Fair or Foul??

[MD Longhorn]

By rule and what you described, everything posted here is right, obviously.

However, I'm having trouble seeing this in my head. Consider where a ball is struck by a bat. If it went from that point, down and back enough to hit BEHIND the plate... what caused it to bound fair unless it hit something (catcher's mitt or foot ... or batter's back foot, etc.). And if it hit something, it's foul. Maybe umpire just did a P-poor job explaining what he saw.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

By rule and what you described, everything posted here is right, obviously.

However, I'm having trouble seeing this in my head. Consider where a ball is struck by a bat. If it went from that point, down and back enough to hit BEHIND the plate... what caused it to bound fair unless it hit something (catcher's mitt or foot ... or batter's back foot, etc.). And if it hit something, it's foul. Maybe umpire just did a P-poor job explaining what he saw.

A lot of top spin perhaps. A small batter deep in the box will hit the ball near the rear of the plate.

[Jeff Davis]

I'd be interested to know how the PU SAW THE BALL HIT BEHIND THE PLATE? Awfully good eyes, I guess!

[pruett3]

Originally Posted by Jeff Davis

I'd be interested to know how the PU SAW THE BALL HIT BEHIND THE PLATE? Awfully good eyes, I guess!

I thought the same thing. It can be difficult for a PU to see a foul ball off a players foot which would definitely be in front of where this ball hit the ground. I think he was "create" an explanation to defend his over zealous call.

And yes, the player was definitely in the back of the box. I have no idea where the ball initially touched (behind or on the plate) but I know it didn't touch the catcher. As has been stated, he got it wrong.