foul ball or strike out

[krobs]

Fed SB Third strike foul tip hits the catcher's glove, deflects off her chest protector, then back into her glove.
Strike out or foul ball????

[JustDHaley]

We have always maintained that if the ball does not go above the catcher's head, it is foul even if she catches it. Really the ump will determine--- does he like you or not..

[Atlanta Blue]

What you described is a foul ball. For it to be a strike, it must go DIRECTLY from the bat to the catcher's glove or hand. If it bounces off anything (including the catcher's chest protector), all you have is a foul.

DeeDee,
Sorry - if we like you or not does not impact on what we see and call...

Dan

[allancru]

foulball

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Atlanta Blue
What you described is a foul ball. For it to be a strike, it must go DIRECTLY from the bat to the catcher's glove or hand. If it bounces off anything (including the catcher's chest protector), all you have is a foul.

DeeDee,
Sorry - if we like you or not does not impact on what we see and call...

Dan

Really? And here I thought it would be the same as ASA. I guess that's one more thing Fed umpires must deal with.

[Rich Ives]

So the softball rule is different than the baseball rule?


I ask because, in baseball, because the tip hit the catcher's glove first, and was subsequently caught, it would be a foul tip, strike three. (Rule 2.00)

[Roger Greene]

Speaking Fed, (and every other softball code I'm aware of) if a pitched ball is struck by the bat, and goes sharp and directly to the hand or mit of F2, and is then legally caught by F2, it is a foul tip, live ball.

In the sitch posted, we have a foul tip. The batted ball went directly to the catchers glove (mit) and was then caught by F2. (see 2-25-2) It doesn't matter that it rebounded off her protector after touching her mit or hand and was then caught.

If it rebounded off her protecctor before touching her hand, it would be a foul ball. (However by interpertation it would not be a caught foul fly unless it was higher than the batter's head)

The difference with this rule in Fed softball and Fed baseball,is that in Fed baseball any fielder may catch the fould tip, as long as it first went directly and sharply from the bat to F2's hand or mit. (see Fed baseball 2-16-2)

Roger Greene

[Edited by Roger Greene on Oct 4th, 2002 at 02:28 PM]

[greymule]

A couple of months ago, we had a discussion on exactly how "not higher than the batter's head" was to be applied. Apparently, it is irrelevant and confusing and should be deleted. It is never the determining factor. Obviously, balls higher than the batter's head could be foul tips (batter swings at a pitch over her head, catcher reaches up over the batter's head, ball goes directly into catcher's glove). Also, most people felt that a ball fouled not sharp and direct but perceptibly slowed and deflected to the side could be "not higher than the batter's head" but still be caught for an out.

Two plays from the ASA case book:

1-58 (FP Only) The batter, with a 1-ball, 1-strike count, bunts the ball in front of the plate. The catcher lunges and catches the ball before it touches the ground. The ball did not go higher than the batter's head, so the umpire rules this a foul tip and returns the batter to the batter's box with a 1-ball, 2-strike count. Ruling: This is not a foul tip, for the ball did not go directly to the catcher's glove from the bat. Because the catcher went to the ball, this should be ruled a legal catch, similar to F3 or F5 making the catch.

All that matters is whether the ball goes sharp and direct to the hand/mitt and is legally caught as opposed to the catcher going to the ball. Of course, in the play above, since the catcher caught the ball in front of the plate, the ball was in fact fair. A fair ball cannot be a foul tip, but the reasoning ASA used is "the catcher went to the ball."

1-59 The ball goes directly from the bat, (a) touches the catcher's glove or hand and then rebounds from the catcher or his equipment, (b) from the bat, strikes the catcher's body, his protective equipment or the umpire. In both cases the ball rebounds into the glove or hand of the catcher and is held. Ruling: In (a) it is a foul tip and a strike, in (b) it is a foul ball. The ball cannot be a foul tip if it first touches anything other than the catcher's glove or hand.

[Atlanta Blue]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA

Really? And here I thought it would be the same as ASA. I guess that's one more thing Fed umpires must deal with.

Mike,

Please see greymule's post below...

There is no difference in this situation between ASA/FED/NCAA.

Dan

[Dakota]

In Fed, as has already been stated, this is a foul tip.
Also in ASA.

For a batted ball to be a foul tip, it must satisfy ALL of the following:

1) Go directly from the bat to the catcher's glove or hands (Fed adds "directly and speedily");
2) Not go higher than the batter's head;
3) Is legally caught by the catcher.

