Definition of a catch

The fielder must demonstrate control of the ball including grasping it firmly in his hand or glove. Merely trapping it against the ground is not control, it must be held. It is irrelevant if the ball is touching the ground on a thrown ball.

Using the scenario above what about this one - ball laying on the ground and 1B reaches down with bare hand to pick up the ball. His hand is completely around the ball with fingers wrapped but his hand is on top of the ball and it's still on the ground.

Do you call the out if he raises his hand with the ball cleanly?

Hand or glove, if he picks it up clean, then call the out. If he regrasps it in any manner then no out.

The title of this thread, "Definition of a Catch" is a bit of a misnomer, since the definition specifically applies to a pitch or a batted ball in flight.

For any other thrown ball, the term "catch" is used loosely to also apply to the pick-up or to the trapping (bad choice of words by FED) of a low throw which has touched the ground.

How about this one:

Runner on 3rd with a big lead, F5 playing in. F5 dives for a line drive, gloves it, tags the runner off his base, then hits the ground whereupon the ball pops out of his glove. Contact with the ground (and not the tag) caused the ball to pop out.

Is it a catch (of the batted ball)?

Is the runner out on the tag?

Maybe if I actually saw the play I might think differently but I believe it would be no catch, no tag. Doesn't seem like he would have had the opportunity to show control long enough for a catch.

Of course that's why I sit in the dugout and not wear blue.

I agree with you it is not a catch of the batted ball. See 2-6-9-1: "...The catch of a fly ball by a fielder is not completed until the continuing action of the catch is completed..." There is no doubt that hitting the ground after diving for a line drive (fly ball) is part of the continuing action of the catch.

But what about the tag? 8-4-2-h says the runner is out when he is touched by a live ball (or the hand or glove with the live ball in it) securely held by a fielder. It also says the ball is not securely held if it is dropped or juggled after the runner is touched. (Emphasis added)

No catch/no tag.

If the fielder dives gloves the ball and gets to his knees and then reaches to tag the runner and then falls, hits the ground and the ball comes loose....I would make the call as catch and tag DP.
If this is a sit. where he dives , gloves and tags in the same motion, and then hits the ground ....I would have no catch/ no tag. YES OR NO ?????

Polo - I can see that. He had enough time to show control (as long as he wasn't bobbling it) and make the tag. But as we have all said if it's one motion then no catch / no tag.

AGREED

Just for debate sake, could you have a tag but because the ground caused the ball to come out have no catch?

Dawg Man - I'm going to say because you can't have a tag without possession. If the runner is out then it's because the fielder has shown possession which is an out. Now if he knocks it down and then picks it up to get the tag then yes.

The real umps will probably do a better job of explaining that.

quote:

Originally posted by dawg-man:
Just for debate sake, could you have a tag but because the ground caused the ball to come out have no catch?

Short answer, no.
A tag, in FED, requires pocession before,during and after. A catch requires the same. If a catch and tag are part of continuous play then you can't have one without the other.

A check with a local PBUC evaluator for the pro viewpoint produced this:

"Although this isn't covered in either the rule book or blue book, were it to happen during evaluations I would advise our umpires to rule that the catch was considered complete upon the tag of the runner...the intervening action, the tag, negated the need foe the voluntary release (which we do not always require).

"If there were enough time lapse to distinctly see that the drop was caused by the ground and that the ball was secure at the time of the tag, we'd have a double play. However, it the real world and in real time I'd guess we'd have an out on the caught on the line drive and no tag on the runner for one out."

I would add that this flies in the face of what I was taught by Jim Evans that a consideration of firm and secure possession is whether or not the fielder has control of his body. In this scenario, obviousy the fielder did not have such control.

My personal ruling is no catch, no tag.

Jimmy:
I would submit that the PBUC evaluator is wrong. I suggest asking either Jim E., Hunter or Rick R. Some of the evaluators aren't umpires at all.

I agree that the evaluator's opinion is incorrect. However, ALL PBUC evaluators were pro umpires and worked up to AAA ball.

At times PBUC issues disagreements with common practice, but this isn't one of them. This was one evaluator's opinion.

I speak with Jim from time to time, but would not waste a goodwill contact on this issue. I know his answer and I have already posted it.