Ground Can't Cause a Fumble
 

Interesting game yesterday. F5 tries to catch foul ball before 3B. Ball goes in glove and F5 takes three steps into fair territory, falls and drops ball.

As I come up the line from HP, I know for certain that it was touched in foul territory first and that F5 did not complete a catch. I have a Brain Freeze and fail to call it a foul ball. (My bad)

The DC comes running out arguing that that was a catch and of course wants the out. Supporting his argument was the words, "just like football, the ground can't cause a fumble." He appeals to my partner first. I go back to the plate and he finally makes his way there asking me to get help about the catch. I told him that "I was 100% certain that what happened did not meet the criteria of a catch and there was no reason to discuss my call with the BU". I explained several examples to him and he wasn't buying off on any of them, so I ended the conversation and we continued with the game.

After the 2-3 pitches the light bulb went off that it was a foul ball. Thankfully the decision had no bearing on the game, (his team was mercy ruled) however, it was quite an amusing discussing after the game with my partner.

For the record , the DC was finally restricted to the bench after coming out yelling for appeals on obvious calls.

assuming the "three steps" were part of F5's momentum of trying to make the catch, you got it right (well, except for the foul part).

It's a common myth.

Tell the coach, "This isn't football" or "that isn't true in baseball." If he persists, "Coach, I've explained it. We need to move on."

I second what Bob said. Also, do not allow the coach to discuss YOUR call with your partner. This is not a survey. Your partner should have refused to talk to him and sent him back to you.

dash,
jicecone hasn't explained the situation after the ball was on the ground, presumably because it isn't important to the "ground causing a fumble." But if the B/R is now standing on 1st base following an apparent foul ball, I would expect any umpire on the field to listen carefully to the DC, if for no other reason than to give jicecone time to recognize the error.

I don't agree. If the coach convinces the calling umpire to talk to his partner, that is fine. In some cases, it is an accepted procedure for an umpire to approach his partner (who made the call) to offer additional information. But it is not OK for a coach to approach other umpires not involved in the initial call.

If a coach tries to go to my partner on a call I made, I will intercept him. If he comes to me when my partner made the call, I will send him to my partner without any discussion of the call.

Actually, when the DC went to my partner first as I called time and walked away to home plate. My partner sent him to me. R3 froze on third and afterwards my partner who was in the "B" position said that he did not realize the ball was first touched in foul territory anyway. Had I realized that I didn't make the correct call on the Fair/Foul then or was uncertain about it, I probably would have talked with my partner.

The coach did not discuss foul/fair, he wanted me to ask my partner if it was a catch or not. I told him that I was 100% sure that it was not, a catch and did not need to discuss it with my partner.

I know you realize it, but I gotta emphasize your first responsibility is fair/foul. It's important. So many bad things can happen.

Your absolutely correct, no excuse. As soon as the player hit the ground and dropped the ball I should have been all over it. Brain freeze, old age, no bearing on the outcome of the game, etc, etc, etc. Still not accepatable to me, for missing the call.

Is it acceptable to point foul at the moment it is touched and then wait to see the result of the catch/no catch?

Not only acceptable, it's preferred (or required).

Don't beat yourself up about it. It happens to all of us.

As dash pointed out, coach should not be allowed to go talk to BU about PU's call. And it is up to the PU to emphatically insist that he doesn't. The discussion might have been less amusing if your partner wanted to make your handling of coach (allowing him to even talk to BU) the only issue (forget about the play)...I know such brutally honest (learned a lot from) partners.

You guys are beating jice up over this, like Jice should have run up the line and interjected himself into the discussion. That's nonsense. Emphatically insist? What - are you saying he should stomp his feet at home plate and yell at the coach to come talk to him? Come on guys.

Sounds like coach went to the wrong person, and the wrong person did nothing but direct him (eventually) to the right person (Jice). What do YOU do when the coach comes to talk to you and it's your partner's call. I expect that answer is simply to direct the coach to your partner --- which it sounds like is exactly what happened. I hope you don't expect your partner to A) run up the line and get himself into the conversation or B) have him emphatically doing something at the plate to get the coach to come to him.

If the coach is going to the wrong guy, then I *do* step up and say, "That's my call, Bill. Come talk to me."

No stomping of the feet or running up the line or whatever, but I do try to direct the coach.

Actually the rule or the philosophy is almost exactly like football. The problem is people use that line in many inaccurate ways. The ground cannot cause a fumble, but it can cause an incompletion. But your point is taken.

Peace