New transfer ruling

True, I've seen multiple plays of an infielder making a catch, attempt to transfer to throwing hand, and umps say it's a drop. Not an easy play at the bag when you have a runner sliding hard to the bag.

M's Marlins game today, worst one yet I've seen.  M's 3B takes a throw for the force out, goes for the transfer, bobbles it, doesn't drop it, Ump right on top if it, waits, and signals out.  Replay, you guessed it, reversed it, it's growing by the day.

 

It will require a rule change in NCAA.  Currently, "reaching for the ball in the glove after the catch" makes the catch complete.

What is the exact wording of the OBR book for this?

 "CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing he does not use his cap, protector, pocket or any other part of his uniform in getting possession. It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his contact with the ball, he collides with a player, or with a wall, or if he falls down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drops the ball. It is not a catch if a fielder touches a fly ball which then hits a member of the offensive team or an umpire and then is caught by another defensive player. If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught. In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional.
Rule 2.00 (Catch) Comment: A catch is legal if the ball is finally held by any fielder, even though juggled, or held by another fielder before it touches the ground. Runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball. A fielder may reach over a fence, railing, rope or other line of demarcation to make a catch. He may jump on top of a railing, or canvas that may be in foul ground. No interference should be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk.
If a fielder, attempting a catch at the edge of the dugout, is “held up” and kept from an apparent fall by a player or players of either team and the catch is made, it shall be allowed."

 

 

I think the part in bold is what is in question here in terms of what completes a catch. Maybe other's know more than me. 

This definition has nothing to do with this play.

 

2.00 Tag is the definition you want.

Not sure why it doesn't apply. Whether it is a tag or a fly ball or a force play, the issue has to do with the fielder catching and gaining and maintaining control of the ball. Do have something that better relates to the "transfer rule" Matt?  I didn't even see anything in any of the above posts about a fielder making a tag on a runner. 

Tags just aren't on runners. They're on bases, too.

 

The problem with using the definition of "catch" is that it is very narrowly written. F5 bounces a ball to F3, who snags it? Not a catch, per this definition.

 

The other reason that "catch" fails to cover this is that it ends up being counter-intuitive. There is a set of plays where "tag" would have defined an out, but "catch" won't: F3 flips to F1, who stumbles and drops the ball after touching 1B; F6 tagging 2B but having the ball dislodged on a take-out slide after the fact, etc.

So, what does apply to this new application of the transfer rule?

Whatever MLB wants, apparently.

Most new ruling's are supposedly made to make the game better. No matter how I look at this one I have failed to see anybody benefiting, and the poor umps are taking a beating trying to enforce it. 

You forgot about those "replay officials", they seem to be making out like bandits..

And

They are ruling the "tag and catch" the same;

A TAG is the action of a fielder in touching a base with his body while holding the

ball securely and firmly in his hand or glove; or touching a runner with the ball, or with his hand or glove holding the ball, while holding the ball securely and firmly in his hand or glove. It is not a tag, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his touching a base or touching a runner, the fielder drops the ball. In establishing the validity of the tag, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball. If the fielder has made a tag and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the tag, the tag shall be adjudged to have been made. 

And they seem to be taking the bolded portion to heart, if it isn't in the throwing motion, you aren't getting the call.  I will add they seem to be ruling on it very consistently, albeit against the natural rotation of the baseball world.. 

I'm still waiting for a dropped 3rd strike on a "strike em out throw em out" scenario..

If they slo-mo'd my wedding, do you think there is any chance it would be ruled not a catch?

No, weddings are not played under OBR...

Matt - this is from an article penned by the senior sportswriter at the St. Louis Post Dispatch, discussing the transfer rule interpretaion, and it quotes Matheny. I think it's right -- and that baseballman is spot on when identifying the gray area that's causing the ruckus:

 

"The definition of a catch in Major League Baseball’s rule book states that it is when “a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it. … The fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional.”

jp24 and bballman,

The definition of a catch is in fact not related by rule to a tag play.  In order to be a catch, the ball has to be gloved "in flight", and that means before it touches the ground. As matt13 has said, the applicable rule here is the definition of a tag.  jjk has already quoted it, and highlighted the part of the rule which is apparently being treated more strictly than in the past.

