Catcher's Mitt vs. Fielder's Glove

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

And you, as well as just about anyone here, are aware of numerous spots in the rulebook that say MAY, and others that say MUST. MAY does not equal MUST. The catcher MAY wear a mitt. This in no way says that he cannot, instead, wear a glove.

He may wear a mitt in lieu of going barehanded.

1B may wear a glove or mitt in lieu of going barehanded.

Other fielders may wear a glove in lieu of going barehanded.

The "may" in the hand-covering rules is there to allow them to wear the device in the first place. The game was originally played bare-handed and so there had to be a rule to allow hand-coverings after the traditionalists objected.

The different rules specify which type of device is allowed at which position. The catcher may wear a mitt. If the rules wanted to allow a mitt or glove they would say so, as they do for F3.

I'm headed to the ballpark now - prep for opening day.