First time this has happened to me and I can't find a ruling in the ASA rule book:

Tree branches overhang backstop. Foul ball goes up, and in coming down hits a branch, deflecting the ball away from the catcher, who would have caught it.

Just a foul ball? Dead ball/strike? Dead ball and the infamous do-over?

Thanks!

Should have been discussed in pre-game discussion or by league rules. Couple of HS diamonds in area here have this situation...it is always ruled a dead ball/foul ball. It would be in the ground rules/local rules part of ASA rule book, I think.

Agree with FUBlue,

Situations such as this should be handled in pre-game. Lot of HS
parks around here have wires crossing above the playing fields.
Some play it when it is hit, others have different rules for it.
Anything unusual that could change the course of the play,
should be discussed during pre-game. Have the home team coach
explain how these things are handled. If he can't, umpires make
the decision at the pre-game.

JMHO,

Thanks--never thought about the tree in pre-game (duh). I always learn something new!

Actually, if it was not brought up under the ground rules discussion, it is by definition a foul ball.

Not necessarily
 

Agreed:
These types of things need to be discussed at the plate meeting, covered under "ground rules." We have trees at one field down the first base line. We play Kingdome rule...in live ball territory, live ball.

However, Dakota, since the tree is natural, if there is no rule covered at the plate meeting, if it hits the tree and ends up in fair territory prior to 1st or 3rd, it would still be considered fair. It would be the same if there were substantial spin on the ball and it hits a rock in foul territory and bounces fair. You shouldn't make the foul call until the ball has either hit something not natural (backstop, equipment, person...okay, so a person is natural, but still would be foul), or has gone past the base.

Re: Not necessarily
 

The rule says "foreign to the natural ground." A rock is part of the ground. A tree isn't.

Re: Re: Not necessarily
 

[/B][/QUOTE]The rule says "foreign to the natural ground." A rock is part of the ground. A tree isn't. [/B][/QUOTE]

Huh????????

Re: Re: Re: Not necessarily
 

The rule says "foreign to the natural ground." A rock is part of the ground. A tree isn't. [/B][/QUOTE]

Huh????????

[/B][/QUOTE]The sentence is clear. What has you so mystified you can't express youself?

Last time I checked....
 

A tree wasn't foreign to the natural ground...

At least that's what my forestry teacher tried to convince us of...

Hitting the tree over dead ball territory would always result in a dead ball...but not over live ball territory...you may have an issue with a catch, but not a fair ball.

Re: Last time I checked....
 

I was quoting the definition of a foul ball, and in the situation presented, the ball hit tree branches hanging over foul territory. While trees come from the natural ground, they aren't part of the ground. At least that assertion is what I am claiming. If anyone has an authoritative ruling to the contrary, I'm open to it.

But, in the scenario presented, with no prior discussion of ground rules, I would have called foul ball.

Logic check
 

A couple of our trees are so big that the branches actually hang over fair territory. We always cover this in our plate meeting...however, say we didn't for some reason. Ball is hit high and touches a branch on the tree.

How would you handle this?

Hello, Newbie to this board here switching over from another board, so Hello to all.
I would have foul ball. I would have in pregame established tree and branches as foul. And in game covered or not in pregame (which is always best) call the ball foul. If not now you have established a ground rule that might be hard to later draw the line. eg: How far down the branch is foul/fair What if a ball is hit that is obviously going out of field of play hits trunk or base of limbs and comes bounding into f2's hands? or any fielder for that matter. And out of sarcarsm what if batted ball hits wood light pole what do you do then? Ok I know that is streching it But you see my point. Take Care
Lenny F.

I agree, ground rules prevail. If there are no ground rules, then if it hits the tree over foul territory, foul ball. If it hits the tree over fair territory, grounder. It isn't as hard as it's becoming in this discussion. AND YOU JUST GOTTA DISCUSS IT IN THE PREGAME. IT'S NOT LIKE YOU CAN'T SEE A TREE OVERHANGING THE FOUL TERRITORY BEHIND HOME PLATE! Actually, I'm gonna notice it right off and find the shade provided by Mother Nature.

Yeppers, but in Texas there are not many ball parks with
trees. At least not in this part. Just heat and humidity.

Is a tree a part of the ground?

Are the hands a part of the bat?

DOH!

Foul in fair territory?
 