 

I'm confused. We are not talking about "tags."

 

Example from Cardinal game, where play went their way, but even as a fan, was just not right:

 

6-4-3 DP.

 

4 catches ball cleanly from six, pulls ball from glove to throw to 3, drops ball as arm is moving up. Call: no catch.

 

THAT's the situation where the transfer rule seems to be causing the ruckus. What am I missing?

That play is a tag play. The base is tagged to get the out.

There is an interpretation from Hunter Wendlestedt to the effect that if there is a release of the ball in connection with the catch of a batted ball in flight, or of a throw, a transfer must be successfully made to the throwing hand in order for control of the ball to be established.  The release of the ball is now irrelevant.

I know you're the ump, but I still must be missing something.

 

This article implies that this is not a tag play issue at all, by my reading. It even mentions that the Neighborhood play will not be reviewable, so tagging second seems a non-issue:

 

http://www.stltoday.com/sports...3d-6f0bd6b81611.html

 

An how is it a tag play when an outfielder catches a ball, but drops it on the transfer, and it's ruled a non-catch?

 

Color me lost.

They are ruling the transfer or lack of the same, whether batted or thrown.

 

You are no more lost than the rest of us, this is not how the play has been called in my lifetime except the last 19 days.

 

I believe the players will adjust faster than managers, umpires (at the ML level) on the field, the announcers, and for sure quicker than us mere fans. 

 

The announcer in the M's Marlins game last night was very confident the out call would stand, as this ball wasn't dropped on the transfer, merely bobbled.  

I felt the same after the overturns I'd seen thus far, those were all clearly dropped on the transfer, but this one, like I said, a bobble, it was not a close play, blue was right on top of it, stuck with it as he saw the bobble, waited until the ball was corralled, then nodded his head yes and called the out... so he thought it through, took his time and was sure the ball was not dropped on the transfer, made his call adamantly and still got it wrong in the eyes of the reviewers,

 

Who are the reviewers, are they umpires, english majors, lawyers?  They've doubtfully ever twisted a DP with a 240lber barreling in on em.   

      

This comment makes me suspect a basic misunderstanding.  If that isn't the case, then I apologize.

For the moment, let's leave aside questions of juggled or dropped balls, and instead just consider how the rules of baseball allow an out to be made.  For that we need to distinguish between a batter and a runner.

 

One of the ways a batter can be put out is for a fielder to catch the batted ball before it hits the ground or wall.  To get the out, the fielder has to comply with the definition of a catch.

 

A runner can be put out by being tagged while off a base or if his advance base is tagged when he is forced.  A batter-runner can be put out by tagging first base before the B-R touches it.  In some instances, runners can be put out on appeal plays by tagging a base.  In order to get the out, the fielder has to comply with the definition of a tag.

 

It isn't possible to put out a batter by tagging him, nor is it possible to put out a runner by catching a fly ball.  Baseball treats batters and runners differently, and it is necessary to use the definition of a tag when playing on a runner, and conversely the definition of a catch when playing of an airborne batted ball.

 

The definitions are related, but not identical.  A catch has no particular aspect of time associated with it-- a fielder can juggle the ball or deflect it to a teammate, and as long as one of them ends up with secure possession of the ball and can demonstrate voluntary release, it is a catch.  The batter is out no matter how far he has made it around the basepath.  On the other hand, for a tag to be valid, the fielder must have secure possession of the ball at the time he applies the tag. Two things are required: 1)  a tag of base or player, and 2) secure possession. Exactly what it takes to demonstrate secure possession has now apparently somewhat changed from the traditional view.

 

In these force plays that are being reviewed, the issue is not whether the bag was tagged, nor if the ball were "caught" --that only matters if the ball had been batted or pitched.  Instead the issue is secure possession.

As of last night I love the new transfer rule. It helped the Red Sox come back to win a game they were down 5-0. The runner sure looked out to me.