NFHS Ruling ? Foul Tip Or Is It ? Live or Dead ?

Bandit · #1 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 09:44am

Batter Swings and Foul Tips (goes directly to) the ball to the catchers glove it thens richochets to the chest protector and the cathers gathers or catches the ball before it hits the ground. Foul Ball ? Foul Tip ? Ball Still Alive ?

whiskers_ump · #2 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 09:56am

"Batter Swings and Foul Tips (goes directly to) the ball to the catchers glove it thens richochets to the chest protector and the cathers gathers or catches the ball before it hits the ground. Foul Ball ? Foul Tip ? Ball Still Alive ?

Foul tip and catch.

Bandit · #3 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 10:45am

Could a runner still be allowed to steal on this pitch. Live ball ?

Dakota · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 10:46am

Quote:

Originally posted by whiskers_ump
"Batter Swings and Foul Tips (goes directly to) the ball to the catchers glove it thens richochets to the chest protector and the cathers gathers or catches the ball before it hits the ground. Foul Ball ? Foul Tip ? Ball Still Alive ?

Foul tip and catch.

Careful, Glen.

It is a foul tip and a strike, but not a catch for an out (unless it is strike 3). Live ball.

It is a foul tip because it hit the glove first and then was caught by the catcher.

It would be a foul ball (and a dead ball) if it hit the catcher's equipment first. It may not be caught for an out in this case.

Dakota · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 10:46am

Quote:

Originally posted by Bandit
Could a runner still be allowed to steal on this pitch. Live ball ?

Yes to both.

Bandit · #6 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 10:52am

Dakota writes : It would be a foul ball (and a dead ball) if it hit the catcher's equipment first. It may not be caught for an out in this case.

I am being told that in NFHS 05 rules that if the batter hittes the ball and it goes directly to the catchers chest protector and then she catches it....it is an out as a caught foul ball. This being due to them removing the height requirement on foul balls.

Steve M · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 11:35am

Bandit -

Check the 2005 Fed Case Book, Play 2.25.1 Situation B. It reads:
"A pitch touches the bat, and without touching the catcher's hand or mitt, strikes the catcher's equipment, body, or the umpire. It the rebounds into the catcher's hands. RULING: This is not a foul tip. Such a ball becomes dead when it strikes the catcher's equipment, body, or umpire. 2-25-1g"

So, the ball that would be a foul tip, if if met the definition, is just another foul when it does not meet the definition.

whiskers_ump · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 12:32pm

Bandit wrote:

"Batter Swings and Foul Tips (goes directly to) the ball to the catchers glove it thens richochets to the chest protector and the cathers gathers or catches the ball before it hits the ground. Foul Ball ? Foul Tip ? Ball Still Alive ?"

Rule 2.25 Foul Ball, Tip.

NFHS Case Play: pitch touches the bat of B2, it goes directly to
the catcher's glove then caroms against her protector and rebounds into
her hand or glove.

Ruling: This is a foul tip and a catch, ball remains live.

I thought my original post stated this. Did not mention the word
"out" since I did not know how many strikes batter had.

Dakota · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 12:46pm

Glen,

My caution was not that your response was incorrect (it wasn't) but that it might be misconstrued as meaning OUT. I know you didn't say OUT, but to some a catch is an out.

whiskers_ump · #10 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 12:49pm

GOTCHA

Thought I worded original correctly, but you had me
wondering.

IRISHMAFIA · #11 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 02:02pm

Quote:

Originally posted by whiskers_ump
GOTCHA

Thought I worded original correctly, but you had me
wondering.

The original statement was redundant. If the catcher doesn't catch the ball, it couldn't be a foul tip.

And if the catcher was wearing #22, you would have a......

Bandit · #12 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 02:51pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve M
Bandit -

Check the 2005 Fed Case Book, Play 2.25.1 Situation B. It reads:
"A pitch touches the bat, and without touching the catcher's hand or mitt, strikes the catcher's equipment, body, or the umpire. It the rebounds into the catcher's hands. RULING: This is not a foul tip. Such a ball becomes dead when it strikes the catcher's equipment, body, or umpire. 2-25-1g"

So, the ball that would be a foul tip, if if met the definition, is just another foul when it does not meet the definition.

Ok, This ruling has been changed for the 2005 season. And when the committee in charge of making sure old rulings from the case book were removed(rule 5.1.1 D #2)this one was missed. I believe you will find this and a couple of others from rule # 5 that have not been ommited and were left in by mistake. I am from Indiana and we have not yet received our 2005 rule books so I cannot go directly to it and look for the rule. But please take a moment and look at the front of I believe your 05 rule book and look at the new changes and plays mentioned there.

With NFHS taking the height rule out of the equation would you agree that when a foul ball is hit off of the catchers gear and still controlled this should be an out ? Off of the umpires gear, no. I have been asked to think of it this way....from the past...if a player turned to bunt and fouled the ball straight up, over the batter head, and it came to be trapped between the catchers mitt and chest protector and she then demonstrated control of the ball with her mit or bare hand...didn't we have an out for a foul ball ? So if you take the height requirement out, shouldn't we have an out for the ball that knows go directly from the bat to the protector and is then caught ?

Dakota · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 03:32pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Bandit
With NFHS taking the height rule out of the equation would you agree that when a foul ball is hit off of the catchers gear and still controlled this should be an out ? Off of the umpires gear, no. I have been asked to think of it this way....from the past...if a player turned to bunt and fouled the ball straight up, over the batter head, and it came to be trapped between the catchers mitt and chest protector and she then demonstrated control of the ball with her mit or bare hand...didn't we have an out for a foul ball ? So if you take the height requirement out, shouldn't we have an out for the ball that knows go directly from the bat to the protector and is then caught ?

You're looking at this the wrong way, IMO. The "higher" phrase was removed because it was redundant, not because they were changing what was and is a foul tip and a foul ball. The operative requirement is "directly from the bat..." A ball that goes straight up is not going directly from the bat to anywhere except the top of its flight path.

Definitionally, a batted ball that goes directly from the bat to the catcher's equipment and is caught is a foul ball. (Unless they completely deleted item g. from the definitions while they were removing the "higher..." phrase).

Bandit · #14 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 04:00pm

Definitionally, a batted ball that goes directly from the bat to the catcher's equipment and is caught is a foul ball. (Unless they completely deleted item g. from the definitions while they were removing the "higher..." phrase). [/B][/QUOTE]

Agreed. But I understand it to mean that this ball if caught off of the catchers equipment will or can result in the batter being called out.

Steve M · #15 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 24, 2005, 04:44pm

"Agreed. But I understand it to mean that this ball if caught off of the catchers equipment will or can result in the batter being called out."

Bandit,
From the RULING in the Case Book - no this is not a catch & out. It is a dead ball. Reread what I quoted from the case book earlier.