R3 grabs foul ball
 

i'm on 3rd base in a 4 man crew in a legion game. R3 takes his lead in foul. Batter hits a chopper down the line about 6 ft (clearly) in foul territory but pretty much right at R3. R3 reaches out with his right arm (away from the foul line) and actually catches the ball.

PU calls foul ball right away and i casually put my hands up and nod to "sell" the call since everyone was caught a little off guard by it. The ball didn't really have any chance of becoming fair. Nobody said a word about it.


I'm 99% certain that we made the correct call, but i'd like some reassurance from you guys :D

Thanks

You got it right. R3 was in foul territory, so no problem. Runner is out when he is hit by a fair batted ball.

Yeah, i was hesitant because R3 intentionally grabbed it, which was my major malfunction about the play.

Given that R3 is in foul territory, the more pressing question is whether F5 had a play on the ball to make an out. If it's a bounding ball, then clearly there's no interference, but on a looping line drive there's a strong presumption in favor of interference if F5 had any reasonable chance of recording an out.

If the ball had not crossed 3B, or come to a stop, then you have R interfering. Who knows, could hit a rock and rebound fair. This is a deliberate act. If the HC of the other team had come out on you with this very argument, how would you defend it? Crystal balls probably won't be persuasive. :D

OTOH, the traditional call here is "Foul" so you are stuck in the middle, aren't you?

6 foot foul with no chance of being fair, I say you got it 100%

The OP is not interference. As another poster said, this is a ball bounding over foul territory, so F5 is not able to catch it in flight to record an out.

My defense for this is simple, the ball had no chance of becoming fair, that's why I ruled it foul. We see base coaches handle these types of bounding balls all the time, why is it different for runners?

This is not correct. A ball that contacts a player in foul ground is a foul ball. The interference rule specifically states a FAIR batted ball. Guess what ... even if you have intent here, you don't have an out. There's no verbiage in the rule about interference that mentions a ball over foul ground that MIGHT become fair. We don't deal in could'ves here.

The ball becomes foul the second it touches the runner (intent or not), and the interference rule doesn't allow us to call him out for intentionally contacting a foul ball (unless it could have been caught, obviously).

WOW smfitty, what WILL you come up with next?? This is a FOUL ball all the way -- you really thinka coach would come out and argue thatt a playerr touching a 6foot-bounding foul ball is INTERFERANCE? and that any blue worth a tinkersdarn would LISTEN to such?

you ARE just argueing for the heckuvit. Now go answer your ownposts 6 more times :D

Sounds like you got away with it. But I'd a added to the runner "don't do that".

You say the ball was 6' foul, well what about 6" foul, how about a bunt rolling up the line just 1" into foul ground?

This is a batted ball, until it passes 3rd, "then" it's either fair or foul not an instant before. Would you call "foul ball" on first contact with foul ground, no.
You wait until it passes the bag.

The ball is foul if "it" contacts something or someone while over foul ground.
Not foul when it's "touched" by an offensive player.

The difference when a coach does it is the proximity to the bag, coaches are usually even or beyond the bag/s. Runners are usually several feet down the line. Squelch this action right away.

Why ... a warning like that should be accompanied by a penalty if someone does it again. What penalty are you going to apply (and how will you justify it) if he does do it again? Don't warn for stuff that's not illegal just because you don't like it.

Good point, or not. What about a bunt rolling just 1 inch foul. Say he picks this one up. Show me the rule that justifies you penalizing that. You won't find it - it's not illegal.

Having trouble understanding what you mean here. It is too foul when it's touched by an offensive player. That is merely a subset of the possibilities in your first sentence.

Again ... why, and by what rule?

7.09 (b): A runner is out when -- He intentionally deflects the course of a foul ball in any manner.

Note that MLBUM clarifies:

6.18 INTENTIONALLY DEFLECTING COURSE OF FOUL BALL
Official Baseball Rule 7.09(b) provides that the batter or runner is out for interference if he
intentionally "deflects the course of a foul ball in any manner." While picking up a foul ball or
otherwise touching it may not, by such act itself, actually deflect the course of the ball, an umpire
may judge such act as deflecting the course of the ball if, in the umpire's judgment, the ball
might have become a fair ball had it not been touched.
It would be better if no member of the offensive team picked up or otherwise touched a foul ball.
There is no objection to a coach returning a foul ball to the umpire after it has passed first or
third base, but the coach should not touch a ball that possibly may go fair.

I think that this is a silly point to argue about. Simply put, Smitty will rule it interference no matter what we tell him. Those with intelligence will rule this as a proper arbiter.

