|
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 |
Quote:
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,
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
Quote:
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.
|
Quote:
|
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. |
Quote:
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 |
To all,
I don't want to take a cheap shot at PWL, even though I would be well within my rights to do so. I honestly believe that he doesn't understand certain rules, and he's not trying to provoke us. CoachJM, Both BigUmp56 and I have tried to explain rules and procedures to him in the past, to which we have both been subjected to the name-calling and personal attacks ever since. We were both honestly trying to help him to be a better umpire, and perhaps we got a bit carried away in the way we presented it, and made sport of him. I have long since apologized to PWL for any personal attacks, real or perceived, and have offered an olive branch. I have yet to hear any change in attitude, or acceptance of any apology. Steve |
I thought you were Jim Evans.:confused:
:D |
And you're still wrong. Notice that there is no distinction between fair and foul under Rule 2.00 CATCH. The runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball. If a the ball then becomes an uncaught foul, then the runner(s) must return.
However, they may leave as soon as the ball is touched, whether in fair or foul ground. Otherwise, the reason the rule is there in the first place would be useless. The rule is there to prevent shenanigans that outfielders used to pull back in the days prior to the rule. They would juggle the ball all the way in to the infield, so that the runners could never score on sacrifice fly situations, both fair and foul. By your logic, the fielders could do the same BS manuevers they did way back when. Just tip the ball in the air as they ran in from the outfield. That is why you are wrong, and everyone else is right. |
MLB RULE 7.08 (d) He fails to retouch his base after a fair or foul ball is legally caught.
And the rule defining legally caught says the runners can leave when first touched. What's so hard to comprehend here? |
Quote:
For a rational person, there's nothing even remotely hard to comprehend here, Rich. Trouble is we're dealing with an irrational thought process. Jim Evans told him this nonsense? I don't think so. Tim. |
Baaaa, baaaaa, baaaaa...............
LMAO at your expense. Tim. |
Quote:
Well, since it says both fair or foul the passage is inclusive of any fly ball. It's not poorly worded. It's just a ruling you need to make by combining two different rules. Something good umpires have to do. It's amazing that you just cannot ever accept the fact that you're wrong. I'll bet the coaches and protest committees love you. Tim. |
just leave it alone guys. This guy obviously cannot see the light and is too proud too admit he made a mistake. However, PWL, you made all of us get a good laugh today. Thanks alot :D !!
|
Ask Vanna if you can buy a clue
Quote:
The runners can leave the base as soon as the fielder touches the ball. That is just as simple as it can be stated. I agree that 7.08(d) is poorly written, but the runners don't have to "wait and see" if the ball is eventually caught in fair or foul ground. If it is foul, and not caught, the umpire will call, "Foul" and then the runner(s) will return to his(their) original base(s). |
Quote:
As you said yourself, the rule is poorly worded. It says "legally caught" when it should say "first touched and then legally caught." Lots of rules in the rulebook are poorly worded, which is why we have clarifications in the form of Casebook Comments, and official and authoritative interpretive manuals. The rulebook is like a really important contract written by a really bad lawyer. In this particular case, the cliche "in a fight between you and the world, back the world" is completely applicable. You're in a minority of 1 in your erroneous intepretation. |
From the BRD:
FED: A baserunner may leave his base as soon as a fly ball is touched by the first fielder. (8-2-4) NCAA: Same as FED. (8-6a-1) OBR: Same as FED. "Runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball. (2.00 Catch CMT 1) Carl goes on to point out the inconsistencies contained in OBR, and again in this case, Rule 7.10(a) is in place only to make sure that the runner does not get a "running start" from a point behind the base, IOW, he must start in contact with the base. It also states "after the ball is caught" but it too should read "after first touched by a fielder." |
Are we really arguing about this?
