Oh, Magoo, you've done it again

[Bfair]

From the Fed 2003 website:

SITUATION 14: The pitcher is wearing a red, white and blue fielding glove. In the second inning, the batter hits a line drive that is caught by the pitcher.

RULING: This is an illegal glove for the pitcher to use. The out is canceled and the batter is awarded third base. Had the pitcher been told prior to the catch, all he would have needed to do is replace the glove with a legal one. (1 3-5. 1-4-3, 6-2-1-h penalty, 8-3-3b)
[my emphasis]

It is quite apparent the Fed has ruled a multicolored glove is an illegal glove for a pitcher---at least for a batted ball.
But what about for a thrown ball?

So, you are now in the bottom of the 7th inning with the visitors leading 2-1 in hot contest. Runners at 2nd and 3rd when the defense changes pitchers---bringing in a closer who is wearing a multicolored glove that you fail to notice. He delivers the first pitch for ball one and receives the ball back from the catcher. The offensive coach then comes out to you to complain about the pitcher's multicolored glove.
What action do you take?
Do you award bases per the rule, or do you merely eliminate the glove per the ruling?

Fed rule 1-4-3 states:

If a ball is touched with an illegal glove or mitt, the coach or captain of the team at bat has the choice of taking the result of the play or having the award (8-3-3a, b, c) for use of an illegal glove or mitt. The illegal glove or mitt must be replaced immediately. A foul fly caught with an illegal glove/mitt shall be nullified and treated as a foul ball, unless the team at bat elects to take the result of the play.

Fed rule 8-3-3 states:

Each runner is awarded:

c. two bases if a fair batted or thrown ball becomes dead because of bouncing over or passing through a fence, or lodges in a defensive player's or umpire's equipment or uniform, or if a live thrown ball:

1. including a pitch, is touched by an illegal glove or mitt, or by detached player equipment which is thrown, tossed, kicked or held by a fielder

Has the pitcher just used an illegal glove to catch a live thrown ball from the catcher?
We know by a different Fed ruling that they consider a mere feint to be a play.
Is the pitch and return throw considered to be a play?
One would certainly think so by the Fed's wording in 2-29-1:

SECTION 29 PLAY, DOUBLE PLAY, FORCE PLAY, PLAY RULING, SQUEEZE PLAY
ARTICLE 1. "Play" is the order given by the umpire when it is time for the game to begin, or to be resumed after having been suspended when he called "time," The term is also used to denote a unit of action which begins when a pitcher has the ball in his possession in pitching position and ends when ball becomes dead or pitcher again holds the ball while in pitching position.

---

IMO, the Fed has made a very poor ruling here whereby they may not have seen as having other ramifications. The color of the glove has no effect on the pitcher's ability to catch the ball.

Fellas.......there won't be multicolored gloves worn by pitchers in Fed games that I umpire. I might appear overofficious, but I'm not going to paint a bullseye on my chest for a coach to take that shot only when it really counts. Now, when I tell the coach WHY I won't allow the multicolored glove (for which he is sure to ask why), is that not setting up another umpire handling any subsequent game where an opposing pitcher is wearing a multicolored glove?
I hope you don't have the game following mine...........

If you fail to notice an illegal glove but later realize it and wish to remove it from the game, I'd recommend you not do so after a play has just been made or with runners on base. You are setting yourself up for the offensive coach to come out and complain at the proper time such that a penalty may have to be invoked.


Just my opinion,

Freix

[greymule]

Another example of a situation that can be argued several ways. Fed's wording gives ammunition to practically any position.

The play occurs in the second inning. Doesn't that imply that the pitcher has been using the glove and catching throws from the catcher all along? Wouldn't Fed have a case book play that gives runners bases when the pitcher uses an illegal glove to catch a throw from the catcher?

What if F1 catches the line drive barehanded? The point of banning the colored glove is to prevent the batter from being distracted by it, not, as with a first-base mitt in the outfield, to prevent the pitcher from gaining an advantage in fielding the ball.

Impossible to be sure without a ruling, I think.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

It is only the pitcher's glove that is color restricted.

Rule 1-3-6 The glove/mitt worn by the pitcher shall be uniform in color and neither white or gray.

Grey's comment about 1st baseman's mitts prompted me to look closer at the rule...

Casebook 1.3.6 F9 catches a fly ball with a first baseman's mit. While leaving the playing field after the third out, the coach of Team B detects this. RULING: There is not a distinction between a glove or mitt. Therefore the catch is legal. Gloves/mitts that do not meet rules specifications are illegal.

Those specifications are also contained in Rule 1-3-6 and are the size specification height, width, and webbing measurements. First baseman mitts must meet the same specifications as any other fielder's glove.

By the way, this is the only casebook play I found that address an illegal glove.

[Edited by DownTownTonyBrown on Mar 13th, 2003 at 06:10 PM]

[greymule]

OK, I'm staying out of Fed threads from now on. I forgot that Fed does not discriminate between mitts and gloves. Never assume anything with Fed.