Catch and Carry

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

He and I looked at each other and said simultaneously "that's not right" when the uncaught ball was sitting on the horizontal fence and judged to be live.

Maybe the fence only made it to 179 degrees.

[agr8zebra]

I emailed a guy on the Nfhs rules comittee, he said catch, then dead ball when the ball in the glove was grounded.

I realize it would be hard to see in a two man crew, maybe a little easies in 3, but still hard.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by agr8zebra

I emailed a guy on the Nfhs rules comittee, he said catch, then dead ball when the ball in the glove was grounded.

I disagree with that ruling. If that's the case, then anytime the ball is in the glove over the fence, and the glove touches something on that side of the fence, it's a dead ball.

For example, a fielder reaches into the stands to catch a foul pop. She makes the catch, and then her glove hits a number of fans' hands and arms as they reached for the ball as well. Or she reaches over the fence and catches the ball, and then her glove contacts something beyond the fence, like the bullpen netting, the back of a bleacher chair, etc, etc.

Are you going to rule a dead ball in those situations? I hope not. And I don't see how you would in this case either.

[agr8zebra]

I would call this one because had she not used dead ball territory to reverse her momentum her whole body would have ended in DBT.

A minor touching of a fan, post, tree limb I would ignore because no advantage was gained by the action. Just like we say in Basketball, Advantage-Disadvantage.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by agr8zebra

I would call this one because had she not used dead ball territory to reverse her momentum her whole body would have ended in DBT.

A minor touching of a fan, post, tree limb I would ignore because no advantage was gained by the action. Just like we say in Basketball, Advantage-Disadvantage.

You'll have to show a case book ruling that convinces me of that "advantage-disadvantage" theory.

It's entirely conceivable that a defensive player can use something on the opposite side of the fence that prevents her from falling completely over. Heck, I've seen in MLB where fans keep players from falling into the stands. If that were to happen in a FED softball game, are you going to rule catch-n-carry then?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

You'll have to show a case book ruling that convinces me of that "advantage-disadvantage" theory.

It's entirely conceivable that a defensive player can use something on the opposite side of the fence that prevents her from falling completely over. Heck, I've seen in MLB where fans keep players from falling into the stands. If that were to happen in a FED softball game, are you going to rule catch-n-carry then?

I'm agreeing with Manny here.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Manny A

You'll have to show a case book ruling that convinces me of that "advantage-disadvantage" theory.

It's entirely conceivable that a defensive player can use something on the opposite side of the fence that prevents her from falling completely over. Heck, I've seen in MLB where fans keep players from falling into the stands. If that were to happen in a FED softball game, are you going to rule catch-n-carry then?

NFHS 5-1-i(d) says exactly that.

Originally Posted by NFHS Softball Rules Book

If a fielder contacts dead ball territory with any part of the body except the foot, she is considered out of play. No play is allowed, and the penalty is applied.

NCAA 9.3 Note 5 says the same thing.

Perhaps ASA is somewhat silent on the topic (or I can't find it ), but I'm not seeing any ambiguity at all in the NFHS (or NCAA) rule.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

NFHS 5-1-i(d) says exactly that.

NCAA 9.3 Note 5 says the same thing.

Perhaps ASA is somewhat silent on the topic (or I can't find it ), but I'm not seeing any ambiguity at all in the NFHS (or NCAA) rule.

And to me, that makes no sense. If anything, the foot being fully in contact with DBT is the definition of leaving playable territory.

And again, have you ever seen the OF touch the top or back of a fence and be ruled out of play?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

NFHS 5-1-i(d) says exactly that.

Well, I just don't believe NFHS had all possible ways a fielder can touch DBT in mind when it came out with this rule. I posed some very plausible scenarios where a fielder touches DBT with her glove after making a catch.

We have a number of fields here where there is netting above the fence to prevent batted/thrown balls from going into adjacent fields or nearby traffic lanes. If a fielder catches a batted ball near the fence, and her momentum causes her to touch the netting with her outstretched glove, technically she has touched DBT. But I wouldn't kill play at that point.

I think the prevailing language is in the main part of 5-1-i:

a fielder, after catching a fair or foul batted ball (fly or line drive), leaves the field of play by stepping with one foot or by falling into a designated deadball area (i.e., bench, dugout, stand/bleacher, etc.).

It doesn't say "by touching" anything in DBT after making the catch.