then directed to employ common sense and fairness and place the runners such that the act of the ball becoming dead is nullified. [5.10, quoted in J/R, p. 32]

Imagine: They are asking an umpire to use his common sense to figure out the fair result of an unusual play. Why, he'd never sell that to a coach.

Right?