ASA Slow Pitch Foul Tip

[drh898]

I play Senior Slow Pitch and on a foul tip where the ball does not go over the batters head and is caught by the catcher the batter is out.

Last night, while umpiring a men's (not Senior) slow pitch game the same situation occured and I called the batter out. It was appealed, saying that the ball must go over the batter head for it to be an out. I consulted my fellow umpire, who has been working these slow pitch leagues for quite awhile and he said that, yes, it does need to go over the batters head.

I can't find any reference to this in the ASA rule book except to say that a foul tip is a strike and not an out (except on the third strike). A foul tip is a ball the goes "sharply and directly from the bat into the catcher's glove". In slow pitch I would be hard pressed to say any ball goes "sharply and directly".

Is there such a rule as "it has to go over the batter's head?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by drh898

I play Senior Slow Pitch and on a foul tip where the ball does not go over the batters head and is caught by the catcher the batter is out.

Last night, while umpiring a men's (not Senior) slow pitch game the same situation occured and I called the batter out. It was appealed, saying that the ball must go over the batter head for it to be an out. I consulted my fellow umpire, who has been working these slow pitch leagues for quite awhile and he said that, yes, it does need to go over the batters head.

I can't find any reference to this in the ASA rule book except to say that a foul tip is a strike and not an out (except on the third strike). A foul tip is a ball the goes "sharply and directly from the bat into the catcher's glove". In slow pitch I would be hard pressed to say any ball goes "sharply and directly".

Is there such a rule as "it has to go over the batter's head?

There WAS a rule that defined a foul tip as not going higher than the batter's head. However, this rule was changed in 2006, I believe, and the definition you found is the current, correct rule.

It is entirely possible, but not nearly as likely, to have a foul tip in SP. I call only SP, and I've had maybe 3 actual, honest-to-goodness foul-tips since they changed the rule.

[greymule]

They deleted "not higher than the batter's head" because it was misleading and confusing. The batter's head was actually never the defining criterion. The wording was intended to indicate that if the ball rises over the batter's head, it can't be a foul tip, but it led people to believe that (1) if it didn't rise over the batter's head and F2 caught it, it had to be a foul tip, even though a case play contradicted that notion, and (2) if F2 did catch it over the batter's head, it could not be a foul tip, which is not true. (A batter could swing and nick a pitch over his head, and the ball could go sharp and direct into F2's outstretched glove—an obvious foul tip but still over the batter's head.)

[drh898]

So, you're saying that the rule, "above the head" was taken out of the rule book in 2006 and that, unless it comes sharply and directly off the bat it would be considered a catch and, therefore, an out.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by drh898

So, you're saying that the rule, "above the head" was taken out of the rule book in 2006 and that, unless it comes sharply and directly off the bat it would be considered a catch and, therefore, an out.

Close... Sharply and directly to the catcher's glove or hand AND is caught.

If it goes sharply and directly to the catcher's face, bounces off their forehead and is caught before touching the ground, it's an out, as the ball did not go sharply and directly to the glove or hand.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Close... Sharply and directly to the catcher's glove or hand AND is caught.

If it goes sharply and directly to the catcher's face, bounces off their forehead and is caught before touching the ground, it's an out, as the ball did not go sharply and directly to the glove or hand.

Are you sure about this? If so, I've misunderstood this rule. If the batter nicks the ball and it goes sharply and directly into the catcher's chest protector and then drops into the glove, you're saying you'd have an out, and I've understood it to be a foul ball. Your reading seems more natural, but that doesn't always mean a lot and I like my rule better.
________
How To Roll A Blunt

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by youngump

Are you sure about this? If so, I've misunderstood this rule. If the batter nicks the ball and it goes sharply and directly into the catcher's chest protector and then drops into the glove, you're saying you'd have an out, and I've understood it to be a foul ball. Your reading seems more natural, but that doesn't always mean a lot and I like my rule better.

The word I highlighted is the clincher. If it goes to the chest protector first, did it go directly to the hand or glove? No, it went directly to the chest protector. It just ended up in the glove or hand.

I've got a caught fly ball for an out.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

The word I highlighted is the clincher. If it goes to the chest protector first, did it go directly to the hand or glove? No, it went directly to the chest protector. It just ended up in the glove or hand.

I've got a caught fly ball for an out.

In NFHS if it hits the catcher without hitting the hand or glove first it's a dead ball so therefore it can't be caught for an out. 5-1-1-d-2

What's the ASA rules say?

(FYI the baseball rules say it's not a catch if it's a rebound.)

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

In NFHS if it hits the catcher without hitting the hand or glove first it's a dead ball so therefore it can't be caught for an out. 5-1-1-d-2

What's the ASA rules say?

(FYI the baseball rules say it's not a catch if it's a rebound.)

There's no such stipulation in ASA.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

In NFHS if it hits the catcher without hitting the hand or glove first it's a dead ball so therefore it can't be caught for an out. 5-1-1-d-2

What's the ASA rules say?

(FYI the baseball rules say it's not a catch if it's a rebound.)

They're ambiguous enough to get to either rule.
________
new condos in Pattaya

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by youngump

They're ambiguous enough to get to either rule.

How is the ASA rule ambiguous? Either it went sharply and directly to the catcher's glove or hand without a perceptible arc AND is caught, or it didn't.

[IRISHMAFIA]

This is heading down a path Bretman and I encountered on another board.

ASA refers to "sharply and directly" on when addressing a foul tip. ASA only refers to "directly" when addressing a foul ball which first touches a part of the catcher or equipment other than the hand(s) or glove.

By the way the rule presently reads, the only time this happens and it is a foul ball is when a fielder other than the catcher catches the ball in flight off the catcher. The discussion is if it is to be called as youngump notes, why would ASA include "another fielder" in the rule declaring the ball foul (Rule 1 - Definitions Foul Ball)?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

This is heading down a path Bretman and I encountered on another board.

ASA refers to "sharply and directly" on when addressing a foul tip. ASA only refers to "directly" when addressing a foul ball which first touches a part of the catcher or equipment other than the hand(s) or glove.

By the way the rule presently reads, the only time this happens and it is a foul ball is when a fielder other than the catcher catches the ball in flight off the catcher. The discussion is if it is to be called as youngump notes, why would ASA include "another fielder" in the rule declaring the ball foul (Rule 1 - Definitions Foul Ball)?

Don't have my book with me now, so I can't look that up. But just to be clear on what you're saying, in the play I posted (sharp and direct to the catchers chest then into the glove (or out into the air and caught by another fielder): Foul fly ball for an out in ASA.
And NFHS has a statement to fix this so in NFHS both variants foul ball.
________
Vaporizer Video Review

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

There's no such stipulation in ASA.

NCAA SB is the same as NFHS and baseball. Is ASA really out of touch with the rest of the world?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

How is the ASA rule ambiguous? Either it went sharply and directly to the catcher's glove or hand without a perceptible arc AND is caught, or it didn't.

The rule is not ambiguous about what a foul tip is. The rule is ambiguous about whether a ball fouled off the catcher can still be caught for an out. [Though I readily concede your reading is more natural, someone who thought the rule was the other way wouldn't be convinced they were wrong by reading it.]
________
Og Kush Seeds