When do you call out?
 

Rookie ump here, so help me out please.

Situation 1: LL Senior league, three man crew. I'm in the C position. R2 attempts to steal 3rd. F2 throws down to 3rd, F5 catches, makes the tag on the slide. I have the runner out but not until I can see the ball. I wait a couple of seconds, F5 keeps glove on the ground. I yell "show me the ball". F5 keeps glove on the ground waiting for call. I yell again "show me the ball". He waits, I say "where's the ball" as I don't see anywhere on the ground. Finally, F5 turns his glove around and I see the ball in his glove and I yell out. F5 then raises his glove and as he does, the ball rolls out. No one says word and game goes on. In talking to PU later, I asked him "runner was safe since F5 dropped the ball huh?", he said "yep".

Situation 2:LL Major game, 3 man crew. No runners, no outs. Short fly ball to left. F7 runs in makes the catch but I see he has the ball in the palm and his glove turned upside down. I'm waiting for him to remove the ball from the glove before I call the out. Other base umpire yells "out". In between innings I say to him "what are you doing making my call?" to which he replied "my gosh, how long are you going to wait before you make the call?". I tell him the situation and what I was waiting for. He says "he had the ball, batter is out, make the call".

So, what's a good rule of thumb. Should I wait until fielder removes the ball from the glove in all cases or do I call out and damn the occassional ball slipping out?

Wait until the fielder does something to demonstrate control -- something not associated with the catch / tag action.

In the first play, "turning the glove" is enough (assuming that act didn't cause the ball to come loose).

In the second play, it could be a change of direction, a significant change of speed (he's no longer continuing his momentum of running to the ball, he's now jogging in to the dugout), a successful movement of the glove from a "catching" postion to a "carrying" position, ....

In the second play, the other umpire should not have said a word if it was your call to make. No verbal or physical out call is necessary on the play since it was not a possible catch/no catch situation, IOW, it was obvious that the ball was caught. If the fielder ended up dropping the ball before demonstrating control or a voluntary release, then the "no catch" call and arm signal would need to be made.

I concur with Bob on the first situation. Roder mentions that catch and tag are similar concepts and that voluntary release applies to both. I believe Evans mentions that all the fielder has to do is show secure possession through the tag. Turning the glove over with possession of the ball is enough for me to judge that he had secure possession.


Tim.

#1: Out - You did things right.

#2: Out - Other umpire blew it. Make the call when your ready to, if needed.

In Situation Number one if it's a good throw and the ball beat the runner in plenty of time, the only thing you need to make sure of is that the fielder didn't drop the ball or the ball is lying on the ground.

From your description it appears the fielder had possession so you do not need to ask him "show me the ball" - Record the Out. Good fielders will simply come up with the ball on a routine tag where the runner is out by a good margin.

If it's a banger and both players are on the ground or something similar where it is not readily evident that the fielder had control, then ask him to "show you the ball". If the fielder delays, then rule on the side of the offense because the delay tells you that "something is wrong" otherwise the fielder would immediately show you the ball.

Pete Booth

two words. Voluntary. Release. If you don't have that, you don't have a catch. (on a batted ball).

Non. Sense.

Voluntary release is but one thing that can prove positive possession. It is most definitely not the ONLY thing that can show positive possession.

Quite correct mcrowder. Bob J. gave several examples of proof of possession and control.

Thanks for the help! I think I got it.

So if F8 gloves a fair fly batted ball, and is running in from center field because he doesn't trust his cutoff to catch the ball and keep the runner at 3rd from running home, and after running 20 steps trips over 2B and hits the ground, causing the ball to roll out of his glove and onto the ground, you have a no-catch?

SIT 1: If I see the ball enter the glove and the tag made, but am unsure if he held onto the ball I will wait FOREVER for him to show me the ball, in his glove. When he does I make the out call, regardless of what he does afterwards. Your partner was wrong. SIT 2: I am assuming you are U3, you don't say. It's bad form for your partner(s) to make your calls. In between innings is not the right time though, because I would be nowhere near my partners between innings. After the game is a good time to do post-game. Timing-wise, I think you can make an out call before the fielder runs half way to the dugout and flips the ball toward the mound voluntarily. If there is any question that he has secure possession wait for the voluntary release, otherwise OUT and if he drops the ball afterwards the batter is still OUT.

Situation 1: LL Smitty was wrong.

Situation 2: LL Smitty was wrong.

Did the fielder demonstrate control of the ball? He carried it friggin all the way to the mound and voluntarily released it. Let's get real.

What did the batter abandon?

In the first situation, the issue is not really deciding whether the fielder has secure control, it is knowing, FOR SURE, where the ball is and confirming that it is in the possession of the fielder who made the tag. "Show me the ball" is a perfectly appropriate and common means of making that determination.

Now, to deal with the drop in situation 1 and the issue in situation 2, Evans speaks of the concept of "he had it long enough" to confirm secure possession, even in the absence of a voluntary and intentional release. The "long enough" principle clearly applies in both your situations. In fact, it's why nobody argued with your out call in the first situation, even when the fielder ultimately dropped the ball out of his glove. Everybody "gets it," intuitively.

Danger, Thin Ice
 

Be careful here Dave. IMO, this is one of the most difficult to defend positions regarding catch/no catch.
What exactly is long enough? If you're discussing this play with a manager, how do you describe what is long enough? The party of the second part in a discussion will most likely ask for a time frame (is 3 seconds long enough?)

It all comes back to the player demonstrating complete control of the ball.

And demonstrating "complete control" and then subsequently dropping the ball involuntarily and unintentionally is, if ruled a catch, nothing more than adopting the "he had it long enough" principle.

"Complete control" is not the rulebook criteria. "Voluntary and intentional release" is, and it is inadequate as the sole determinant of whether a ball was caught or not.

If your guideline is "complete control" but you ignore a subsequent drop of the ball, then you're using Evans' "long enough" guideline whether you acknowledge it or not.

Hmmm? Me thinks you're right. I do use the "long enough" criteria.

So what about explaining this to the manager? It seems as thought their argument is always "He had it long enough."
What response could one use that would not initiate the what is the time frame question?

"long enough" refers to actions, not to elapsed time.

Catch or no Catch
 

I was under the impression from the rule book that the fielder who caught the ball had to physically remove the ball from the glove in order for it to be called an out. Now with that said, I'm one of those who use the "he had it long enough" thing, which after reading some posts here is the wrong thing to say. But if the rule book says the fielder has to physically remove it from the glove in order for it to be an out...and after the fielder runs 50-feet towards the mound after making the catch which was the 3rd out then drops the ball from his glove, and the coach uses the physically remove the ball thing, what do you do then? Of course this is all hypothetically but what the hell, it could happen...it's baseball where there's a winner and a loser and no one likes to lose!

What you do is NOT use the 'physically remove the ball' idea exclusively. There is not set time, just 'long enough' to demonstrate that for purposes of the catch the fielder showed sufficient control.

The fact that time elapses during this process does not mean the umpire is waiting for a set amount of time to elapse :D


Dave Hensley is right on here.

?!?!?!

If your rulebook says this, I suggest you get another one. Yours appears to be for Calvinball.