Is it Fair of foul

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

OP: "Batter hit a ground ball in fair territory but is heading foul, then hits the orange base in foul territory . . "

Where did it meet the qualifications for a fair ball? It went up the line and hit the colored part of the base. Foreign object in foul territory. What do you think made it fair? Foul all day.

You obviously didn't read my response. No, the OP did not state the ball went up the line, but that it was in fair territory. The fact that it touched the orange base has no more bearing than the location of the fielder's feet when touching a ball in flight. The location and path of the ball, OTOH, have everything to do with the appropriate call

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Does the ball have to pass ALL the white base or any part of it?

No, and you are starting to sound like a coach trying to bullshit an umpire

To get scientific about it...a ball bouncing FROM fair territory that does NOT hit the front of the orange base (which would be foul), but DOES bounce on the top of the orange, and has passed over some of the white. Is this fair?

I say it is.

"Bounds over" is how the rule reads in the definition of a "fair ball". It does not demand a specific % of the base or the ball, just whether the ball goes over the base. Should be handled the same as a pitch passing over any part of the plate

[Umpire@1]

I sent the umpire that asked me this question to Rule 8, section 2, N 2 on page 95 of the 2016 ASA rule book.
It specifically states, that A batted ball hitting or bounding over the contrasting color portion is foul.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

You obviously didn't read my response. No, the OP did not state the ball went up the line, but that it was in fair territory. The fact that it touched the orange base has no more bearing than the location of the fielder's feet when touching a ball in flight. The location and path of the ball, OTOH, have everything to do with the appropriate call

It hit a foreign object in foul territory before passing the base. It's foul.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Does the ball have to pass ALL the white base or any part of it?

To get scientific about it...a ball bouncing FROM fair territory that does NOT hit the front of the orange base (which would be foul), but DOES bounce on the top of the orange, and has passed over some of the white. Is this fair?

I say it is.

Yep. Any part of the bounding ball over any part of the white base is fair; just like any part of the pitched ball over any part of the plate (at the correct height) is a strike.

[josephrt1]

In the rare situation where it bounced in such a way that it pretty much took a 90 degree angle and went over some of the white base before touching the orange base, I would call this fair because of the definition of Fair Ball, line B "Bounds over or past first or third base, which is in fair territory, regardless of where the ball hits after going over the base."

That is what most of you are saying and that's they way i was taught and interpret the book and definition of Fair Ball and how i would call it.

But Rich Ives makes a point that in 8.7.N.2 it plainly states "A batted ball hitting or bounding over the contrasting color portion is foul." That line is the source of the controversy. Although if the ball went over the white base it should be called fair; that line in 8.7.N.2. does not allow for that situation. it simply says the ball is foul when it touches the contrasting color base.

I would still call it fair.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Umpire@1

I sent the umpire that asked me this question to Rule 8, section 2, N 2 on page 95 of the 2016 ASA rule book.
It specifically states, that A batted ball hitting or bounding over the contrasting color portion is foul.

We go over this every once in a while here. The rule is just wrong there. A ball which bounds over the color portion also bounding over the white partion is fair. The rules have a contradiction but just ignore it.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by josephrt1

In the rare situation where it bounced in such a way that it pretty much took a 90 degree angle and went over some of the white base before touching the orange base, I would call this fair because of the definition of Fair Ball, line B "Bounds over or past first or third base, which is in fair territory, regardless of where the ball hits after going over the base."

That is what most of you are saying and that's they way i was taught and interpret the book and definition of Fair Ball and how i would call it.

But Rich Ives makes a point that in 8.7.N.2 it plainly states "A batted ball hitting or bounding over the contrasting color portion is foul." That line is the source of the controversy. Although if the ball went over the white base it should be called fair; that line in 8.7.N.2. does not allow for that situation. it simply says the ball is foul when it touches the contrasting color base.

I would still call it fair.

This is the question I was trying to ask when Irish called me out for sounding like Coach BS. Thanks for spelling it out more clearly than I could. Rule 1 (Fair Ball) is not at all consistent with 8.7.N.2. Example:


Fair ball all day long if the orange bag is not in use, right? Does 8.7.N.2 have precedence over Rule 1?

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by teebob21

This is the question I was trying to ask when Irish called me out for sounding like Coach BS. Thanks for spelling it out more clearly than I could. Rule 1 (Fair Ball) is not at all consistent with 8.7.N.2. Example:


Fair ball all day long if the orange bag is not in use, right? Does 8.7.N.2 have precedence over Rule 1?

I can't say I've ever seen a ball take a path like that. Have you?

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

I can't say I've ever seen a ball take a path like that. Have you?

Not this exact situation, but similar. Nubbers off the end of the bat with tons of side spin can do funny things when they bounce.

[josephrt1]

OK, so the controversy continues:

1. Youngump says "The rules have a contradiction but just ignore it."

Who gets to make the decision to ignore a rule? How does that go over when you say to a coach we ignore that rule, but we enforce this other rule.

2. teebob21 says "Fair ball all day long if the orange bag is not in use, right? "

I think most of the respondents are saying it is fair ball even if the contrasting base IS in use.

There does seem to be a contradiction in the rules

[CecilOne]

What does colored bag in use or not in use mean? It is either there or it is not there.
Hitting the spot on the bag or on bare ground if not there are only different by the "foreign object" definition.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

It hit a foreign object in foul territory before passing the base. It's foul.

Where does the OP state it hit the orange before crossing over the white portion of the base? It doesn't.

My response was situational because the OP lacked specifics.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

We go over this every once in a while here. The rule is just wrong there. A ball which bounds over the color portion also bounding over the white partion is fair. The rules have a contradiction but just ignore it.

IMO, the rule is accurate when applied in order of its presentation. The first determines the ball as fair. Once a ball is fair, I do not believe there is any circumstance when that same batted ball can properly/legally be declared foul.

82N1 addresses the ball passing over or contacting the white portion.

82N2 addresses the ball passing over or contacting only the contrasting color portion.

However, I agree the rules in 8.2.N could be worded better simply by adding the word "only" to 82N2

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

What does colored bag in use or not in use mean? It is either there or it is not there.
Hitting the spot on the bag or on bare ground if not there are only different by the "foreign object" definition.

I would assume "in use" means that there is a batter-runner at that point of the play. Otherwise, it is just one big base.