Ankiel injury - Catch/No-catch?
 

In last nights Cardinal game, Rick Ankiel made another amazing dive and catch (?) immediately followed by a crash into the left-CF wall. The ball popped out of his glove, and the left fielder picked it up but held it in his glove as he stood over his injured team mate. He made no attempt to return the ballto the infield. Since this was definitely NOT a voluntary release of the ball, why was it rued a catch? Why was the runner not trying for the next base?

TxUmp,

If you observe the video carefully, you will see he removed the ball from his glove just prior to crashing into the outfield wall.

Secure possession in the glove, voluntary release when he transferred the ball to his throwing hand.

That's a catch!

JM

I'll try to catch it again on ESPN, but I did not see any sign of him reaching into his glove with is bare hand. There was NO voluntary release.

TxUmp,

You can check out the replay at the following link:

The Official Site of The St. Louis Cardinals | stlcardinals.com: Homepage

JM

You can clearly see the ball fall out of the bare hand as he hits the ground (after he hits the wall). It was a catch.

It's clear as day. Watch the replay again before making such a definitive (and wrong) statement.

As a Phillies fan, I watched the end of the game and the Cardinals announcers actually covered this in the post-game and said it was a catch because Ankiel took the ball out of the glove with his bare hand. They must have called somebody to be *that* right.

~Cripes~
 

After watching the replay twice this statement:

ties for the dumbest post ever made on the internet.

What a great call by the officiating team getting that right in real time. Easy to see in the replay.

If I was watching as an umpire, I don't think it would've been that tough. I would've been anticipating a crash and looking for the transfer. Watching as a fan, though, in real-time, all I saw was a horrendous crash.

Good Call
 

It was called correctly. Voluntary release. Here is something to think about. If that wasn't a 4 man crew, that would have been a very difficult play to call

tim what did you expect he is from Texas....LOL

Tim, that's got to be a pretty big list by now. ;)

Pardon me for being a bit ignorant here... but i'm not making the connection with the "on the transfer" analogy of calling this a catch.

The only time I see an "on the transfer" call is on the front end of the double play, or an outfielder is trying to throw out the runner after a caught fly ball.

In both scenarios, the fielder has complete control of his body and he bobbled the transfer because he was trying to throw someone out at another base.

In the video, the ball was transferred (hard to tell full speed) from his glove to hand, but what for? He wasn't trying to throw anybody out because he still hasn't stopped stumbling.

I'm a little confused because this looks like a no-catch to me...


PS- the video appears to show that they ruled it a no-catch. The beginning scoreboard at the top has nobody on and 1 out and when Ankiel is being carted off, there is R3 and still 1 out...

It doesn't matter what for. All that matters is that the transfer was a voluntary release from the glove.

Heck - on a third out the fielder often takes the ball from his glove (obviously for no reason as there's no play to be made) and tosses it into the stands. Would you think that wasn't a catch?

Says the guy in Mississippi. ;)