Slow Pitch - Foul Tip?

[Linknblue]

The ASA rule book says "sharply or directly" to the catcher's hands. I interpret this as being "straight" back with no perceptible direction change at all. Anything that changes direction that I can see is a foul ball.

Is my interpetation too strict? I've never seen one go "straight back" in slowpitch....they always have a slight change in direction.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Linknblue

The ASA rule book says "sharply or directly" to the catcher's hands. I interpret this as being "straight" back with no perceptible direction change at all. Anything that changes direction that I can see is a foul ball.

Is my interpetation too strict? I've never seen one go "straight back" in slowpitch....they always have a slight change in direction.

For SP, I look at it as "as directly as is possible in SP." The rule used to be that a foul tip was a foul ball hit to the catcher that was no higher than the batter's head. Rather than letting the height of the batter govern whether or not it was a foul tip, ASA, in my opinion, changed the rule so that umpires could "use common sense." If it bloops, it's a foul ball (and out, if caught). If the catcher had to make an amazing, diving leap, ring 'em. If it goes straight back to the catcher, foul tip.

In 15 years, I've only seen maybe 4 actual foul tips.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Linknblue

The ASA rule book says "sharply or directly" to the catcher's hands. I interpret this as being "straight" back with no perceptible direction change at all. Anything that changes direction that I can see is a foul ball.

Is my interpetation too strict? I've never seen one go "straight back" in slowpitch....they always have a slight change in direction.

Yes, it is. The ONLY requirement is that the ball go sharply and directly from the bat to the catcher's hands/glove/mitt and is caught. There is no mention of change of direction. If there is, that still does not necessarily make it a foul ball. If there is a perceptable "hump" or arc off the bat and is caught by the catcher, it is an out.

[mcrowder]

The rule says directly to the catcher's mitt... so what do you look for? The catcher's mitt.

If she had to move it to catch it, it's an out.

If she didn't, assuming no VERY visible loop, it's not.

I agree that in slowpitch this is rare (honestly, I don't remember one, but I do maybe 10 SP games a year vs 75-100 FP). See it all day long in FP though.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

The rule used to be that a foul tip was a foul ball hit to the catcher that was no higher than the batter's head.

That was not the rule at all. The "higher than the batter's head" would make what was otherwise a foul tip into a catch for an out, but not the other way around. Perhaps this misunderstanding is why ASA changed the rule. Or, maybe they were just following NFHS (which changed it first).

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Dakota

That was not the rule at all. The "higher than the batter's head" would make what was otherwise a foul tip into a catch for an out, but not the other way around. Perhaps this misunderstanding is why ASA changed the rule. Or, maybe they were just following NFHS (which changed it first).

That's what I meant. Wasn't that what I said? Did I brain fart this morning?

[HawkeyeCubP]

I just had my first SP foul tip three weeks ago - only one I've seen in going on 5 years. I was caught off gaurd, and I'll admit there was a slight delay before I dug the signal out of my memory bank and used it (I only work SP).

[greymule]

There were two problems with "higher than the batter's head." The first was that it wasn't a determining criterion and was thus not necessary. The rule made perfect sense without it.

The second was that it was inaccurate and thus misleading. A spinning bloop that F2 dove to her right to catch was obviously an out, even if it hadn't gone higher than the batter's head. And a pitch that was over the batter's head but was swung at and nicked directly back into F2's outstretched glove was also clearly not an out but a foul tip.

Had this one last Sunday in the district junior college FP tournament in Georgetown, Delaware:

The batter swung and nicked a 1-2 pitch, and the ball went directly off the catcher's hand and lodged behind her chest protector. The catcher reached under her protector and plucked the ball out. The offensive coach immediately yelled that it wasn't a foul tip, because the ball had to go directly into the hand or glove. Of course, he was right that it wasn't a foul tip, but for the wrong reason.

In certain SP, outs on fouls to the catcher may be more common than you might think. Especially at high levels, some catchers do not squat behind the plate but instead, to give the umpire a better view, stand directly behind the batter's box opposite the batter, leaving the plate wide open to view. (Remember that the softball box is as wide as both batter's boxes.) In that position, catchers stand a much better chance of snagging fouls for outs.

[NCASAUmp]

True, but as I said - in 15 years, I've only seen maybe 4 actual foul tips. I'm still a bit lost as to how my previous statement was incorrect. My understanding of the old rule is exactly as you stated it. Maybe I just couldn't hablo very well today.

Regardless, the rule has changed, and I think it changed for the better. It makes more sense now, and I am glad for that.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

True, but as I said - in 15 years, I've only seen maybe 4 actual foul tips. I'm still a bit lost as to how my previous statement was incorrect. My understanding of the old rule is exactly as you stated it. Maybe I just couldn't hablo very well today.

Regardless, the rule has changed, and I think it changed for the better. It makes more sense now, and I am glad for that.

The only thing which changed about this rule is that the "above the head cannot be a foul tip" caveat was removed. Nothing else has changed.