Sox/Angels tag at third in 9th

[bossman72]

Anyone see this play in the top of the 9th? I thought it was a great call!


The play: F2 dives, tags R3 (and maintains possession immediately after the tag), then falls to the ground and the impact of the ground knocks the ball out of F2's glove.

[oyaisee]

What about voluntary release?

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by oyaisee

What about voluntary release?

Not needed for tags of players.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by oyaisee

What about voluntary release?

It's been discussed here and other forums; all that is needed is to demonstrate control after the tag. Tonight's call would appear to confirm this is the MLB interpretation.

[Dave Davies]

Directly from the Jaksq/Roder ROPB:

"Catch" and "tag" are similar concepts. A tag [2.00] occurs when the ball is live and a fielder has the ball in his hand
or glove (or both) and
(a) a base is touched by his person, or
(b) a runner is touched by any part of the glove/ball, hand/ball, or glove/hand/ball combination.

Such fielder must have complete control of the ball during and after the touch. If the fielder bobbles or drops the ball
during or after the touch of the base or runner, and the bobble or drop is due to his lack of control of himself or the
ball, or due to contact with a runner, it is not a tag.

A fielder shows complete control by

(a) regaining control of his own body after extenuating efforts to make a tag (especially in regard to a fall, dive, or a collision), and
(b) showing that his release of the ball is (or will be) voluntary and intentional.

A fielder need not regain control of his body if he is able to voluntarily release the ball, the voluntary release alone is proof of complete control.

Dave

[DG]

Originally Posted by oyaisee

What about voluntary release?

Required for a catch.

[Dave Davies]

And a Tag, according to J/R

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by oyaisee

What about voluntary release?

When it comes to tags and catches of thrown balls (as opposed to catches of batted balls) MLB, for some time, has followed the theory of "long enough" as espoused by Jim Evans.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Dave Davies

And a Tag, according to J/R

Roder does not speak for MLB...just the umpire union.

[justanotherblue]

I felt it was a dropped ball, no tag. In watching the replay, you can see U3 didn't watch the entire play. He was calling the runner out as Veritek (sp?)was falling.

[blue83]

Thinking of a tag at the plate where the tag is made and the catcher falls backwards and the ball falls out of the glove after hitting the ground. Safe. Why is contact with this tag any different? He was not able to fully control the ball. When does the play end?

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by justanotherblue

I felt it was a dropped ball, no tag. In watching the replay, you can see U3 didn't watch the entire play. He was calling the runner out as Veritek (sp?)was falling.

I saw that too. He never watched the catcher bounce, and release the ball. I guess it just didn't matter because he had control of the ball during the tag.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by blue83

Thinking of a tag at the plate where the tag is made and the catcher falls backwards and the ball falls out of the glove after hitting the ground. Safe. Why is contact with this tag any different? He was not able to fully control the ball. When does the play end?

Caveat: I have not yet seen the play.

Question: Did the ball drop as a result of the tag or action after the tag?

In the case of the play at the plate cited above, the ball falls out of the glove due to the tag. Compare that with F2 tagging a runner, and then taking two steps towards the infield and then having the ball fall to the ground. Did he hold it long enough?

[SanDiegoSteve]

if you watch the play in regular speed, not super slow-mo, I don't think the correct call was made. The ball most certainly didn't meet the "long enough" standard. I've seen outfielders catch balls and then run five or six steps into the wall and lose possession, and these have been emphatically called, "no catch." Varitek did nothing to demonstrate either control or voluntary release as well. It is my opinion that if Varitek had held the ball after colliding with the ground, then as he was showing the ball it fell out, it would be an out, and he would have had it long enough. But to tag the runner then hit the ground in the same motion dropping the ball on impact, that's stretching it a little.

Varitek tagged the runner and in the same motion his mitt slammed into the ground dislodging the ball. In the meantime, Tim Welke was already signaling and calling the out before the ball even popped out. He called the out the nanosecond the tag was applied and did not even see the ball pop out. Absolutlely terrible timing on his part. I know that he was trained as we all were to see the entire play through until the action stops before making his call. He most definitely did not do that on this play.

If I were making the call, I would have waited until action had ceased, while keeping my eyes everalastingly on the baseball (as the rules instruct). I would have seen the ball rolling away and called the runner safe. This isn't football...the ground certainly can cause a fumble.

[soundedlikeastrike]

Pool night, juke box playing, but I caught the blown squeeze attempt outta the corner of my eye, only saw it once; but it looked like the end result was safe:

Here's why I disagee and agree:

Safe call; nobody bats an eye, per definitions above. I'd almost agree with that..

Out: sure, and what he called. F2 made the tag, gathered himself (like he thought he missed him) and made a "second" (unessacary lunge and tag) which was then followed by the drop, seems "long enough" was the call.
And from what I saw, blue, called the out when he saw "F2 gather himself".

So what's "long enough" looks like, if you have the ability to "re-tag an already out runner", that's long enough.