Tagging base with empty glove
 

Official Little League rules.

I'm 99% sure that the glove is deemed part of the hand at all levels of baseball, so that if a fielder has the ball in his bare hand, he can record a force out by touching the base with his empty glove. Does someone have a rule or point of emphasis to cite for this? Or is it something that is understood but not in the rule book? Thanks.

All properly worn equipment is part of the player. A force out can be recorded when a player holds the ball securely in hand or glove and touches the base (with any part of his person).

Thanks mbryon. Do you know of a rule cite for that, or is it just understood that properly worn equipment (like a shoe or glove or catcher's shin guard) is deemed part of the body?

tap24,

The Rule 2.00 definitions of "Tag" and "Person" are the "rule cites" that prove mbyron's assertions correct.

JM

If someone wants to argue with you ask them if it's a valid tag of the base if the fielder touches the base with his shoe, or does he have to remove his shoe and sock ant touch the base with his bare foot.

That should get the "aha" lamp lit.

Not a baseball umpire here so this will seem like a dumb question. What if the fielder tags the runner with an empty glove and the ball in his hand? Does the same logic apply?

bisonlj,

No, the logic is decidely different.

For a tag of a runner (as opposed to the tag of a base), the runner must be tagged with the hand and/or mitt that has secure possession of the ball.

JM

Funny you should mention that Rich.... Several years ago at one of the rec games I had a coach that was upset with a call I made at 2nd where the 2nd baseman fell down but had the ball in his hand and streched out and touched 2nd with his glove on a force. HC... "There's no way his out, the ball was in his hand and not the glove when he touched 2nd"

I could not convince this guy that it's the same as the 1st baseman with his foot on the bag when receiving a throw...

It was so funny until that "aha" light came on when his player demonstrated to him how that was an out...

Man I sure miss those rec games!!!

Well,
 

At one time I posted the two follwing items as I thought they were funny:

From Brad Rumbles NFHS Newsletter of the early 80's:

F3 has long hair. He catches a ground ball and as he runs to first to tag the base for an out, he falls. His hair (only) touches the base before the runner arrives and he retains secure possesion of the ball.

Ruling: OUT! Hair is a body part like any other.

Situation 2:

Batter hits a ground ball to F3. F3 tosses to F1 covering first base. F1 is next to the base but not touching the base. F1's shoe laces then touch the base before BR arrives and F1 has secure possesion of the ball.

Ruling: OUT! Shoe laces are part of equipment like any other.

TC

In addition to Tim C's post, I ask, as the BR is making his way down to 1st, if F3 holds the ball securely and touches the base with his foot, is the BR out? So why not instead of the foot, the glove? It is simple logic that on a force or at 1st base, all that is needed is secure possession and any part of the fielder's body or properly attached equipment touching the base will produce an out.

Sigh...certainly would no longer be a problem if I were playing the game...

JJ

One word...
...Rogaine !