Little Turf Means It's a Trap & Tag Attempt Base Path Plays

Consecutive plays confused Tigers manager AJ Hinch as Replay upheld a no catch/trap call on Rangers batter Kyle Higashioka's line drive to Riley Greene before 2B Umpire Alfonso Márquez ruled an out of the base path infraction did not occur when runner Higashioka avoided Detroit fielder Javier Báez's tag attemp on Jonah Heim's ground ball, resulting in an error. Let's review.

We begin with one out and none on in the bottom of the 3rd inning with Higashioka's line drive to left fielder Greene, ruled no catch by 3B Umpire Carlos Torres and challenged by Detroit. Replay Review returned a "call stands" verdict, deeming that video evidence was not clear or convincing to suggest the call's quality of correctness. 

The TV broadcast pondered what would happen if half of the ball was cleanly caught by the glove while the other half bounced off the turf. The Official Baseball Rules' definition of catch states, "A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in their hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing they do not use their cap, protector, pocket or any other part of their uniform in getting possession."

Because "IN FLIGHT describes a batted, thrown, or pitched ball which has not yet touched the ground or some object other than a fielder," a half-glove, half-ground situation would not qualify as a catch.

On the very next play, Rangers batter Heim hit a ground ball to Báez, who attempted to tag baserunner R1 Higashioka before ultimately throwing to first base (an overthrow for an error). 2B Umpire Márquez ruled R1 Higashioka did not run out of his base path, explaining to a befuddled manager Hinch there was no tag attempt.

Although replays indicate there actually was a tag attempt later in the sequence, OBR 5.09(b)(1) states, "Any runner is out when they run more than three feet away from their base path to avoid being tagged unless their action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball. A runner’s base path is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight line from the runner to the base they are attempting to reach safely."

Because the runner already ran to the right field side of the baseline between first and second base prior to the fielder's tag attempt, R1's base path was established from this point and, therefore, he did not run more than three feet away from his base path to avoid the tag (even if he ran more than three feet away from the baseline...just not his personal base path).

Video as follows:

Dodgers-Mets Obstruction, Tag-Up & Pirates Out of Base Path

Dodgers 3B Max Muncy's visual obstruction and Shohei Ohtani/Michael Conforto's timely tag-up in New York and Pirates runner Alexander Canario's out of the base path calls feature in this rules analysis trio. How did the umpires do?

Muncy's Obstruction: With one out and a runner on third, Mets batter Pete Alonso hit a fly ball to Dodgers right fielder Toescar Hernández, who threw home in time to retire baserunner R3 Starling Marte, with HP Umpire Ryan Blakney signaling the runner out on the tag. 3B Umpire Tripp Gibson, however, called "Time" and ruled obstruction on Dodgers 3B Muncy, awarding Marte home for a Mets run.

According to the MLB Umpire Manual pertaining to official rule interpretations, Muncy committed obstruction by intentionally positioning himself to block R3 Marte's view of the fielder catching the sacrifice fly: "This is obstruction under Official Baseball Rule 6.01(h)(2). The umpire should call the infraction when it occurs and award bases, if any, in the appropriate manner."

Ohtani & Conforto's Timely Tag-Ups: Also in this game, New York unsuccessfully challenged 2B Umpire Marvin Hudson's call that Dodgers baserunners R1 Ohtani and R2 Conforto did not leave early (fail to retouch) second base on an outfield fly ball that was caught. Mets outfielders Juan Soto and Tyron Taylor briefly juggled the fly ball before Taylor ultimately caught it. Replays indicate R2 Conforto left second base after Soto's first touch of the fly ball, but before Taylor's eventual catch.

According to the Official Baseball Rule's definition of a catch, "Runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball." This means Conforto timely retouched by leaving second base after fielder Soto's touch, even if he left before the bobbled ball was eventually caught.

Canario's Out of the Base Path Overslide: In Pittsburgh, HP Umpire Mark Wegner called Pirates baserunner Alexander Canario out at home for running more than three feet away to avoid a tag on a play at the plate. Runner Canario overslid home plate and, in doing so, Wegner ruled that Canario ran out of his base path, since the base path from the start of the tag attempt ends at the base to which the runner is trying.