Lenny...
How can you call a foul ball in fair territory? You have a few choices on overhanging obstacles in fair territory, but foul is not one of them. For natural obstacles, like trees, it is either live ball with no effect (possible catch), or live ball no catch possible (like a grounder). Why would you punish the offense on a well-hit ball? As I mentioned before, we always cover this in our pre-game, but it is always live ball, play on, catch is possible. The trees are only down the first base line, and the branches are quite high. I have only seen them hit one time, in foul territory.

"And out of sarcarsm what if batted ball hits wood light pole what do you do then?"

The wood light pole is:

1. Usually out of play and always at least foul. Dead ball, foul or out of play.

2. Foreign to the natural ground. Once it is hit, ball is dead.

Natural doesn't refer to what it is made of, but rather how it relates to the environment of the field.

Precedent: Seattle's old Kingdome. If a ball hit a speaker or other structure over fair territory, live ball, fair, play on (catch possible).

Try and keep up... :-)

Also, no matter what Dakota says, a tree is very much part of the natural ground.

So based on the rule as written, and the precedent set by MLB at the Kingdome, it is my opinion that overhanging branches over live ball territory are live and playable as if nothing happened. I would also agree with the decision that if you decided so at the plate meeting, branches in foul territory may still be called foul when touched by the ball. In the absence of the plate meeting, though, you have to go with the rule as it is written.

Once again, however, COVER IT IN THE GROUND RULE DISCUSSION at the plate meeting.

I agree that it should be discussed during the ground rule part of the plate meeting, and save yourself all this agony... but if there is an oops,

a) The original question was not about overhanging branches over fair territory;

b) A tree is not dirt or rock;

c) MLB domed stadium ground rules don't mean squat unless you are calling a MLB game in a domed stadium.

If you oops and don't discuss it during the plate meeting, with the tree over foul territory, calling the ball foul is a reasonable interp of the definition. I'm still waiting for someone to offer an authoritative interpretation for ASA, NFHS, or some other softball body that treats an overhanging tree as part of the natural ground. No baseball interp, especially MLB, counts. If it can be provided, I will gladly stand corrected.

Having said all of that, ASA 10-1 would seem to give the umpire the discretion to rule however suits him, since trees are not specifically convered in the rules.

I'm with Dakota. A tree is not ground. It grows from the ground, but is not ground. Dirt - yes, part of the ground (in fact, the main substance making up the ground). Rock - yes, part of the ground (just hardened dirt). Tree - uh, no.

Ball in foul territory hit's tree - Foul Ball. Ball in fair territory hit's tree - Fair ball. The only question becomes catchable or not catchable - and if you neglected it in ground rules, I'd rule both catchable.

Uh oh....conflict....
 

Mcrowder:

In one statement, you said that if a ball hits the tree in foul territory it is foul. In the next, you said it would be catchable.

"Ball in foul territory hit's tree - Foul Ball. Ball in fair territory hit's tree - Fair ball. The only question becomes catchable or not catchable - and if you neglected it in ground rules, I'd rule both catchable."

A ball cannot be both foul and catchable. In order to be catchable, it must be live. If it is still live when it hits the tree, then bounces or rolls and settles in fair territory before 1st or third base, it must be fair. A foul ball is dead and therefore cannot be caught.

So, in essence, if you neglect to cover it in ground rules, you are agreeing with me.

Dakota, a tree is part of the natural environment of the park. This rule is completely the same as baseball, so don't be getting into the difference between baseball and softball.

I stand with my initial opinion. IF it is not covered in the initial ground-rule discussion, over-hanging branches in live ball territory remain live.

Again, umpires, COVER THIS ISSUE AT THE PLATE MEETING!!!

Dead ball....Foul.

Cover it in pre-game, but if you don't, then you still have a dead ball/Foul.

Let's not get into backyard youth wiffle-ball games..."Okay anything left of the big Oak Tree is fair..If it hits the maple limbs above the fence then it's a home run, unless you catch it.".

State a rule with an interpretation, Kellerumps!
 

The rule states foreign to the ground. A tree is not foreign to the ground.

You have simply made a statement that is your opinion. This is fine if you cover it that way in your pre-game. I am using the rule as it is worded and a precedent.

Nice try at a put-down, though. Those of us that live in the beautiful northwest actually have parks surrounded by big, beautiful trees.

Striker ... did you just try to tell us that a foul fly ball is not a live ball? Or did I misunderstand you? I hope I'm misunderstanding you.

I meant what I said. And of COURSE you can catch a foul fly ball.

Actually, there is no such thing.

