Foul tip

[MD Longhorn]

Thought E was true.

Ball hit directly to catcher's mitt, bounces up, fumbled a bit by F2, caught by F1... whaddayahave?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Thought E was true.

Ball hit directly to catcher's mitt, bounces up, fumbled a bit by F2, caught by F1... whaddayahave?

Foul ball. ASA Definitions - FOUL BALL - G.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Foul ball. ASA Definitions - FOUL BALL - G.

I don't have my book here ... can you quote G for me?

And if it's foul ... is it foul and caught? An out... with runners needing to return if they left before the ball hit the catcher? if so, the smark catcher would, on a routine foul tip, bobble it on purpose right on out to the pitcher and let F1 catch it. A stealing baserunner would be a dead duck. This can't be right.

[Dakota]

No, not an out. Just a foul ball. It is an odd-duck rule that goes against the general bobbled-ball-caught-by-another-fielder definition of a catch.

Here it is:

FOUL BALL: A batted ball that:
G. Goes directly from the bat to any part of the catcher’s body or equipment and is caught by another fielder.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Dakota

No, not an out. Just a foul ball. It is an odd-duck rule that goes against the general bobbled-ball-caught-by-another-fielder definition of a catch.

Here it is:

But the foul tip rule separates straight-to-glove from straight-to-body/equipment. A ball that goes straight to the catcher's equipment and is caught is not a foul tip either.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

But the foul tip rule separates straight-to-glove from straight-to-body/equipment.

Is the catcher's hand/glove not part of the player's body/equipment?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Is the catcher's hand/glove not part of the player's body/equipment?

No. Not with regards to the average everyday run of the mill foul-tip. Forget the deflection to another player... and look at the normal case:

A) ball goes from bat, directly to glove, and is caught.
B) ball goes from bat, directly to mask, falls, and is caught.

We treat those differently, don't we --- so why the assumption that the cases are suddenly the same if the person catching the ball is not F2?