High, deep fly ball clearly over foul territory twists in the wind so that it travels just over the fence and strikes the 'foul pole' at a point that lies lower than the top of the fence.

Fair or Foul?

Foul. Impossible, but foul.

The ball in the Atlanta-Washington game appeared from all replays to strike the foul pole above the fence. A ball striking the foul pole should be fair, since it should be placed so that the only way to miss it is for the ball to be foul.

How so Bob? A ball that strikes a foul pole should be fair, if placed properly.

This play was originally correctly ruled fair by Jerry Layne. Robinson came out and argued, the umpires huddled, Layne reversed his decision. Cox failed to get ejected...amazingly enough. BTW, the foul pole at RFK is painted black the first foot or so over the fence. Also the foul pole lines up on the fair edge of the yellow line on the wall. It appears to be possible to miss the foul pole with a ball crossing the fence on the line.

Edit
Now that I think about it, Bobby may go ahead and get tossed at the plate meeting tomorrow. If he is carrying a video tape, you'll know what is going to happen.

[Edited by TBBlue on May 30th, 2005 at 09:07 PM]

Bob may have been addressing the question as actually worded and not the play everyone else apparently saw. The oringal question has the ball leaving the field of play (travels over the the fence) while it is in foul territory and then striking a "foul" pole after leaving the field of play.

If the original question is in reference to the Atlanta/Nationals game, it is not a good representation of what happened.

The original question was not intended to be a representation of the Atlanta/ Brian Jordan play.

But that play sure stimulated some discussion ! So I modified the play for this board so that my question here might help me understand the principles involved.

I'm still thinkin' about it!

The stadium has several issues. One is the mound:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?...mlb&id=2046295

#2 is that the foul pole does not sit on top of the fence as it does in all other parks. The chance that a ball could get between the pole and the fence should not happen.

#3 is that the Mets protested a game last week because the grounds crew failed to cover the field after it had rained for 30 minutes - BEFORE the game. I don't know if they won the protest or not.

RFK has some issues and the umpires shouldn't have all the blame on this one.

Then, I hope some others will discuss your question instead of the Atlanta situation.

It's possible, but TWP. Just because a ball in flight is clearly over foul territory, doesn't make it foul. No fair/foul decision can be made until the ball touches something or someone past 1st or 3rd base. If it goes 50 feet foul in the air and gets blown back to hit the pole...guess what...Fair ball.

Fair ball.

OBR doesn't specifically cover this. The definition of a fair ball says that it's fair if passes out of the playing field while over fair territory, but there's no corollary for a foul ball. The definition of a fould bal doesn't specifically say what happens if a foul ball passes from the field in foul territory and doesn't return.

The foul pole should be mounted on the fence. Otherwise there's not much point in having a pole to begin with. If it's not, the field's ground rules should cover what happens to a ball that strikes the pole after leaving the field in foul territory. By common sense and interpolation, I'd say the ground rule should say that a ball striking the foul pole below the fence line should be ruled fair or foul relative to it's position when it left the field. So after leaving the field in foul territory it would be ruled a foul ball should it strike the pole below the fence. This is also going to be the easiest thing for an umpire to rule, since once the ball drops below the fence the umpire wouldn't likely see it even hit the pole and therefore would be ruling foul anyway since that's where it left the field.

Whatever. From 150 to 300 feet away, depending who is calling this...if it is seen to hit the pole...fair ball....always.

[Edited by TBBlue on May 31st, 2005 at 02:04 PM]

IMO, the pole below (and outside) the fence is the same as the back of the fence.

IMO, the back of the fence is the same as the ground outside the fence.

So, the play presented is the same as a ball that passes over the fence in foul territory, but then curves and hits the ground in "fair" territory -- I've got a foul ball.

Huh?
 

Bob, I am not understanding your answer. Carldog, perhaps I'm not understanding the ball's flight; what are you asking?

If the foul pole is properly positioned at junction of the foul line and the outfield fence... a ball that hits that foul pole has got to be fair....

unless you are saying that the ball is out in foul territory, beyond the distance of the fence and is being blown back towards home plate (getting closer to HP) and then hits the back side of the foul pole...

okay that I can justify as a foul ball.

I need a better description.

Re: Huh?
 

