WCWS: Catch or no catch?

[teebob21]

UW vs OU; https://youtu.be/mQdLcJc0gj4?t=97

I've watched this 20 times to come to my conclusion. Thoughts?

There is a video on ESPN with a few more replay angles, but I don't know how to link to their videos. EDIT: 1:13 here https://www.ncaa.com/video/softball/...e-2-highlights

[RKBUmp]

That ball never stopped moving and was definitely not lost on transfer.

[IRISHMAFIA]

The more I watch it, the more I lean toward a "no catch"

What I am seeing:

Ball loosely in the glove and snow coning.
The fielder's hand coming up and holding the glove.
As the ball starts to come out of the glove, the bare hand getting underneath the ball.

At this point, the angle becomes very difficult. To me it seems the fielder is still trying to get a grip on the ball and she is holding it against her body. In less than a half a second, we see the ball come shooting out from the other side or her body. IMO, I never see incontrovertible evidence of possession or control of the ball.

Yes, it was difficult to determine after watching it by frame a half-dozen + times and the umpire on the field has to go with the gut feeling at that time. I have no problem with the call as made, but can completely understand if it went the other way.

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

The more I watch it, the more I lean toward a "no catch"

What I am seeing:

Ball loosely in the glove and snow coning.
The fielder's hand coming up and holding the glove.
As the ball starts to come out of the glove, the bare hand getting underneath the ball.

At this point, the angle becomes very difficult. To me it seems the fielder is still trying to get a grip on the ball and she is holding it against her body. In less than a half a second, we see the ball come shooting out from the other side or her body. IMO, I never see incontrovertible evidence of possession or control of the ball.

Yes, it was difficult to determine after watching it by frame a half-dozen + times and the umpire on the field has to go with the gut feeling at that time. I have no problem with the call as made, but can completely understand if it went the other way.

That's what I saw the first time in real time, and in frame by frame. To me, there is no evidence of control or "transfer" because there is no "secondary movement."

From the case book:

Catch
A.R. 9-1. A fielder makes a shoestring catch and immediately lifts her glove in the air over her head to show the umpire that she has possession of the ball. As she does so, the ball trickles out the palm of her glove and lands on the ground. Since release was not voluntary, is it still a catch?
RULING: Yes, because the ball landed on the ground as a result of a secondary move and not as part of the action of the catch, she has completed the catch. Secondary moves include throwing the ball, transferring the ball from glove to throwing hand and demonstrating
possession of the ball to the umpire. (Rule 9.2.1)

I think the game play and case play are different is respect to "secondary move." I don't see the throwing hand/arm causing the final movement of the ball (from the waist/body to the ground). Nor do I believe that the ball moved from the glove to the body is a secondary move. I think glove to body was via momentum.

And the stupid announcer comment of the night, the between games crew said: "in softball, the ball doesn't need to survive the ground."

The unfortunate part about this play is PU was the primary for this play. With a runner on second, counter-rotated starting position, this is PU's area of responsibility. Although there is a alternate mechanic (circa 2016) that allows U1 to help on catch/no catch (all the way to the line), this is still a difficult play. And now the calls for 4 umpires (as happened in the FSU regional game, FSU vs. Auburn).

Well, and replay.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Big Slick

And the stupid announcer comment of the night, the between games crew said: "in softball, the ball doesn't need to survive the ground."

99% of the time, that would not be true. You can also add wall, fence, mascot and another fielder to that list.

The unfortunate part about this play is PU was the primary for this play. With a runner on second, counter-rotated starting position, this is PU's area of responsibility. Although there is a alternate mechanic (circa 2016) that allows U1 to help on catch/no catch (all the way to the line), this is still a difficult play. And now the calls for 4 umpires (as happened in the FSU regional game, FSU vs. Auburn).

Having worked a few 6-umpire games, I can assure you that while more eyes are watching different angles, there are still some situations that will stretch the crew's ability to cover every possible angle.

[Scooby]

This play is so close that I do not believe that you can fault the umpire with either call she/he makes in this situation. I think that it comes down to communication skills (explaining why a certain call was made) and game management skills.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Scooby

This play is so close that I do not believe that you can fault the umpire with either call she/he makes in this situation. I think that it comes down to communication skills (explaining why a certain call was made) and game management skills.

I agree that it was incredibly close. I felt like on my first viewing that she had caught the ball before she rolled over and the rolling over is where she lost it trying to get it thrown back in. But there were 2 outs, so there was no point in rolling over. Would it be appropriate to consider that fact here? It seems like it should perhaps shift the balance a little that at best she lost the ball in the transfer for a throw she didn't need to make.

[markrischard]

Sitting here with my "OU" shirt on, it would be easy to say there is no way that met the definition of a catch. But, it was awful close, and a really difficult call in real time. I'm happy to let the call stand, as I've been there and had to make the same judgement, myself.

[Skahtboi]

There was another very similar catch/no catch in today's game in right field. The Washington right fielder seems adept at selling no catches.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

There was another very similar catch/no catch in today's game in right field. The Washington right fielder seems adept at selling no catches.

Today's was good. Glove - bare hand - glove.

Blown call at 1B.

Blown call on the "hit near the foot and popped up" play.