Look at the comment attached to rule 2-
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. There are many problems with the official rules, but this one seems to be one such problem that everyone I've ever talked to agrees upon. I'm failing to understand where you're coming from with thi PWL. I'm not trying to be a smarta$$, but help me understand your logic...:confused: |
Quote:
The next logical step would be to find out what a catch is and then you read ...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. |
Quote:
Tim. |
Quote:
7.10(a) is listed there along with the touch requirements just to illustrate the inconsistency in the language of the rule, just like you are saying about the errors in the book. In that there are errors, we agree. But there are interpretations in place that specify which rule to go by. Carl goes on to say, in touch requirements, to just go by rule 2.00 Catch: Comment 1, which states that on any fly ball, the runners can leave their bases as soon as the first fielder TOUCHES the ball!!! That is the ruling to use in all fly ball situations. Do you get that? |
Quote:
1. When is a runner called out for not properly retouching after a batted ball is caught in flight? 2. The definition of a catch. 3. The definition of "in flight." 4. When does a batted ball become fair (or foul)? Okay... I think I'm starting to understand your logic a little more. Perhaps there are 3 ideas/definitions we need to explore with this: 1. When is a player out for not properly retouching after a batted ball is caught in flight. |
Hook, line and sinker. Nice recovery though. Excellent twist.
|
Quote:
Back to the fair/foul argument...I think I see where PWL is making his case, that runners can only advance on a fly ball in foul territory when legally caught, and that runners can only advance on a fly ball in fair territory once it touches a fielder. Everyone else is saying a similar thing, just with different words. Obviously, if the a fielder touches a fly ball over fair territory the runners can leave at the point and advance. If the ball is in foul territory, then the runners can only advance if the ball is legally caught, otherwise it's a fould ball and the runners must return. This seems to be the hang-up. The runners can leave their base as soon as the ball is touched by a fielder no matter where the ball is, but cannot advance to the next base unless the ball is in fair territory (catch/no catch), or is legally caught in foul territory. |
No, that's not what the rule means! A runner can only advance on a foul ball that is "legally caught" to differntiate it from a foul ball that is touched and drops to the ground! There is nothing, absolutely NOTHING, in the rule that even remotely suggests a runner cannot leave his BASE until a foul is caught. If it's bobbled dropped, he returns. If it's bobbled and caught, he heads-up has a new base.
Easy call. |
Quote:
This is where the trouble began. After being told over and over that the runner can advance on a foul fly that was deflected to another fielder on the first touch by the first fielder, he still didn't understand the error he made. He still maintains that a runner cannot advance on a ball deflected over foul territory from one fielder to another until the ball is caught. This is erroneous information. Tim. |
Yeah, the two fielders can just volleyball the ball back and forth to each other all the way back into the infield area on all foul balls in his parallel universe.
<a href="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb008_ZRYYYYYYYYUS" target="_blank"><img src="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_3_38.gif" alt="Spaceship" border="0"></a> |
Lets go back and see who is twisting things. This was the initial post.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Once again you find yourself all alone on the Island of Misfit Umpires. There to stay until there comes a time when you're willing to admitt that you are more often than not, wrong in your rulings. I'm expecting that a skating rink in hell will be built before that happens. Tim. |
I forgot to ask you something, PWL. Did you actually talk to the real Jim Evans or your alter ego that's posting on Mcgriffs?
Tim. |
Hey Tim - Take it easy! He's been talking to the real Jim Evans - the brother of Bob Evans of the sausage restauants in Ohio! Oh - were you thinking he meant THAT "Jim Evans"?
|
So Mr. Evan's word is superior to that of the rulebook? That's like saying a pastor's (or priest's ;) ) word is superior to the Bible. Even if he did say this, the rulebook, as everybody has tried to point out to you, completely goes against what you are saying. Can you please just admit it and we will move on?
|
uh-oh!........
|
Quote:
I quoted your posts in the exact order they were presented as you responded. My "legion" is anyone with a firm understanding that you're not all that brushed up on the rules. That would include nearly every umpire on this site. Did you even discuss the situation where the ball is deflected and subsequently caught by another fielder over foul territory with Evans? You'd be lying if you said you did, if you're not already lying when you say you spoke to him in the first place. Tim. |
Quote:
So you think the two fielders can just bat the ball back and forth to each other with their gloves, with nobody catching the fly ball over foul territory, all the way in towards the infield, in order to keep runners from advancing on a sacrifice fly after the ball was touched? If you say "yes, that's what I mean" then you is a fool, as they used to say on my block. Admit that your good friend Jim Evans meant that the runners could advance on a caught foul fly, but did not mean the runners had to wait until the ball was caught to start running. The very idea is ludicrous. Even Ludacris thinks it is ludicrous. I talked to him this afternoon.:) |
Quote:
No, he won't admitt it. From my experience with this person he's shown time and time again that he's not one to be reasoned with. He'll twist it around into a personal attack in an attempt to deflect the discussion away from his incompetency. He'll now try to rationalize what we know to be a irrational thought proccess. Tim. |
Never argue with a fool. People might not know the difference. :rolleyes:
|
Thanks Confucius!:D
|
Quote:
Tim. |
Man, I wish this forum had an ignore poster feature. Sure would make all of our lives easier...