You cannot teach Smitty!

This is exactly what I was going to say. It is the umpire's judgment of whether the ball might have had a chance to go fair. 6 feet off the line is a bit farfetched to imagine hitting anything that would cause it to go fair.

7.09(b) is the correct rule to apply if the ball is near the line.

I will try and convince you: Sounds like a chore though.

To think a batted ball that's still live, can be intentionally caught, kicked, or whatever, by the offense is absurd.

My original post, "sounds like you got away with it", means just that. A real coach would have eat'n ya up, and rightfully so, especially at this level of play. He (coach) simply agreed, that the ball had no chance of being fair, so no harm done, shows his ingnorance (of the rules) right there.

To warn, "don't do that" is simply agreeing that it should not be done and that a penalty could be awarded, should it be repeated.

I personally don't agree, with a "don't do that" as it does give the message that there is no penalty. Since the infraction and penalty were ignored, that would be the least to do, "don't do that" with perhaps a non-commital explanation; "hey, you were lucky there, that ball was foul, but if it has a chance your interferiing"..

Some rule quotes for ya:

A FOUL BALL is a batted ball that settles on foul territory between home and first base, or between home and third base, or that bounds past first or third base on or over foul territory, or that first falls on foul territory beyond first or third base, or that, while on or over foul territory, touches the person of an umpire or player, or any object foreign to the natural ground.

IMO: The ball is not foul, this ball did not touch anything, it was "touched intentionally" by an offensive player.

INTERFERENCE
(a) Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play. If the umpire declares the batter, batter- runner, or a runner out for interference, all other runners shall return to the last base that was in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference, unless otherwise provided by these rules.

IMO: this is a batted ball, still live and not yet foul.

A LIVE BALL is a ball which is in play.
IMO: See above.


Official Rules: 7.00 The Runner

7.08
Any runner is out when --
(b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball;
Rule 7.08(b) Comment: A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not.
If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on "fair or foul territory", is intentional. If the umpire declares the "hindrance intentional", the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out.

IMO: the fielder was hindered attempting to make a play on a live batted ball.

6.05
A batter is out when --
(i) After hitting or bunting a foul ball, he intentionally deflects the course of the ball in any manner while running to first base. The ball is dead and no runners may advance;

IMO: if the batter can't do it, neither can a baserunner..

Because MLBUM says
"It would be better if no member of the offensive team picked up or otherwise touched a foul ball."

The umpire may have judged in this case 'no harm no foul' but the next time may be a different judgement.
There is absolutely no harm in a little preventive umping.

The ball was a) bounding, and b) 6 feet off the line. Not interference. By your own definition, it became a foul ball as soon as it touched the runner. It had no chance of becoming a fair ball, so there is no interference.

Your opinion is wrong, IMO. When the ball touched the runner, it became a dead ball. How is the ball still alive. There was no fielder attempting to make a play, so what does interference have to do with this situation?


Again, where do you come up with this opinion? The fielder had no play on the ball, so you can't have interference. Very OOO.

Now you are taking a rule that only applies the the batter-runner and trying to apply it to a runner. You can't mix and match rules.

Bob Jenkins gave the one correct answer with Rule 7.09(b) being the rule to go by in this case. He also cited the MLBUM interpretation, which is clear and concise. IMO.

That would be 7.09(c) {formerly (d)} you are thinking of.

The website is wrong and should be corrected. They accidentally deleted what used to be 7.09(c), but is now 7.09(b). They deleted what was 7.09(b), which was deleted because another rule already covered it. 7.09(c), which is now 7.09(b) states, "He intentionally deflects the course of a foul ball in any manner."

I won't argue with the rest of your mess ... but this statement is downright asinine. The ball IS foul - it touched the offensive player. By your inference, since when the offense touched the ball intentionally, it still hadn't touched anything ... then if the runner had not caught it, but instead intentionally deflected it INTO fair ground ... then you must have a fair ball ... after all - the ball didn't touch anything in foul ground, right?

Another extension of your asinine statement --- the rule simply says player, it doesn't say which team. So if the intentional touching of a ball over foul ground by the offense doesn't make the ball foul ... well ... then the intentional touching of that same ball by the DEFENSE must not make it foul either.

Just ridiculous. The instigator of the contact with the ball is irrelevant - the instant it is touched by ANY player (whether intentional or not ... whether offense or defense) over foul ground, it becomes a foul ball.

Wow, I said; "it'd be a chore". It appears your wrong, confused, or just really anal in your interp of a "foul ball" vs "a live batted ball"? Or just stirring the ....?