There are fly balls and there are foul balls. A fly ball over foul territory is not a foul ball, since the fly ball is live and the foul ball is dead.

That is the contradiction Striker was pointing out.

If a fly ball hits the screen, it is immediately a foul ball and is dead. The catcher catching it means nothing.

Same thing if you call a fly ball off a tree a foul ball. It is dead and a catch means nothing.

If you are keeping the ball live for a catch off the tree, you must also keep it alive for all other purposes. For example, the ball hits the tree branch over foul territory, drops to the ground and rolls into fair territory. If you are keeping the ball live for a catch, then what I just described would be a fair ball.

Striker, being part of nature does not mean part of the ground. A ball cannot become blocked by the natural ground. Would you consider a ball that went into the tree and rattled around in the branches several seconds a blocked ball? Would you consider a ball that went into a tree and lodged in the crotch of one of the branches a blocked ball? If yes, then how can the tree be part of the natural ground? Shouldn't you be requiring the fielders to climb the tree?

I know I am being absurd, but it is absurdity to make a point. You want consistency - let's have consistency.

Without a ground rule discussion, if it hits the tree over foul territory, it is a foul ball.

You keep bringing up the tree over fair territory, probably because you think it is a better argument, so you ignore the foul territory issue that was the original scenario.

Name me one MLB park with a tree overhanging the field. MLB rules for speakers in domed stadia mean absolutely nothing wrt amateur softball.

And don't have such a thin skin.

No thin skin here...
 

Did you miss my smiley?

Actually, I am enjoying this debate. Don't have a game until tomorrow, then three weeks straight! So, I have a little time on my hands.

Dakota, please don't get me wrong. I understand your point perfectly and I don't necessarily disagree with you. However, if I am a coach (god help us all), and the ball hits the branch in foul territory in the air, bounces and settles in fair territory, and my batter-runner is standing on second, I will argue that the tree is not foreign to the natural ground. Of course, as an umpire, your response should be: "Coach, in my judgement, the tree is foreign to the natural ground." His protest is now over, because you have stated and applied the rule correctly and it has now become a judgement call. Hee hee...I would love to see the look on the coach's face after that statement!

A blocked ball is a different issue here. We aren't discussing that. We are discussing an instance where the ball merely hits or touches an overhanging branch. If a ball becomes blocked, the play is killed and the appropriate action is taken.

I think we have, by our discussion, made one point perfectly clear and we both agree...these issues need to be clarified at the plate during the ground rule discussion. This also means that umpires need to take the time to inspect the field when they first arrive to make note of items like this. Our association is very clear about this in our training.

Re: No thin skin here...
 

Sorry - yes I did.
What I would probably say is something like, "Coach, the rules do not specifically address trees in playable territory. Therefore, I am ruling this as the same effect as if the ball contacts the fence or the backstop. Foul ball."True, but I brought it up since you are arguing that the tree is part of the natural ground. Therefore, a ball that is sitting up on a branch in the tree is not blocked, just as a ball sitting on the ground is not blocked. Right?

And, to bring back up your fair territory situation, I would rule a ball that contacts a tree overhanging fair territory (in the abense of any ground rules) to be a blocked ball. Two bases from the TOP.

In the general case, a ball hit into a tree will not come out of the tree immediately and will not come out of the tree on a predictabe path. To consider it to be the same as a fly ball would seem to put the defense at a disadvantage.Absolutely agree.

Definitions: Catch E. A ball which strikes anything other than a defensive player while it is in flight is ruled the same as if it struck the ground. Only difference I can see is if it got stuck in the tree in fair territory we would have a blocked ball.

Re: State a rule with an interpretation, Kellerumps!
 

Well, if we're gonna get into semantics, let's use the right wording. Definition for Foul Ball states ".... or any object foreign to the natural ground

Now, that seed that started that tree was FOREIGN to the ground. Although natural to nature, it's still foreign when it grows up big and hangs over the playing field to give the umpire shade. Soooooo, foul ball.

Re: Re: State a rule with an interpretation, Kellerumps!
 

In there an echo in here? ... ;)

Re: Re: Re: State a rule with an interpretation, Kellerumps!
 

Ahh, you know, " Great minds ........"

[Edited by TexBlue on Jun 28th, 2004 at 01:50 PM]

We could solve this whole problem with a chain saw!

Now CecilOne, you know we cannot do that. Too many bleeding
hearts would chain themselves to the tree in protest. :eek: