Never saw this before....

robbie · #1 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 10:26am

In NSA, clearly a foul ball (no catch).

"A batted ball that travels directly from the bat not higher than the batter's head to any part of the catcher's body or equipment other than the hand(s) or glove/mit is a foul ball is dead and is not a foul tip"

Furthermore............

"A batted ball that goes higher than the batter's head is a foul ball. It is not a foul tip. If legally caught, the batter is out."

NSA often leaves gray areas gray, but I think this one is pretty clearly spelled out.

By the way - For those wanting a catch out - Think of this....... You are saying that with less than 2 strikes, a tipped ball back to the catcher that is cought by the glove is only a strike, but if cought by the body, we have an out. Not logical.

mick · #2 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 10:35am

Quote:

Originally Posted by robbie

In NSA, clearly a foul ball (no catch).

"A batted ball that travels directly from the bat not higher than the batter's head to any part of the catcher's body or equipment other than the hand(s) or glove/mit is a foul ball is dead and is not a foul tip"

Furthermore............

"A batted ball that goes higher than the batter's head is a foul ball. It is not a foul tip. If legally caught, the batter is out."

NSA often leaves gray areas gray, but I think this one is pretty clearly spelled out.

By the way - For those wanting a catch out - Think of this....... You are saying that with less than 2 strikes, a tipped ball back to the catcher that is cought by the glove is only a strike, but if cought by the body, we have an out. Not logical.

Okay! Thanks. I don't get out much.

NM FP Ump · #3 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 10:45am

PU's call was right, foul ball. This can't be a foul tip because it did not go directly to the catcher's mitt/hand; it went to the catcher's equipment (assuming she had shin guards over her knees).

Dakota · #4 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 10:53am

Guys, this is a foul ball by rule. ASA 1-FOUL BALL-G; NFHS 2-25-1-g; all others somewhere, I'm sure.

whiskers_ump · #5 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 11:35am

OK, I am the quilty umpire that had the play. Have looked it up, and now
believe that I got the call correct.

This was an excellent game [ending up 1-0 in favor of the team that was on
defense during the questionable play.] I certainly did not want it to effect
the game in any way. Being behind the play, all I saw was catcher take the
ball from her knees. Coach never asked me to get help, [probably should
have on my own, but did not]

CecilOne · #6 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 01:47pm

Besides NSA, which rules care about "higher than the batter's head"?

canump · #7 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 03:40pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Besides NSA, which rules care about "higher than the batter's head"?

our rule book up here north of the border has that wording.

#8 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 12, 2008, 07:55am

Quote:

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Besides NSA, which rules care about "higher than the batter's head"?

DSI - Dixie softball

IRISHMAFIA · #9 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 02:29pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota

Guys, this is a foul ball by rule. ASA 1-FOUL BALL-G; NFHS 2-25-1-g; all others somewhere, I'm sure.

Actually, ASA's definition of Foul Ball does not support a foul ball ruling. However, as previously cited, RS #22 does.

Dakota · #10 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 02:39pm

You mean their goofy grammar? ("another" fielder)?

IRISHMAFIA · #11 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 11, 2008, 06:04pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota

You mean their goofy grammar? ("another" fielder)?

That's not goofy, but quite meaningful. It avoids the argument of a ball coming off the catcher's glove and being caught by another fielder for a "foul tip" or an out.