|
It does have an ignore poster feature. Go to User CP at the top and you'll find it. I had him on ignore, but I kept reading his post in Tim's quotes, so I ended up having to read his crap anyway, so I unblocked it.
|
Looking through the rulebook I think I see where PWL is getting his information. Under rule 2.00: "A Foul Ball is a batted ball...while on or over foul territory, touches the person of an umpire or player, or any object foreign to the natural ground."
According to this, it would seem that once the ball touches the first player it becomes a foul ball. |
That would be correct. However, the runners do not have to wait until the foul fly ball is caught to start their advance, they may leave on first touch of the ball just like a fair ball. If the foul fly ball is dropped then it becomes a foul ball and they must return. PWL is trying to save face by twisting this to a "when can they advance" issue when it's a "when may they start their advance issue".
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
So what you're saying PWL is that on a fair ball its at point of touch while foul its time of legal catch.
So on a foul ball, fielders can play volleyball all the way into the infield? The ball is foul once touched, but not "dead" until hit hits the ground. You can advance on foul balls. You cannot advance once its dead. |
Quote:
I became known as "Volleyball" when during a demonstration, a spectator commented that there was a lot of volleying involved in playing the game. Morgan based his new game on the popular German game called "Faustball." On the other subject, before they had a rule allowing baserunners to tag up and leave their bases as soon as the ball was touched, the strategy of some outfielders was to not catch the fly balls, but to merely juggle, or "volley" the baseball back close enough to the infield before finally catching the ball, hence preventing the runners from advancing, as they could not leave until the ball was "caught." This, obviously PWL, is no longer the case. This space cadet has forgotten more about the game of baseball than you've ever known.:rolleyes: |
Quote:
We have only corrected you in the past in hopes that you would learn and become a better official. You chose to overpersonalize our criticisms and lash out with personal attacks. Perhaps we were a bit heavyhanded and sarcastic in our original criticisms of you, but we take the same kind of remarks all the time when we have a gross misunderstanding of a rule or procedure. Nobody "railroaded" anything. We just gave the correct interpretation to an ambigously written rule, and you have decided to make it your Waterloo. |
Going back to the fair/foul...according to the way I am interpreting the rule (I acknowledge I may be incorrect), it seems that once a ball touches a person while over foul territory it immediately becomes a foul ball, and therefore a dead ball. Now, I understand that once the ball is touched the runners can leave, but because the ball is dead upon touch the runners could not advance. So, the juggling act for which the various rules counter seems to not apply for a foul ball, because upon touch the ball is dead. However, if the first touch is a catch the runners can advance.
|
If it is dead upon touch and the runners cannot advance then you could not get an out either. Yet, you do. Hmmmmmm......
As for opening a discussion of a rule, it's a rule that's cut and dry (at least one would think so). What you are trying to "discuss" is contradictory to the rule. |
Quote:
Now please read 5.09(e) The ball becomes dead and runners advance one base, or return to their bases, without liability to be put out, when- (e) A foul ball is not caught; runners return. Soooooooo.....even though it's foul it's not dead until it touches the ground (or some other unnatural object). If it's not dead, it's.......LIVE! If it's live it is the same as a fair ball. Rule 2.00 (Catch) Comment: A catch is legal if the ball if 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......and so on. The bold is the pertinent part. Notice it makes no mention of whether the ball is fair or foul. It's time to quit the BS. :mad: |
Quote:
A foul fly does not become a dead ball until it becomes an uncaught, ordinary foul ball. When have you ever seen a foul ball that was eventually legally caught after being bobbled declared a dead ball? Answer, never, because it does not. It is merely a poorly worded rule, which is clarified by interpretations, and by the definition of a catch under Rule 2.00, stating that the runners may leave the base the moment the first fielder touches the ball, and makes no distinction between fair or foul. Rule 2.00 FOUL BALL is describing a ball which touches an umpire, player, object foreign to the natural ground which is not caught. The writers did not put the emphasized part in the rule, probably because they figured that it was so obvious, it didn't need to be mentioned. If a player bobbles a foul fly and another player catches it before the ball hits the ground, it is a catch, and the ball remains alive. Only when it is declared "no catch" by the umpire does the ball become dead. |
I have received a reply to my email inquiry from Jim Evans. Without going into unnecessary detail, he confirmed that PWL's interpretation of tag up requirements with respect to a fair vs. foul fly ball is incorrect, and if PWL's understanding came from something Jim said, it was very definitely a misunderstanding.
