Legal posseion of the ball for an out?

[bd41flpk]

I just wanted to get a clarification on the rule around the definition of a legal possession of the ball to declare an 'out'? My basic question surrounds the 1st baseman and what is considered 'legal possession' of the ball to determine the 'out'?

Scenario: B/R hits a ground ball to F6 who then throws to F3 for the force and the following scenarios occur (please comment on each):

(1) F3 has possession of the ball in the right hand with the palm of the hand facing down and the ball is on the ground - legal possession? IMHO - No

(2) F3 has the ball lodged in the forearm against the body - legal possession? IMHO - No

(3) F3 has the ball against the body with the glove pressing up against the body with the ball - legal possession? IMHO - Yes

(4) F3 has possession of the ball in the glove hand with the glove facing down and the ball is on the ground - legal possession? IMHO - No

(5) If I have missed any other ares of possession, please feel free to list them in your response?

My need here is of course to determine whether to rule an 'out' as the B/R crosses 1st base and did the ball beat the runner to 1st.

Thanks in advance for the review.

[Dakota]

In a trap situation (ball on the ground, or presumed to be on the ground because it is covered by the glove), the fielder needs to lift the ball prior to the runner reaching the bag. Trapped against the body by an arm, outside of the glove, etc., is the same. In #3, are you saying the ball is IN the glove, or between the outside of the glove and the body?

[BretMan]

Catching a thrown ball doesn't have the same definition and requirements of catching a batted ball for an out. So if the ball happens to be touching the ground at some point while a fielder tries to glove a throw, it doesn't necessarily mean that the fielder won't subsequently demonstrate possession and control.

On these plays, we're not looking for the rule book definition of "a catch", but rather the definition of "a tag". A tag requires that the fielder be holding the ball "securely and firmly in the hand or glove" (to paraphrase the ASA rule).

#1) If the fielder subsequently raises the ball from the ground without having to readjust her grip or bobbling the ball, then the ball was "securely and firmly held".

#2) The ball needs to be in the hand or glove, not the crook of the elbow or pressed against the body by the forearm.

#3) If pressing the glove against the body is what's keeping the ball there, the fielder would still need to demonstrate control by bringing the glove away from the body while holding the ball in the glove (similar to the ball touching the ground in #1).

#4) Same as #1.

Dakota raises a point about the fielder raising the ball up off the ground prior to the batter-runner reaching first base. This is a little bit different than my understanding. For instance, if the fielder had her bare hand wrapped around the ball, hand on top, bottom of the ball touching the ground, then the B/R touched first, then the fielder raised the ball without adjusting or losing her grip and held it secrely, would that not be an out?

I would liken that to a fielder holding the ball in her bare hand and diving toward the base to touch the top of the base with the bottom of the ball. So long as the fielder doesn't lose the secure, firm possession it's still an out.

[Tex]

Per NFHS Case book 2-9-5 Situation C, both #1 and #4 are outs.

This is the same as the umpire saying to the defensive player "Show me the ball" after a tag has been made.

[Dakota]

If I can see possession and control by the bare hand, then the "show me the ball" analogy works. In #4, however, I cannot see control since the glove is covering the ball. The case play you reference takes away all doubt with the description of the play, "F3 secures a thrown ball while it is in contact with the ground and her hand is on top of the ball." In the case play, you see the ball is secure, just touching the ground. In the OP, perhaps the description meant she also had control, but it only said she had possession. The case play does not address a ball hidden by the glove on the ground, and I do not believe you can extrapolate it to mean that.

The difference with the "show me the ball" on a tag (in my view) is that you see the tag; you want the fielder to demonstrate she had secure control at the time of the tag, and you are using loss of the ball during the tag as evidence of no control. With the ball out of sight under the glove, you don't know whether the ball was on the ground or in the glove at the time of the "tag" (of the base), hence "show me the ball" demonstrates nothing, since it is too late. That's my view, anyway.

[BuggBob]

From My game the other night. Cather makes a snow cone catch very near the ground right over the plate, the runner steps on the glove and then the plate. The ball was in the glove, but clearly touched the ground when the runner stepped on the glove. I rule the runner out.