That's what he's saying -- and adding the point that the ball hit the foul pole below the level of the top of the fence.

That is, had there been no foul pole, only a line on the front of the fence (or even just on the grass), the ball would clearly be ruled foul. But, because the foul pole sticks out a little from the fence, the ball hit it. As I said, "impossible." But still foul.

Re: Huh?
 

The only description available is the one originally posted:

<i>"High, deep fly ball clearly over foul territory twists in the wind so that <b>it travels just over the fence</b> and strikes the 'foul pole' at a point that lies lower than the top of the fence."</i>

As incredible as it may seem, in this scenario the foul pole is apparently beyond the fence. If a batted ball travels over the fence still in foul territory, it is foul, regardless of what it does after it leaves the field of play. TWP all the way.

Re: Huh?
 

As for OUR calling this play where we typically don't have 6 man crews, to call a batted flyball foul that hits the foul pole is a difficult judgment to sell. The umpire has to make this judgment from a considerable distance. The fair call is the obvious call unless that foul pole is a considerable distance back from the fence.

At our level of play, to call this ball foul is opening a Pandora's box for yourself. If you call it foul, you better be damn certain of your judgment. When the game is over you can visit the Beverly Hillbillies and start shooting bugs off the wall with Jethro Bodine..........


Just my opinion,

Freix

Re: Re: Huh?
 

And how could you be damn certain of your judgement unless you were standing/lying on the ground AT THE FOUL POLE? Even at that, you're still going to have to make a tremendous sales job if you call this a foul ball.

I'm with Freix ... even if his moniker does appear a bit biased - Bfair.

My eye-sight is not phenomenal but even from 150-250 feet away, this is going to be a fair ball - it hit the pole!

We've all seen pop ups that would blow/climb 30-40-50 feet from where we thought they would land. But I have never seen a ball hit hard enough and deep enough to actually go out of the field of play and be blown directly back into the field. Highly improbable. And to be blown into the backside of the foul pole... even more improbable. Makes me want to do some math to determine the improbability. Let me see trajectory is a hyperbolic cosine... wind friction is a velocity squared function... required exit velocity to travel 400 feet horizontal... assume a 40 degree angle... therefore the required wind velocity towards the ball's origination point of home plate must be.... Holy Moly Batman... that's some incredible windspeed. Perfect baseball weather!

Well it is the beginning of the hurricane season. Perhaps we need actually consider this situation. :D

Only way I can see this fair-curving ball is on a pitch coming AT the batter, slower than expected. He REALLY gets around on it without getting the bat-head around, so much so that he hits it foul, but with a slice.

Completely TWP though.

Re: Re: Huh?
 

Thank you Freix.
Edited to add....and Down Town. Don't know if it's in Carls list, but calling a foul on a ball that hits the pole will surely ruin a ballgame.

[Edited by TBBlue on Jun 1st, 2005 at 05:20 PM]

"As incredible as it may seem, in this scenario the foul pole is apparently beyond the fence."

We watch MLB games on TV with the foul pole just beyond the fence (Washington, DC, for ex.). And it looks to be 10-12 inches in diameter.

So, I'm not so sure this scenario is as improbable/impossible as many have said...but DownTown made me chuckle pretty good. Because the foul pole can be directly behind the fence - the front of the pole touches the back of the fence like in Washington - and because the pole can be 10-12 inches in diameter...I can certainly see a high fly ball dropping at a near vertical angle...drifting from a point over foul territory toward fair territory... traveling just over the fence by an inch or two...and grazing the 'foul pole' on the foul territory side at a point that lies a few inches lower than the top of the fence.

Interesting discussion: thanks!







[Edited by carldog on Jun 1st, 2005 at 08:43 PM]

Back to the RFK foul poles. I posted earlier, either here or on another board, that the LF pole is lined up on the fair edge of the foul line as opposed to directly over the line. Last night, the Braves broadcast showed the RF foul pole. It is lined up on the foul edge of the line, off exactly the same amount as the LF pole. It appears they measured the distances, erected the poles, and oops, when they drew the field the poles are off by 3 inches. Maybe the line on the fence is off, but I don't think so because that would be easy to fix. It is much more difficult to move a Major League foul pole if you mess it up.