I trust that I have sufficient credibility with most of the readers here to be trusted that I am conveying Jim's response accurately. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Now, admit you were wrong and let's move on.:) |
Quote:
FWIW, I personally have no question that what you say is true. I have been reading what you post (both here and elsewhere) for over 6 years now, and, if memory serves, I have NEVER seen you post anything misleading, untrue, or even incorrect for that matter. Thank you for sharing what you know with those of us who know less. I am a little curious as to whether Mr. Evans found your inquiry more amusing or more annoying. If you should choose not to satisfy my curiosity on this point, I certainly understand. Sincerely, John |
Quote:
I think he would be OK with my passing along one thing he said - if you ever see someone posting on an internet board as Jim Evans, you can be assured it's a spoof and not him, because he will never post to an internet board. |
Dave,
Thanks for indulging me. Your answer (all of it) does not surprise me in the least. I almost met Mr. Evans last November (at the invitation of my editor) when he was in Ft. Worth for a weekend clinic and I was in Dallas on a business trip. Unfortunately, some personal commitments I had made prevented me from taking advantage of the opportunity. Maybe sometime in the future. Thanks again. JM |
Quote:
Additionally, I know that had you been incorrect, you would have reported that here with equal timeliness and frankness. |
Thanks for humoring me. I went back and re-read the foul ball definition and found out that I was misreading it. Never was very good with grammar. ;) Truthfully, I've never seen a foul ball juggled. It's either been caught or dropped, so that's a new one for me.
|
Would like to know what?
|
The unnecessary details?
|
PWL: could you make a little more sense when you say that you would like to know? How about saying, "Okay, I admit I was wrong, lets move on now". Humility is a great thing brother, it sounds like you need a dose of it. Dave basically proved you wrong, so just admit that you misrepresented Mr. Evans and misunderstood him when he was discussing the situation. It's simple man, I promise you will feel better:)
|
Quote:
I have not and will not speculate on who is posting as Jim Evans on McGriff's or any other site. I passed along a statement he made to me, that it is not (and never will be) him, that is all. I do not, never have and never will, post anonymously on McGriff's or any other board. I haven't read McGriff's board in a couple of years. I have only recently started participating on this board and eteamz, after something of a hiatus from public boards. |
Dave,
Even when you're nice to him, he behaves like a moron. Personally, I'd recommend just ignoring him. JM |
Quote:
You're probably right again. There's another umpire with an Arlington Texas IP address posting as "Jim Evans" on McGriffs that has accused me of stealing the JEA, defames my legal name and acts like a 12 year old child. What was I thinking. Tim. |
Quote:
Hmmmm...... You've mentioned several times that you are from The Dallas/Forth Worth area. Arlington sits right between the two. Here's your IP address and the information I obtained by tracking it. Coincidence? I think not. Location: United States [City: Arlington, Texas] Comcast Cable Communications, IP Services EASTERNSHORE-1 (NET-24-0-0-0-1) 24.0.0.0 - 24.15.255.255 Comcast Cable Communications TEXAS-8 (NET-24-0-0-0-2) 24.0.0.0 - 24.1.255.255 # ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2006-07-02 19:10 # Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database. Tim. |
Quote:
Dude, I am the idiot that posted as Sarah Evans. You didn't find that amusing?:) And you are the idiot that posts as Jim Evans. Dude, I don't care what forum you post on, or under what name, your lack of style and substance make it obvious that it is you. |
"You two should really, really grow up." says PWL.
Pot to kettle, pot to kettle. You're black. You first. NO, YOU FIRST. NO, YOU FIRST! NO, YOU FIRST! And on and on....... |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Therapy would do you no good
You need a frontal lobotomy and I need a bottle in front of me.<a href="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb008_ZRYYYYYYYYUS" target="_blank"><img src="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/12/12_13_1.gif" alt="Martini" border="0"></a>
|
Actually, I rarely drink, and haven't drank Country Club since that day in question. Do they even still make it?
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:24pm. |