Another how to handle it

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Insane Blue

The fielder must maintain possession of the ball whenever they go to the ground. Whether it be from laying out to make a catch or from a hard slide like you explained.

So, the first baseman fields a ground ball far to her right. She turns and races to the white bag and tags it. Her momentum carries her forward and she collides with the batter-runner as she crosses the orange bag. The collision causes the first baseman to fall to the ground and drop the ball out of her glove.

It sounds to me as if you would call the BR safe here. That would be wrong. In fact, it would be wrong to call the BR safe if the collision causes the first baseman to drop the ball even before she hit the ground.

As others have said, catches and tags are treated differently when it comes to releases of the ball.

[Insane Blue]

Originally Posted by Manny A

So, the first baseman fields a ground ball far to her right. She turns and races to the white bag and tags it. Her momentum carries her forward and she collides with the batter-runner as she crosses the orange bag. The collision causes the first baseman to fall to the ground and drop the ball out of her glove.

It sounds to me as if you would call the BR safe here. That would be wrong. In fact, it would be wrong to call the BR safe if the collision causes the first baseman to drop the ball even before she hit the ground.

As others have said, catches and tags are treated differently when it comes to releases of the ball.

Okay on a play like this their is an exception since the fielder was never given the chance to release the ball due to the collision after the force out.

[Insane Blue]

Originally Posted by okla21fan

the thought process that 'possession' must be maintained from hitting the ground (as compared to maintaining possession from the hard slide) If the 'contact from the slide' did not make the defense lose possession of the ball' then you have an out. Even though the movements after the tag was applied and the contact with the ground caused the defense to lose possession.

I will agree to disagree with you. in this type of play the fielder must maintain control of the ball after hitting the ground.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Insane Blue

The fielder must maintain possession of the ball whenever they go to the ground. Whether it be from laying out to make a catch or from a hard slide like you explained.

That's isn't right. As noted, the moment the player takes possession of the ball, the forced runner is out. There is no "continuation" or "finishing" of the play required.

[okla21fan]

Originally Posted by Insane Blue

in this type of play the fielder must maintain control of the ball after hitting the ground.

you are mis-applying the requirements for a legal tag then. The impetus of the fielder losing control/possession of the ball while applying a tag must come from the offensive player and their slide, not from the after effect of that contact/slide. there is no requirement for the 'continuation' or subsequent actions by the fielder. (whether under control or not)

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Insane Blue

Okay on a play like this their is an exception since the fielder was never given the chance to release the ball due to the collision after the force out.

Rule cite please? I see no exception in the book that reads anything at all like this. From what rule or rule exception do you derive this opinion?

[UmpireErnie]

IB

The concept of "voluntary release" where a fielder must hold on to the ball when falling to the ground or running into a fence or teammate has to do with determining if a legal catch has been made.

Outfielder catches fly ball on the run takes three more strides and collides with teammate or fence and ball comes loose. No catch.

This would apply to a thrown ball as well. Ground ball to F5 playing deep. F5 makes long throw to F3 that F3 has to stretch for. F3 catches ball in time with toe touching bag then falls to ground and the impact with the ground dislodges the ball. BR safe because F3 did not complete the catch of the thrown ball.

But this concept does not carry over into tagging a player with the ball. The fielder is already in possession of the ball, there is no catch to complete. So long as she maintains possession of the ball during the tag what happens afterward does not matter. Assuming the runner is off base and in jeopardy its a legal tag and the runner is out.

[EsqUmp]

Interesting discussion on catch/no catch. A good place to start is the definitions.

"A catch is a legally caught ball, which occurs when the fielder catches a batted, pitched or thrown ball with the hand(s) or glove/mitt." Notice that batted, pitched or thrown ball are all grouped together. That implies there is no difference in how to rule on a catch / not catch.

"It is not a catch if a fielder...falls to the ground and drops the ball (implying that it was originally securely held) as a result of the collision or falling to the ground."

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Interesting discussion on catch/no catch. A good place to start is the definitions.

"A catch is a legally caught ball, which occurs when the fielder catches a batted, pitched or thrown ball with the hand(s) or glove/mitt." Notice that batted, pitched or thrown ball are all grouped together. That implies there is no difference in how to rule on a catch / not catch.

"It is not a catch if a fielder...falls to the ground and drops the ball (implying that it was originally securely held) as a result of the collision or falling to the ground."

And catch/no catch has nothing to do with whether a ball is possessed at the time of a tag or after a collision. These are two different animals.

Considering voluntary release after a tag, collision, and fall is just as out of place as it would be in this situation:

High fly to CF is caught, apparently. R1, seeing no one covering 2nd makes a break... CF, seeing the same thing also makes a break for it. They collide near 2nd base and the ball rolls free.

No catch? Batter runner now safe?

No, of course not.

[Insane Blue]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Interesting discussion on catch/no catch. A good place to start is the definitions.

