The new face of 'voluntary release'?

[UMP45]

I read where MLB HAS changed the interpretation. They wanted to take judgement out of the call. One umpire would rule one way and one would rule the other way. I just don't understand why so many posting on here are getting their drawers in a wad because of it. It doesn't affect how WE call it. Until NFHS or PONY says otherwise I will call it the "old"way.

[BretMan]

Well, they're at it again...

In last night's Angels/Mariners game, a long fly ball was hit to Hamilton. He was parked under it, gloved the ball over his head, brought the glove down to his throwing hand, reached into the glove, then the ball dropped out.

The umpire ruled it a catch and lost on the transfer. The call was challenged and subsequently overturned- no catch.

This one created another argument of sorts. A runner on second base had gone halfway waiting for the catch, then scampered back to second when the catch was initially called. The Seattle manager argued that his runner should have been placed on third, which he most likely would have had easily if no catch had been ruled in the first place. The runner was kept at second base.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by BretMan

The Seattle manager argued that his runner should have been placed on third, which he most likely would have had easily if no catch had been ruled in the first place. The runner was kept at second base.

Placement of runners…the thorn in baseball's replay system. We all called this before it was implemented.

The umpires will start officiating the game like the NFL where they will rule "no catch" so everything can play out, then if reversed, simply put them back.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

Placement of runners…the thorn in baseball's replay system. We all called this before it was implemented.

The umpires will start officiating the game like the NFL where they will rule "no catch" so everything can play out, then if reversed, simply put them back.

So they're going to start not officiating the game?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by UMP45

I read where MLB HAS changed the interpretation. They wanted to take judgement out of the call. One umpire would rule one way and one would rule the other way. I just don't understand why so many posting on here are getting their drawers in a wad because of it. It doesn't affect how WE call it. Until NFHS or PONY says otherwise I will call it the "old"way.

Source, please (not that I'm doubting you -- I'd just like to add it to my library.

And, if it's in any way "official" -- then I will change how I call it in many of my games.

[LRZ]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Source, please (not that I'm doubting you -- I'd just like to add it to my library.

And, if it's in any way "official" -- then I will change how I call it in many of my games.

I don't know how "official" this is, but on Umpire-Empire, there's a post from Wendelstedt Umpire School. I don't know how to link to it, but here is the text:

"In determining whether a fielder drops the ball 'while in the act of making a throw following the catch' in accordance with Rule 2.00, the umpires will determine whether the fielder obtained possession of a ball in flight but dropped the ball while in the act of making a throw during the momentum of the catch. For example, if the shortstop, in an effort to turn a double play, throws to the second baseman, who drops the ball while in the act of drawing back his arm to make a throw to first base, the second baseman shall be adjudged to have had secure control of the ball and thus the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught by the second baseman. However, it shall not be adjudged to be a catch if, while in the act of making a throw during the momentum of the catch, the fielder loses possession of the ball in the transfer (e.g., flip from the glove) before he secures the ball with his throwing hand.

"Our emphasis: The 'flip' itself is not deemed a voluntary release, even though it may be a voluntary action. This is an update you will find in the 2014 Rules and Interpretations Manual. We have removed the exclusive interpretation offered for a number of year providing that it only be an attempted voluntary release. This is no longer the case. The release must be voluntary. Additionally, this interpretation has been merged with a tag of a base as well on the front end of a double play attempt. He must secure the ball in his throwing hand before it will be deemed secure possession was made."

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by LRZ

I don't know how "official" this is, but on Umpire-Empire, there's a post from Wendelstedt Umpire School. I don't know how to link to it, but here is the text:

"In determining whether a fielder drops the ball 'while in the act of making a throw following the catch' in accordance with Rule 2.00, the umpires will determine whether the fielder obtained possession of a ball in flight but dropped the ball while in the act of making a throw during the momentum of the catch. For example, if the shortstop, in an effort to turn a double play, throws to the second baseman, who drops the ball while in the act of drawing back his arm to make a throw to first base, the second baseman shall be adjudged to have had secure control of the ball and thus the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught by the second baseman. However, it shall not be adjudged to be a catch if, while in the act of making a throw during the momentum of the catch, the fielder loses possession of the ball in the transfer (e.g., flip from the glove) before he secures the ball with his throwing hand.