Note the definition does not require that the ball be caught on this initial contact with the glove. What happens between 1) and 3) is irrelevant as long as all three conditions are met.

"Directly from the bat to the catcher's hands or glove" by definition leaves out the case where the catcher's glove goes to the ball. If the catcher had to make a play to catch the ball (e.g. lunge to the side, to the front, etc.), it is not a foul tip, whether the ball goes higher that the batter's head or not.

If in some 3rd world play setup the ball does go higher than the batter's head, but still goes directly from the bat to the glove, it is still not a foul tip, by definition.

[greymule]

ASA and Fed define foul tip almost exactly the same:

ASA: A batted ball that goes directly from the bat, not higher than the batter's head, to the catcher's hand(s) or glove and is legally caught by the catcher.
Fed: . . . a batted ball that goes directly from the bat to the catcher's mitt or hand not higher than the batter's head and is legally caught by the catcher.

Dakota: My Fed 2002 softball rule book does not include "speedily" in the definition. Where do you see that?

According to ASA's case book ruling, the catcher going to the ball is the determining factor in whether the ball went "directly" or not. Therefore, "not over the batter's head" is irrelevant. If on a pitch that resembled anything like a strike the ball was hit over the batter's head, then the catcher would have to go to the ball to catch it. Now there is that one play where the batter foul tips a pitch that's already over her head (not so third-world, either; I've seen it happen more than once). Does ASA include the "not over the batter's head" clause simply to ensure that we call an out in that particular case? Hard to believe.

What if ASA defined a foul tip as "a batted ball that goes directly from the bat to the catcher's mitt or hand and is legally caught by the catcher"? Except for that one "third-world" play, what play would we call any differently?

[Skahtboi]

Originally posted by JustDHaley
Really the ump will determine--- does he like you or not..

That has to be the absolute dumbest and least informed statements I have ever heard on this board!

Scott

[JustDHaley]

Okay, do you live in Savannah, Scott? I am on both sides, I promise and I also know that here, the blue calls what sometimes gives him more a warm fuzzy than the other. I have never been accused of stupidity or ignorance. Let's all be realistic. Right or wrong, it is a game we have to play here. I don't argue with blue because I know the rules that we must play by(real and political/good ole' boy). And it's okay. Mostly, they are very, very fair. And you know, being human, we all make mistakes, so.... Hell, I certainly have. I have been playing/coaching/PUing for the past 25 years. Uninformed, I don't think so. Truthful, yes, though obviously, you don't like it.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Atlanta Blue

Mike,

Please see greymule's post below...

There is no difference in this situation between ASA/FED/NCAA.

Dan

Dan,

I am aware of that which is why I responded in the manner I did after the posts previous to mine, including yours (above), noted this was a foul ball as opposed to a foul tip.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by greymule
Dakota: My Fed 2002 softball rule book does not include "speedily" in the definition. Where do you see that?

In the 2001 book - the one I had handy. Sorry.

According to ASA's case book ruling, the catcher going to the ball is the determining factor in whether the ball went "directly" or not. Therefore, "not over the batter's head" is irrelevant. If on a pitch that resembled anything like a strike the ball was hit over the batter's head, then the catcher would have to go to the ball to catch it. Now there is that one play where the batter foul tips a pitch that's already over her head (not so third-world, either; I've seen it happen more than once). Does ASA include the "not over the batter's head" clause simply to ensure that we call an out in that particular case? Hard to believe.

What if ASA defined a foul tip as "a batted ball that goes directly from the bat to the catcher's mitt or hand and is legally caught by the catcher"? Except for that one "third-world" play, what play would we call any differently?

I'll admit it is hard to cook up a case where the "over the batter's head" is the only condition of the three that is not met.

Also, this part of the rule is a constant nuisance with coaches, since they think that if it is below the batter's head, it must be a foul tip.

They way I call this, if the catcher is moving to the pitch, and the tipped ball goes into her mitt, then it is a foul tip. If, on the other hand, she is moving to the batted ball, then it is a caught fly ball.

Suppose a high pitch that is a pitcher's error - i.e. the catcher was not set up for the high pitch, so the catcher reaches up / stands up in reaction to the pitch. The batter swings at the pitch above her head and tips the ball, which goes directly into the catcher's mitt.

Foul tip or catch?

By rule, catch, since it was above the batter's head.