A live batted ball is a ball which comes off a bat, is bounding, flying,hasn't become foul, been interfered with, caught (by a defensive player), nor left the field of play. I admit this is strictly my own interp, but I'm thinking it's right..

A foul ball is one which:
1. "settles" on foul ground, before passing 1st or 3rd.
2. lands on foul ground beyond 1st or 3rd.
3. touches something (not natural to the field) while over foul ground before
passing 1st or 3rd.
IMO: there is a "huge" difference between 1. a ball touching a person and 2. a person touching a ball.

Should the ball be a rocket or take an odd bounce and hits the runner over foul ground, I agee, 100%, that is a foul ball, everytime.

The ball comes to rest (settles) on foul ground, prior to the bag, guess what? Foul ball. R3 picks it up, hey great, thanks runner for keeping the game moving..

But when a runner or BR or coach or on deck batter "intentionally" alter the course, it's interference, everytime. Unless of course you all agree that it had "no chance" of becoming fair, in that case, just make something up and have a nice day.. and continue to skip through games, hoping it never comes into play...IMO if it's moving, it's got a chance. Perhaps that's why good umpires don't sing out "foul ball" on a two hopper towards the corners on the first bounce, cause, "it's got a chance", or on a bunt up the line, that first lands foul..

Ever see a ball hit foul first, but become fair? I hope so, cause it happens.

Consider:
R3, squeeze play. Bunted down the 3rd base line, ball rolling right down the line, R3 slips as he heads for home, as F5 nears the fallen runner and the still rolling ball "in foul territory", R3 seeing he has no chance (should the ball become fair) picks it up. You saying you have nothing, cause it was over foul territory?

R3, two outs, two hopper towards 3B. R3 1/2" onto foul ground and 10' down the line towards HP. You saying, he's okay to catch the ball? Not sure what game your watching, but hope it's never one I'm involved with..

Have I ever ingored a coach knocking down a ground ball when he's 6' into foul territory? You bet, several hundred times. Why? Because of his proximity to the bag; even or beyond. Guess what, a ball that's 6' foul at or beyond the bag is a foul ball, there is no penalty for touching a "foul ball", there is however, a penalty for touching a live batted ball..

The OP, as I said, probably okay, not right, but okay, as in coach didn't know the rules, no harm, no foul type thing.. but a discertation on "why that shouldn't be done", would be the least I'd a done..

As one poster put's it, "that's all I have to say about that."

So if a batter catches the ball off the end of the bat, and it squirts over towards the on-deck batter (in the air), and he catches it, that's interference? The ball hasn't yet settled on foul ground....

The OP is all about the judgement of the umpire. A ball which can't be played on, as in the OP, is foul, in my judgement. Every umpire has his own judgement. Apparently, some of these judgements are much bettr than others!

Not only a chore, but a bore. You couldn't be more wrong in your analysis. You have been told this twice now, but you want to call people "anal" for merely pointing out your folly. There is no way that the original situation is remotely close to being interference, and for you to continue to try to argue your position is pointless.

If the ball had not crossed 3B, or come to a stop, then you have R interfering. Who knows, could hit a rock and rebound fair. This is a deliberate act. If the HC of the other team had come out on you with this very argument, how would you defend it? Crystal balls probably won't be persuasive.

Coaches if in their box are often further up the line.

As I said, this is a technical INT but nonetheless INT regardless of C or R. I have had coaches come out on me for this, one moron in particular. They never do it twice.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Well said.

Correct.

Correct. The proper, technical judgment is the ball has been INT with.

Because if you don't, a savvy HC with an agenda will call you on this technicality.

Look at the official field diagrams in any rule book and you will notice (or should notice) that an officially drawn coach's box is BEFORE the bases so your notion that a coach in his box is OK because he's farther back is based on a lack of knowledge.

You might also want to go watch a few games and keep track of 1) where coaches station themselves 2) Where runners station themselves and 3) how many times a coach is called for interference on a foul ball.

Everyone in the park (except you) knows it's a foul ball. No one is going to (female dog) unless, of course, you call the runner out.

Considering I have overseen the building of two or three dozen ballfields, I think not. Coaches boxes are drawn differently for each age group, MOF. Rs typically move further down the line than a C. Goodbye.

Can't even read a rule book diagram I see.

no kidding -- WOW smfitty, your digging to China! good to see you ownposted 6 more times just as i thot you might.

so your saying (and sounded-strike also) that every TIME a basecoach grabs a foul ground ball pasing near him its INTERFERENCE and the batter is out?? WOW, and that only happens DOZENS of times in a game! who knew???


LMAO--you guys are priceles.