Our emphasis:
The 'flip' itself is not deemed a voluntary release, even though it may be a voluntary action. This is an update you will find in the 2014 Rules and Interpretations Manual. We have removed the exclusive interpretation offered for a number of year providing that it only be an attempted voluntary release. This is no longer the case. The release must be voluntary. Additionally, this interpretation has been merged with a tag of a base as well on the front end of a double play attempt. He must secure the ball in his throwing hand before it will be deemed secure possession was made."

Well I certainly hope they go back and change the definition part of a Catch in 2.00 "A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it... to and.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by LRZ

We have removed the exclusive interpretation offered for a number of year providing that it only be an attempted voluntary release.

I'll say it's exclusive. I've never heard of "attempted voluntary release" until now.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by LRZ

I don't know how "official" this is, but on Umpire-Empire, there's a post from Wendelstedt Umpire School. I don't know how to link to it, but here is the text:

"In determining whether a fielder drops the ball 'while in the act of making a throw following the catch' in accordance with Rule 2.00, the umpires will determine whether the fielder obtained possession of a ball in flight but dropped the ball while in the act of making a throw during the momentum of the catch. For example, if the shortstop, in an effort to turn a double play, throws to the second baseman, who drops the ball while in the act of drawing back his arm to make a throw to first base, the second baseman shall be adjudged to have had secure control of the ball and thus the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught by the second baseman. However, it shall not be adjudged to be a catch if, while in the act of making a throw during the momentum of the catch, the fielder loses possession of the ball in the transfer (e.g., flip from the glove) before he secures the ball with his throwing hand.

"Our emphasis: The 'flip' itself is not deemed a voluntary release, even though it may be a voluntary action. This is an update you will find in the 2014 Rules and Interpretations Manual. We have removed the exclusive interpretation offered for a number of year providing that it only be an attempted voluntary release. This is no longer the case. The release must be voluntary. Additionally, this interpretation has been merged with a tag of a base as well on the front end of a double play attempt. He must secure the ball in his throwing hand before it will be deemed secure possession was made."

First they say the release must be voluntary, then they say a transfer must be made to the throwing hand. And a flip is not a voluntary release? YGBSM. I have seen many "flips" that demonstrate complete control of the baseball including a voluntary and intentional release. They are making a mess of this.

And a catch has no momentum, the ball has momentum.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

[COLOR="red"]And, if it's in any way "official" -- then I will change how I call it in many of my games.

Not me. This "interpretation" is in direct conflict with the letter of the rule. MLB is just making sh!t up now because they can.

Any fielder who closes his glove around the ball before he releases it without contacting the ground, another player, or a wall has caught it in my games.

[UMP45]

Originally Posted by Publius

Not me. This "interpretation" is in direct conflict with the letter of the rule. MLB is just making sh!t up now because they can.

Any fielder who closes his glove around the ball before he releases it without contacting the ground, another player, or a wall has caught it in my games.

Exactly. And when you get to the show you'll call it the way MLB says call it!

[Robert E. Harrison]

Originally Posted by UMP45

Exactly. And when you get to the show you'll call it the way MLB says call it!

Or not and let the guys in NY change it for you.

[UMP45]

Originally Posted by Robert E. Harrison

Or not and let the guys in NY change it for you.

So you will lack the nards to make the call right of wrong? Lazy!

[Robert E. Harrison]

Originally Posted by UMP45

So you will lack the nards to make the call right of wrong? Lazy!

I was just saying, than in the show, if you don't call it the way in which they have instructed, it will be overturned as we have repeatedly seen in the challenges thus far.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by UMP45

I read where MLB HAS changed the interpretation. They wanted to take judgement out of the call.

They want to take judgment out of a Catch/No Catch call??

Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats living together! Mass hysteria!!