"A catch is a legally caught ball, which occurs when the fielder catches a batted, pitched or thrown ball with the hand(s) or glove/mitt." Notice that batted, pitched or thrown ball are all grouped together. That implies there is no difference in how to rule on a catch / not catch.

"It is not a catch if a fielder...falls to the ground and drops the ball (implying that it was originally securely held) as a result of the collision or falling to the ground."

The same applies to a tag play that has a collision the fielder must maintain possession of the ball.

[Insane Blue]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

And catch/no catch has nothing to do with whether a ball is possessed at the time of a tag or after a collision. These are two different animals.

Considering voluntary release after a tag, collision, and fall is just as out of place as it would be in this situation:

High fly to CF is caught, apparently. R1, seeing no one covering 2nd makes a break... CF, seeing the same thing also makes a break for it. They collide near 2nd base and the ball rolls free.

No catch? Batter runner now safe?

No, of course not.

No Batter Runner out as possession was maintained after the catch and the tag play would constitute a separate play by CF. R1 would be safe as CF did not maintain possession of the ball after the collision.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Way too much supposition and cross-rule application.

Speaking ASA

Voluntary release is not required at any time if the umpire has determined the fielder had demonstrated possession of the ball.

On a tag, if the umpire determines the player has possession of the ball at the time of the tag, the runner would be out if the situation called for that ruling.

When touching a base for the purpose of effecting a force out, putting the BR out at 1B or on a live ball appeal, if the umpire determines the player has possession of the ball at the time that player contacts the base, the runner would be out if the situation called for that ruling.

On a catch, the defender must hold the ball in his/her hands and/or glove long enough to demonstrate control and/or the ability to voluntarily release the ball.

AT NO POINT is the defender required to "complete" a tag or play in order for an out to be called.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I truly hate to bash you on two simultaneous threads... but you continue to demonstrate that to you the rulebook is a guide, rather than a set of rules. Find a clinic, a mentor, whatever. Don't make stuff up to suit your personal set of desires on the field.

While you're at it... find us all the rule that says, "4.1.3 B - If the base umpire doesn't like the "level of contact" he may call an out, especially if a former friend of his hurt her ankle in a similar play." Luckily for those of us who actually care to check - the rulebook spells this out for us. If you have malicious contact (key word: MALICE), call an out. But to say flat out that you DON'T have malicious contact, but are going to call an out anyway??? Again, you do the entire profession a disservice.

First, I really don't give a rats tail end about your opinion. Now maybe you should read the rulebook, specifically the rules 8-6-13.

8-6-13 The runner does not slide legally and causes illegal contact and/or illegally alters the actions of a fielder making an immediate play on her. Runners are never required to slide, but if they slide the slide shall be legal.

Then refer to rule 2-52-1 A legal slide may be either head first or feet first. If a runner slides feet first, at least one leg and buttock must be on the ground. If the runner slides, the runner the runners hands or feet must be within the reach of the base when the slide is completed.


The key part of this is at least one leg and buttock MUST be in contact with the ground. The runner had not gotten to the ground when the contact with the catcher occured.

Now as for your assinine comments about my opinion. I persoanlly have a major problem with people who think they are the only person who knows anything about anything. You are acting EXACLY LIKE that person. You do not know me, you have never met me, but tyou sure seem to think you know all about me and my level of training. I don't pretend to know everything, but based on your comments I should just kiss your a$$ because you are the only person who knows everything about every rule in the book.

I don't know your level of experience, but I have talked to several umpires I know, including several that work high level college ball, as well as HS. They seem to agree based on the discussion that the runner should have been called out even if the contact was not malicious.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

The key part of this is at least one leg and buttock MUST be in contact with the ground. The runner had not gotten to the ground when the contact with the catcher occured.

If you feel you need to change the story around to make the situation match your opinion... fine. You said nothing about an illegal slide. You said you wanted to rule them out because the contact was too hard and an old friend of yours hurt their leg in a slide that was too hard. Which is idiocy. If the slide was illegal - it's a completely different situation. By all means, rule them out for sliding illegally. Do NOT rule them out because you didn't like the level of contact (your words, sir).

you sure seem to think you know all about me and my level of training. I don't pretend to know everything, but based on your comments I should just kiss your a$$ because you are the only person who knows everything about every rule in the book.

I don't know you. I can only base my opinion of you on your own statements. You (in multiple threads) stated you wanted to make rulings because of your own personal feelings of fairness. That kind of umpire has no business on the field, and only makes matters more difficult for the real umpires that follow you.

No need to kiss my backside - personal kudos from you will do nothing for me. You DO need to crack open a rulebook - I base this solely on your own erroneous statements about what proper rulings should be.

I don't know everything - I participate here to learn. You should too. Especially if you can be cured of your desire to be that umpire the rest of us constantly have to clean up after.

[CecilOne]

Time for you two to take it offline.
This forum as no room for or acceptance of personal insults.