swinging third strike

[Rich]

(1) NO. It was caught.

(2) NO. That's not a foul tip. It didn't go sharp and direct to the catcher's hand or glove. It went sharp and direct to the catcher's leg. That makes it a foul ball. I'm glad that MD Longhorn won't wrongly argue with me, however.

(3) YES. First is occupied with less than 2 outs.

[bob jenkins]

I agree with Rich.

On #3 -- if first wasn't occupied, or there had been two outs, then I agree with Paul L in post 3 (but the batter would likely have acted differently)

[MD Longhorn]

On 3, I didn't notice the graphic showing 1 out and R1 - I just watched the video. So yeah - he's out.

On 2 - not arguing but clarifying my response. I also am not calling this a foul tip. Just a caught batted ball for an out.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

On 3, I didn't notice the graphic showing 1 out and R1 - I just watched the video. So yeah - he's out.

On 2 - not arguing but clarifying my response. I also am not calling this a foul tip. Just a caught batted ball for an out.

I know what you are trying to say. I completely disagree with it, however. In this situation, the leg is no different than the chest protector. If it hits the protector first, you wouldn't dream of calling it a caught batted ball...or would you?

[David Emerling]

Here's what I was thinking about these. I could be wrong.

Play #1 - WRONG - The umpire is using the mechanic for an uncaught 3rd when, in fact, the ball was caught. An understandable mistake but, what if the catcher had thrown it over the first baseman's head? I wonder if the catch (of the pitch) is reviewable. I don't know.

Play #2 - RIGHT - The umpire calls the batter out - because he is! The question is: WHY does he call him out? It can't be a caught foul tip because it never touched the catcher's mitt or hands. Yet, the ball was caught. Since the umpire never gave the foul tip signal, I assume he's calling the batter out for a caught foul ball. Which would be correct.

Play #3 - RIGHT call WRONG mechanic? - Since there is a runner on 1st with less than two outs (I told you that you had to look for details), the umpire gave the MLB mechanic for an uncaught third strike THEN, it seemed to me, he belatedly realized that the batter was out anyway and signaled the out. He could have directly signaled the batter out as soon as he swung and missed regardless of whether the pitch was caught or not.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

Play #2 - RIGHT - The umpire calls the batter out - because he is! The question is: WHY does he call him out? It can't be a caught foul tip because it never touched the catcher's mitt or hands. Yet, the ball was caught. Since the umpire never gave the foul tip signal, I assume he's calling the batter out for a caught foul ball. Which would be correct.

I read 2.00 Foul Tip as saying the ball cannot be caught period. It's a foul ball, not a caught batted ball for an out.

A FOUL TIP is a batted ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to the catcher’s
hands and is legally caught. It is not a foul tip unless caught and any foul tip that is caught
is a strike, and the ball is in play. It is not a catch if it is a rebound, unless the ball has first
touched the catcher’s glove or hand.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I read 2.00 Foul Tip as saying the ball cannot be caught period.

Why?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Why?

From J/R:

A nicked pitch
that initially strikes something other than the catcher's glove or hand (e.g., the
ground, batter, umpire, mask, protector) cannot be a foul tip; it is simply a nick
and foul

also -- if it can't be caught for a foul tip, I don't see how it can be caught as all

And, FED case 2.16.1D COMMENT: "... the ball becomes dead when it touches the body of F2 and is an uncaught foul."

[MD Longhorn]

I feel like I'm being baited... And I worry this is going to go south soon... but........

Yes, a batted ball that is not a foul tip, which is caught before it hits the ground, is an out. At any level, in any code, baseball or softball. If you disagree, quote a rule ... and quote one that doesn't simply say that it's not a foul tip. A ball caught by F9 near the bat girl is also not a foul tip.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I feel like I'm being baited... And I worry this is going to go south soon... but........

Yes, a batted ball that is not a foul tip, which is caught before it hits the ground, is an out. At any level, in any code, baseball or softball. If you disagree, quote a rule ... and quote one that doesn't simply say that it's not a foul tip. A ball caught by F9 near the bat girl is also not a foul tip.

Not arguing, but just wondering - wouldn't you think there would be an official interpretation about this ... somewhere? There are lots of things we know are true but are not explicitly addressed in the rulebook - aren't there? It's hard to believe that, in all the literature and interpretations, this has never been specifically addressed. Or, maybe it has and we just don't know about it.

[Paul L]

OBR 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; providing he does not use his cap, protector, pocket or
any other part of his uniform in getting possession.

Sounds like once the ball is no longer in flight or if you use your uniform to gain secure possession, like it's lodged between your pants and your shirt, it is not a catch.

I always thought it was getting secure possession before touching the ground.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Paul L

OBR 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; providing he does not use his cap, protector, pocket or
any other part of his uniform in getting possession.

Sounds like once the ball is no longer in flight or if you use your uniform to gain secure possession, like it's lodged between your pants and your shirt, it is not a catch.

I always thought it was getting secure possession before touching the ground.

Not quite a relevant cite, and I think you are mis-interpreting it. Had the ball been a liner to F4 and it stuck between his thigh and stomach, and f4 then grabbed the ball -- that's a catch.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

Not arguing, but just wondering - wouldn't you think there would be an official interpretation about this ... somewhere? There are lots of things we know are true but are not explicitly addressed in the rulebook - aren't there? It's hard to believe that, in all the literature and interpretations, this has never been specifically addressed. Or, maybe it has and we just don't know about it.

There's a FED case play that talks about having a perceptible arc, but only in the context of treating that one as a foul fly that's caught.

I know I feel pretty good from a spirit and intent perspective.

Two plays:

(1) Foul fly. Catcher chases. Loses the ball. Hits his chest protector and is eventually caught.

(2) The play in the video, except the ball hits the chest protector first and is then caught.

I would feel good about calling the out in (1) and a foul ball in (2).

Also, 2.16.1D (NFHS Baseball) comment refers to the "body" of the catcher.

[asdf]

2.16.2A (b)

B2 swings and tips the ball and (b) the ball goes directly to the catcher's chest protector and then is caught by the catcher.

Ruling: in (b) this is a foul ball

[David Emerling]

I think I'm going to change my answer to Play #2. Since the pitch went sharp and direct into the catcher, without touching his mitt or hands, it is a foul ball. If the ball had any discernible loop, however slight, it would be a caught foul ball for an out. I'm going with "wrong call", regardless of the umpire's reason.