Is it Fair of foul

[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.

[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 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.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by teebob21

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.

Yeppers.

In a contrary instance, a few years ago in an MLB game, U3 called a bounding batted ball which landed fair behind the base a foul ball. He insisted the ball passed the base over foul territory.

Wish I could find a video of it. As expected, the offense went crazy but the call stood.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Yeppers.

In a contrary instance, a few years ago in an MLB game, U3 called a bounding batted ball which landed fair behind the base a foul ball. He insisted the ball passed the base over foul territory.

Wish I could find a video of it. As expected, the offense went crazy but the call stood.

This is not your example but it's a good one. http://m.mlb.com/video/v22734353/mus...-run-for-twins

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

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

Yes, but so what if I hadn't, the definition of foul ball doesn't change just because the umpire has never seen a ball bound over 1st or 3rd base before.