Detached glove?

[rbmartin]

7.05 Each runner including the batter-runner may, without liability to be put out,advance—
(b) Three bases, if a fielder deliberately touches a fair ball with his cap, mask or any part of his uniform detached from its proper place on his person. The ball is in play and the batter may advance to home base at his peril;
(d) Two bases, if a fielder deliberately touches a thrown ball with his cap, mask or any part of his uniform detached from its proper place on his person. The ball is in play;

Would you consider a detached glove as "part of his uniform" and thus meeting the penalties described above?

[BSUmp16]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

Would you consider a detached glove as "part of his uniform" and thus meeting the penalties described above?

I think it's pretty clear that Rule 2.00 CATCH makes a distinction between the fielder's glove and the fielder's uniform. As examples of parts of a uniform, the rule cites "cap, protector, pocket". I also think a common sense interpretation is that the glove is not part of the uniform. Also, 7.05 makes a clear distinction between using detached parts of the uniform (7.05(b) and (d)) and a detached glove (7.05(c) and (e)). See also comment to Rule 8.02(a)

Finally, Rule 3.15 does not allow players to be on the field unless they are "in uniform". If the uniform included the glove, players would always have to carry their glove while on the field, which they obviously are not required to do.

I'd say making a catch using a securely held glove in which the fielder has not inserted his fingers is still a catch and legal. The glove is not part of the "uniform" and has not been thrown.

[Larry1953]

This seems similar to the case where a batted ball got stuck between the fingers of the pitcher's glove so he tossed glove/ball to F3 for the out. Here the player is essentially catching his own glove.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

This seems similar to the case where a batted ball got stuck between the fingers of the pitcher's glove so he tossed glove/ball to F3 for the out. Here the player is essentially catching his own glove.

No, it's not.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by BSUmp16

I think it's pretty clear that Rule 2.00 CATCH makes a distinction between the fielder's glove and the fielder's uniform. As examples of parts of a uniform, the rule cites "cap, protector, pocket". I also think a common sense interpretation is that the glove is not part of the uniform. Also, 7.05 makes a clear distinction between using detached parts of the uniform (7.05(b) and (d)) and a detached glove (7.05(c) and (e)). See also comment to Rule 8.02(a)

Finally, Rule 3.15 does not allow players to be on the field unless they are "in uniform". If the uniform included the glove, players would always have to carry their glove while on the field, which they obviously are not required to do.

I'd say making a catch using a securely held glove in which the fielder has not inserted his fingers is still a catch and legal. The glove is not part of the "uniform" and has not been thrown.

I bet you'd lose the protest. It's the ball that has to be held securely (not stuck in the glove, held securely) . Hard to do if your fingers aren't in the glove. The throw-the-ball-stuck-in-the-glove play is only an out when the reveiving fielder holds the ball/glove combo securely in his hand or glove.