fair/foul - then catch/no-catch

[Rich Ives]

I see them call it just about every time. A discussion on umpire.org is going on now. Everyone says call it with one exception by a person with questionable (to me at least) motivations. Those who have been to Evans' academy say he teaches to always call it.

It is especially important on a ball very near the line. It is possible to have a ball touched in the air over the line, then dropped so you see that determination just might have to happen before you know if it's caught or not.
And then everyone really needs to know and know now if it's fair or foul because it governs ensuing action.

Don't get lazy on calls. Make a call every time so you're in the habit and don't forget at a crucial time.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

I see them call it just about every time. A discussion on umpire.org is going on now. Everyone says call it with one exception by a person with questionable (to me at least) motivations. Those who have been to Evans' academy say he teaches to always call it.

It is especially important on a ball very near the line. It is possible to have a ball touched in the air over the line, then dropped so you see that determination just might have to happen before you know if it's caught or not.
And then everyone really needs to know and know now if it's fair or foul because it governs ensuing action.

Don't get lazy on calls. Make a call every time so you're in the habit and don't forget at a crucial time.

+1

And while the OP is right that is doesn't matter if the ball is caught (except maybe to the scorer), you won't know that the ball is caught until after you should have signaled fair/foul.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

And then everyone really needs to know and know now if it's fair or foul because it governs ensuing action.

I think the most important thing that governs ensuing action is whether it is caught or not.


If the ball is caught - it makes no difference whether it was caught in fair or foul territory. Runners can tag up without any concern about the fair/foul status of the ball. If the ball was on the fair side and was a marginal "catch" requiring an umpire ruling - the runner will primarily want to know if it was caught or not. Because, if it was on the foul side and ruled a no-catch, it really doesn't matter.

If the ball was not caught, once the runners see the no-catch ruling they can assume that it was fair and immediately respond appropriately - if it subsequently turns out to be foul - no harm.

I don't know, it just seems backwards to me.

I'm thinking the reason they encourage umpires to call it in this manner is so they focus on the fair/foul status of the ball; because, if they focus too much on whether it's a catch or not, they will fail to notice where the ball was first touched. That's great for the umpire - doesn't work so well for the runners.