A ball hitting a base (or pole), and ricocheting foul could (incorrectly) be called foul; this can be corrected.
PU not hearing the ball skip off F3's mitt, gotta live with that one...

Yes, I read what Steve wrote. I'm asking for the why behind it. Is it a matter of obviousness or is it a matter of the umpire believing the wrong rule or what? E.g., if it hits the mitt and I call it foul because I misunderstood the rule can I fix it?

If the PU hears/knows it hit the mitt, and knows that contact was over fair territory, and calls it foul; and when questioned by a coach admits all of the above, then it would be a misapplied rule that, on protest, would be changed by a UIC. Along those lines, then you should overturn your call, and apply a "jeopardy" decision on where to place runners. And in many, if not most cases, no one will agree with those decisions.

But to apply the same deal with a base umpire hears the contact, and the plate umpire somehow knows the contact he didn't see or hear was over fair territory?? It better be one of those cases where the only person in the park that doesn't know it was touched over fair is the plate umpire before you change that one. I mean, REALLY obvious to everyone that the change is "getting it right", because you may well have to eat a lot of crap and/or eject a coach over the overturn.

I had this a couple years ago. R1 on 1st, Ball is hit with a ton of spin near first base. F3 attempts to make a play on the ball and it hits off the glove in fair territory before rolling foul in front of 1st base. My PU does not make a call, F3 picks up the ball and tags B2 coming down the line. R1 thinks the ball is foul and comes back to first. . After the tag, F3 goes over and tags R1, who is still standing on 1b.

After all of this happens, the PU finally calls foul ball. What the heck do we do now? The foul ball call was not made until all that action happened.

What we did was get together and discuss it. We ended up ruling the ball fair, with B2 out on the tag and R1 safe at first (force was removed when B2 was tagged). The reason we went with this call was that I was sure the entire playing action had finished prior to the ball's position being determined by the plate umpire.

In all of that, the only argument was from the defensive coach, who wanted a double play called for the tag on R1.

Here is the situation I had in an ASA Qualifier a few years ago. I am the tournament UIC and saw this play.

Three umpire crew, no runners on base. F5 is playing up anticipating a bunt.
Batter swings and hits a ground ball at F5, she reaches down to field it, ball goes through her legs and rolls foul prior to reaching third base. PU calls FOUL. Offensive coach comes out and says that F5 touched the ball in fair territory so it should be a fair ball, requests PU ask his partners for help. PU gets crew together, U3 tells PU that the ball was touched by F5 over fair territory. PU reverses call and awards batter first base.

Defensive coach wants to protest the changing of the call from foul to fair, I am called to the field. After conferring with the crew to determine what happened and exactly what was called, I inform the coach that there is nothing to protest as the PU simply reversed his judgement call after seeking input from partners.

During the post game, I informed PU that he should have politely declined the initial request to get help as he was sure that the ball was not touched and was foul.

I have no problem with what your PU did, he got it correct. Shit happens and we cover the angles the best as possible.

This was exactly the case for my partner and me a number of years ago - everybody at the field, both coaches, everybody - except P heard the line shot tick off the glove of F5 in fair territory. We scored the runner from second base and placed the b-r on second base. (The ball had deflected down the left field line into foul territory.) Very little grief as I recall, and everyone stayed in the game.

The following spring, I gave the situation to Merle Butler at our state ASA clinic, and he said it was probably the best we could do with a difficult situation.

Sorry to revive an old situation, but this is almost twilight zone material.
I posted the above-mentioned hypothetical in April, and had make the call this weekend.

Bases loaded, hard shot down the 3d base line. By the time I caught sight of it, it was beyond the leaping F5 and hooking foul. "Foul Ball!".

Everyone but me heard (or saw) the ball hit her glove. Surprisingly-patient BC asked me to consult with my BU, who verified this.

I knew I was gonna take a load of s**t, but I made the decision to give everyone 2 bases (could've easily been a bases-clearing double).

Guys, would this survive a protest? I gotta know... I've already put on 10lbs from the crap I had to eat because of this.

Once you call foul it is foul. Where do you find the authority to award bases on a dead ball in this situation?

He apparently reversed the foul call, and then used Rule 10 to place the runners after the call reversal.

You made a judgement call. Went to your partner for additional information which led you to reverse your judgement call. You placed runners according to your judgement. Basically, what you have here is a judgement call and judgement calls are not subject to protest.

As a tournament UIC, I had this same situation in a game, coach wanted to protest, I would not allow the protest.

Why is this different from asking your partner for help on a pulled foot/swipe tag, and then reversing your call based on the information provided?

Except in NCAA, where, by rule, that foul call cannot be changed, under any circumstance.

I can't answer that last question with credentials, but other than NCAA probably ok in a protest; not a rule issue.

All through rereading this topic, I keep thinking that the plate is the hardest place to hear anything. Surrounded by dugouts and spectators.

Didn't we just see that happen in a regional game this year?