Catch? Out?
 

Last night a batter hit a relatively hard line-drive to 2nd baseman, but the ball pops out of his glove and is deflected into the air. The ball does not touch the ground and the right fielder catches the ball. Catch? Out?

mpklein,

Yes, that's a legal catch and an out (assuming the F9 demonstrated voluntary & intentional release after gaining secure possession in his hand or glove). (See Rule 2.00, Catch & In Flight).

JM

Follow-up
 

It turned out to be a triple play because the umpire called out both R1 and R2for leaving early on appeal. R1 left the bag early before the 2nd baseman touched the ball. However, R2 left the bag after the 2nd baseman touched the ball, but before the outfielder touched and caught the ball. Was the umpire correct calling R2 out?

mpklein,

As described, no the umpire was not correct. Any runner has met his retouch obligation as long as he was in contact with his TOP base as or after the first touch by the first fielder. Once again, Rule 2.00, Catch (in the Comment,towards the end).

JM

mpklein,

I would encourage you to completely disregard PWL's remarks, because he has entered a JACKASS in this race.

JM

P.S. Where do you get this B.S. PWL?

I guess it makes a big difference if one were in fair or foul according to PWL:rolleyes:

I hate to state the obvious, but that makes no sense. In fact, it's quite funny:D

PWL,


Actually, it ain't nothin' before it's caught. And, those of us who have actually read a rulebook know that a runner CAN advance on a caught foul ball. As long as said runner has met his retouch obligation. Which would be on the "first touch". Moron. (No offense intended towards the developmentally disabled.)

How long will it be before you delete your erroneous posts on THIS thread - as is your habit?

JM

I almost didn't want to dignify the previous misinformation with a response, but I found this and thought it would directly disprove PWL's ideas. Here goes...

MLB Rule 2.00 (Catch) Comment: A catch is legal if the ball is finally held by any fielder, even though juggled, or held by another fielder before it touches the ground. Runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball. A fielder may reach over a fence, railing, rope or other line of demarcation to make a catch. He may jump on top of a railing, or canvas that may be in foul ground. No interference should be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk.


MLB Rule 7.08 (d) He fails to retouch his base after a fair or foul ball is legally caught before he, or his base, is tagged by a fielder. He shall not be called out for failure to retouch his base after the first following pitch, or any play or attempted play. This is an appeal play;

I just pulled MLB.com's Rule Book for the citations because I'm at work at 3am and didn't feel like going out to the car to pull other books.

No, it was still an uncaught foul fly at the point of the first touch. The ball remains live and in play until it touches the ground. Think of it like this. Suppose the fielder who made the initial touch and subsequent deflection over foul territory ended up securing the ball himself before it touched the ground. Would the runner not be entitled to leave the instant of the deflection instead of having to wait for the fielder to show secure possession.
True, we could look at it any way we want. However, we choose to look at it in a light supported by the rules, rather than with blinders on in a cellar.


Tim.

Good God!
 

PWL is at it again.

How sad.

Do you guys think he does this on purpose just to get a reaction?

Sheese,

He does, and sadly too many here indulge him.

That explains it! :rolleyes:

No one could be so consistantly wrong, accidentally.

I'm on the opposite side, Bob. I really think he doesn't know any better.


Tim.

Lman,

My bad. I apologize. I should have known better. I'll try not to let it happen again. :o

I had noticed a recent change in his posts; in many of them, he actually seemed to be attempting to contribute to the discussion - rather than just name-calling and otherwise insulting people. Due to my naive and overly optimistic (hopeful??) view of human nature, I was inclined to believe that he was starting to "grow up". I only wished to encourage that trend.

Besides, I have empathy (pity??) for the poor coaches who might have to suffer through the games he alledgedly officiates (if he has, in fact, ever umpired a baseball game). How could anyone with an ounce of compassion not? Even those of you who do not hold those of us who coach in particularly high esteem. (Perhaps I misread the tone of some posts. ;) ). If I could help him learn even ONE THING about the rules, well, then at least he would know one thing.

However, I have been shown the error of my ways. Again, my apologies to all.

JM