Just chewed on an umpire

Art. 1... A foul is a batted ball:
a. which settles on foul territory between home and first base or between home and third base; or
b. that bounds past first or third base on or over foul territory; or
c. that first falls on foul territory beyond first or third base; or
d. that, while on or over foul territory, touches the person of an umpire or a player or any object foreign to the natural ground; or
e. that touches the ground after inadvertently being declared foul by an umpire.

In the case of a catch down the line I believe that the touching of the player meets the definition in d . But this is obviously not a dead ball and playing action continues.

2.6.1 says
Art. 1... A batted or thrown ball is in flight until it has touched the ground or some object other than a fielder.

The ball is fair or foul based on its location as touched, are you suggesting in your rule argument above that if the fielder drops the ball you would rule it fair?

Foul ball, that was caught. Simple as that.

....no brainer, foul !

So are implying that, an umpire would signal and call "foul" on such a catch? I think not..

...yes, he would signal foul, then declare a catch for an out ! However, training in different parts of the country now are starting to go away from such formalities of signalling it a foul ball and simply signalling it as a catch. Either way the test questions and answer were accurate.

Sometimes custom and accepted opinion make the written OBR rules wrong. This is one of those situations. The good news is that it doesn't matter.

Umpires have a signal for foul ball; it is the same as the signal for dead ball or time. Clearly umpire cannot signal foul in this situation because the ball is still live.

An umpire can signal fair by pointing, but he won't do that in this case, not just because the ball isn't fair, but also because to do so would imply that the ball wasn't caught.

The umpire should simply signal the catch. If there isn't a catch, he can signal foul or point fair.

Jaksa/Roder list specific criteria for judging whether a ball is fair or foul, and they are slightly different to the OBR book. A ball caught in foul territory fits neither the definition of fair or foul. In fact it is simply a caught fly ball. OBR calls the ball foul, and then in the case of a catch makes a special exception to the general rule that the ball is dead following a foul. That approach just doesn't fit in with umpiring mechanics, and that's why OBR is "wrong".

The question of whether the ball was caught in fair or foul territory doesn't matter. The batter is out, the ball is live, and runners must retouch in either case.

jjk, if you accept J/R, the answer to the T/F question is indeed False, but your contention that the ball is fair isn't actually right either. It is neither a fair or foul ball.

j2h6, your claim that the umpire would signal foul and then signal the catch is wrong. Signaling foul kills the play, and its been that way for the 50 years that I've been watching baseball.

Actually, the correct answer to the question as quoted is neither true nor false.

The correct answer is, "Yes."

So whoever wrote the test should repeat third grade English.

3FG, you certainly did a much better job of explaining than I did.....when I stated the umpire would signal foul, then signal a catch, I should have stated that he would simply point his arm toward foul territory, not come up w/ both arms showing foul ball to all in the stadium, then signal catch, thus, stating the ball was caught for an out in foul territory and all that you stated after the fact to be true that it was a live ball, yada, yada, yada.....this is really not that difficult but thank you for allowing me to clarify my original post as I obviously must have been paying way too much attention the football game on TV

Sorry gang, I didn't mean to imply, that the ball was "fair". Rather that it was 1.a poorly written question, especially in a T or F scense, 2)I was bored to tears. Been cooped up with cough/fever and all around crud. I hadn't seen a post in a while, just checking if anyone's' still here.


3FGs' post is 100%.

j2h6, in your defense:
if you've been around any USSSA SP softball, then you are correct. U-trip the batter get's 2 strikes, and is out, if he/she hit's a second foul, after one strike. And the ball is dead.

Ex: B has a called strike, fouls one off, then, with the winning run on 3B, 1 out, B drives one deep down the LF line, R3 tags, the exact play as in the orginal test ? Then the correct call is "Foul and Time", no runners can advance. ouch..
Luckily I've never had to call this in a summer rec adult league..Not an easy sell, but it's in the book.

j2h6 is correct. An umpire's priorities are, in order: 1. strike/ball, 2. fair/foul, 3. catch/no catch, 4. everything else. They are no different on this play (or any play, for that matter). Sometimes the call is so obvious that no signal is given; examples would be a foul back to the screen (no "FOUL" call is given) or a catch made above the waist on a can of corn (no "catch" signal is given).

On this play, the correct mechanic would be to first POINT the ball foul, and then signal the catch IF NECESSARY. I don't agree with the mechanic, because fair/foul on a caught fly is only relevant to the official scorer, but that's the way it is.

Note that POINTING the ball foul on a caught fly does not kill the play. If the ball had dropped in foul ground (or was first touched over foul ground and then dropped), the proper mechanic would be a strong verbal FOUL (not FOUL BALL) with both hands overhead, killing the play, followed by a point foul.

Like I said, I don't like this mechanic, but this is the way it's taught at the Jim Evans Academy of Professional Umpiring - one of two schools approved by MLB for training umpires. Jim is a 30-year major league umpire. His word is good enough for me.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
j2h6 is correct. An umpire's priorities are, in order: 1. strike/ball, 2. fair/foul, 3. catch/no catch, 4. everything else. They are no different on this play (or any play, for that matter). Sometimes the call is so obvious that no signal is given; examples would be a foul back to the screen (no "FOUL" call is given) or a catch made above the waist on a can of corn (no "catch" signal is given).

On this play, the correct mechanic would be to first POINT the ball foul, and then signal the catch IF NECESSARY. I don't agree with the mechanic, because fair/foul on a caught fly is only relevant to the official scorer, but that's the way it is.

Note that POINTING the ball foul on a caught fly does not kill the play. If the ball had dropped in foul ground (or was first touched over foul ground and then dropped), the proper mechanic would be a strong verbal FOUL (not FOUL BALL) with both hands overhead, killing the play, followed by a point foul.

Like I said, I don't like this mechanic, but this is the way it's taught at the Jim Evans Academy of Professional Umpiring - one of two schools approved by MLB for training umpires. Jim is a 30-year major league umpire. His word is good enough for me.

The reason this mechanic is taught is for the times when the ball is dropped. The fielders, runners and coaches all want to know if it is in play or not.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:

The reason this mechanic is taught is for the times when the ball is dropped. The fielders, runners and coaches all want to know if it is in play or not.

The reason this mechanic is taught is to keep the umpire's priorities consistent. This is why a caught foul fly is pointed foul, even though this information (fair/foul) is irrelevant to everyone but the official scorer.