I guess it has been discussed before, but I can't find it.
Codes of interest are ISF and ASA.

What determines the position of a defensive player, especially considering the use of a special glove / mitt?

Say F3 positions herself in the leftfield and catches the flyball with her mitt. Would that be an illegal catch?
Or more general: Does the position in the infield determine which glove a player is allowed to use or the position marked in the line-up?

And if a player uses an illegal glove, how do I call it? Do I treat it like an appeal play or do I call: "Illegal catch!", but let the play run, since the coach has an option?

Thanks

Raoul

ASA.

The physical position where the player is determines whether the player may legally use a mitt. If there is a shift, and F3 is playing in the outfield or elsewhere, then F3 may no longer use the mitt.

See POE 22 (2004)

It is not an appeal; the rule just says "discovered by the umpire." Of course, the umpire may be helped in this discovery by the offense!

Allow the play to complete and then give the coach his options. If you declare "illegal catch" (besides being a confusing call - what does that mean?), you may affect the outcome of the play and hence affect the coach's options.

Speaking ASA (believe ISF is the same)

It is not an appeal play. There is only an issue if the fielder with the illegal glove makes a play.

Once discovered by the umpire, the offensive coach has the option of accepting the result of the play or complete nullification of the play, return the runners and the batter to the box assuming the count which existed prior to the ball being put into play.

Obviously, the fielder must change gloves or move to a position which permits the use of a mitt.

Sorry in Germany I am not able to get the ASA Rule Book. Well I tried but I haven't received it via a friend.

Could you post that POE?
Or tell me more about how ASA handles that? How far away from the base is ok? ...

Thanks

Raoul

ASA 2004 POE 22
There is no specificity on how far removed from the area normally covered by F3 is acceptable. Umpire judgment - IOW, you get to decide.

It should be noted that regardless of the position at the TOP, if that player is the closest to 1B, or in the most likely position to cover that base on a batted ball, they should be permitted to wear a mitt.

What's the intent?
 

A more basic question is why does ASA care which fielder uses a first basemans mitt? Does it give the defense an advantage over the offense? I've never used a first basemans mitt. Is there an advantage? If so, then if both defenses were allowed to use a mitt at any position, would not that be fair and balanced and negate the advantage?

Re: What's the intent?
 

God forgive me for posting this, but why does MLB disallow it?

To the best of my knowledge, only Fed ignores the mitt/glove issue.

Re: Re: What's the intent?
 

And USSSA in their FP program.

So in the following scenario, who is allowed to use the mitt?

Infield way in taking away the bunt (I'm talking 15-20 feet from the plate at the corners, 2B/SS about 35 feet back) and outfield on the edge of the grass. Who is responsible for fielding first? RIGHTFIELD! That's right, to my surprise, RF covered the throw at first base on the slap attempt (of course, primary coverage for RF was to stop the slap). So, since F3 isn't likely to cover first, she can't use the mitt? RIGHT? What's the call if she does field the ball, and throws to first (Being covered by RF)?

Ah, the ambiguities!!! You gotta figure the F3 at the pitch is the only one who can use the glove. Otherwise, they could just lay the glove on the base, and let F9 pick it up and use it.

Just because another player whose primary position is not 1B takes the throw, doesn't give that player the right to wear a mitt. Never said they did.

If you choose to take this to the absurd, keep it on your field, I'm not interested :), thank you very much.

To the contrary, I don't think it's absurd at all. My concern is for first base, no where near the vicinity of the base, fields the ball and F9 is the cover person. Threw me for a loop because I have F9 charging in to cover the base while I'm trying to get the angle on the throw.

It's a serious question...if offensive team brings it to your attention, qoutes the rule you quote, and asks you to make a judgment on it, what do you do? You tell me what you'd do and I'll tell you what I DID!

My concern isn't for F9 wearing the mitt. It's for F3 making a play when she has no intention of ever covering first base.

[Edited by FUBLUE on May 9th, 2004 at 08:50 PM]

Ouch!!!

I still think you gotta use some judgement on this and go with the F3 at the pitch.

Then you must have a cow when the pitcher or F4 cover the base on a ball fielded by F3.

The only way this becomes an issue is if a player which normally plays to the right of F3 are positioned to F3's left at the time of the pitch.