Re: Re: Re: Loss of body control?
 

No, Barney was much more innovative and creative than that. He ruled in January 1985 that the head was part of the body. It was so original that we thought heads might roll at the BUD. Even Johnny Depp was frightened, and he was already 23.

007
 

I was enjoying your post until you made a fatal error . . .

Mr. Thurston of NCAA made the following ruling last year that shoots a great big whole in your logic:

Play.

As R2 is advancing towards third base and R1 towards second a wild throw passes F5. F1 is in good position to back up the play but falls . . . his feet are clearly in DBT but the major part of his body is in the field of play.

F1 DOES NOT CATCH the ball but simply blocks it back into the field of play.

Ruling:

Since the player does not 'capture'the ball and the majority of his body is in the field of play the ball is alive and in play.

A player must establish himself "out of play" to be "out of play".

I appreciate your attempt. But Carl is "Nuts ON!" on this one.

Tee

Re: 007
 

So...I guess that since you didn't quote the "logic" that has a big hole in it I guess that I just have to ask, since when does Thurston render opinion or interpretations for OBR? My question WAS pertaining to OBR.

"unless he falls down or loses body control"
 

Interesting wording. I'm NOT an OBR umpire (I do ASA JO Fastpitch, so I hope you don't mind the "intrusion"), but both of these imply to me an unintentional result -- i.e. the assumption is that the fielder intended to remain on his feet. What about a fielder who makes a dramatic diving catch into DBT? Is this a fall? No, it was a dive. Is it loss of body control? Certainly not, it is the untimate in body control to dive at full speed into the ground and make a catch, and to come up firing.

Is the ball live or dead?

Taking a dive...
 

Jim Mills is right about the fall and the dive producing the same result. It is the result that matters.

I just wanted to add that the whole point of the rule under discussion is to allow play to continue if the fielder remains on his feet after involuntarily entering dead ball territory as a result of his momentum after making a catch. It is most often colloquially referred to as the "catch and carry" rule. The only reason that the "loss of body control" interpretation from NCAA is of any consequence is that it gives us a <i>reference point</i> in time at which the act of falling commences, and after which a legitimate throw can no longer be made.

In the case of your diving fielder, the moment he left his feet such a subsequent throw became automatically impossible under the rule. If he catches the ball in mid dive before touching down in dead ball territory the catch and the out will stand, but either way there can be no legitimate following throw and continuation of play under OBR, unless the fielder is a cat and manages to land feet first! :)

Cheers,

[Edited by Warren Willson on Feb 27th, 2001 at 12:34 PM]