OBR 5.09(b)(1) states, "Any runner is out when they run more than three feet away from their base path to avoid being tagged unless their action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball. A runner’s base path is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight line from the runner to the base they are attempting to reach safely."

Video as follows:

Pitcher Catches Baseball with Armpit - Or Lodged Ball?

Fargo-Moorhead RedHawks pitcher Garrett Alexander caught a line drive with his armpit during an American Association game, ruled an out by the umpire but we were asked whether this is truly a legal catch or if it is a lodged ball instead.

In 2018, HP Umpire Dan Bellino "caught" a pitched ball with his armpit in Colorado and awarded baserunners a base each as the ball remained out of play, and this might be where some of the confusion comes from. Official Baseball Rule 5.06(c)(7) supports this call...for an umpire trapping the ball: "The ball becomes dead and runners advance one base, or return to their bases, without liability to be put out, when—A pitched ball lodges in the umpire’s or catcher’s mask or paraphernalia, and remains out of play, runners advance one base."

For pitcher Alexander, however, OBR 5.06(c)(7) does not directly apply (it is a batted ball, for one), so instead we turn to the MLB Umpire Manual which clarifies that, yes, similar (but different!) lodged ball rules apply to infielders, too: "If a batted or thrown ball inadvertently goes inside a player or coach’s uniform, lodges in the catcher’s face mask or paraphernalia, or is intentionally placed inside a player’s uniform (e.g., in a pants pocket), the umpire shall call “Time.”  The umpire will, using common sense and fair play, place all runners in such a manner that, in the umpire’s judgment, will nullify the action of the ball going out of play."

The primary difference (other than pitched/thrown/batted) is twofold. First, the Colorado play involved an umpire not a player interacting with a ball, and second, the MLBUM interpretation requires the ball actually go inside a player/coach's uniform or lodge in the catcher's equipment.

Because the ball never went inside Alexander's uniform, it was accessible to the player, and (if you want to take it step further in OBR 5.06(c)(7) language) did not remain out of play, it is considered in play and a legal catch.

Video as follows:

Ask CCS - Outfielder Drops Ball Over Wall - HR or Out?

Oklahoma City Dodgers batter Devin Mann hit an unusual home run against the Sacramento River Cats when his fly ball to left-center field was transported over the bullpen wall, courtesy of River Cats center fielder Bryce Johnson, ruled a home run by 1B Umpire Mike Rains.

The question of whether the fielder should have been credited with an out (catch) or not rests in the rulebook's definition of the term itself, which may be found both in Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(1) ["a batter is out when their fair or foul fly ball is legally caught by a fielder"] as well as the definition of terms glossary.

The rule defines a catch as "the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in their hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing they do not use their cap, protector, pocket or any other part of their uniform in getting possession. It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following their contact with the ball, they collide with a player, or with a wall, or if they fall down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drop the ball..."

Replays indicate center fielder Johnson, following his contact with the ball, collided with the wall and as a result of such collision, dropped the ball over the fence and out of play for a home run. To further drive the point home, we continue with the catch definition: "...In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that they have complete control of the ball and that their release of the ball is voluntary and intentional."

One would thus surmise the player's release of the ball was not voluntary nor intentional. As a result of these criteria not being satisfied, the play therefore should not be ruled a catch and, instead, should be deemed a home run. (We can't have a catch & carry here, either, as this was not a catch in the first place.)

Related Post: Aaron Judge's Bullpen Crashing Catch & Carry (6/4/23).

Video as follows:

Aaron Judge's Bullpen Crashing Catch & Carry

After Dodgers batter Max Muncy demonstrated how to legally run within the runner's lane and was therefore safe when hit in the back by Yankees catcher Jose Trevino's throw, New York outfielder Aaron Judge crashed through the bullpen fence and gate in right field while catching JD Martinez's fly ball.

Yankees manager Aaron Boone soon left the dugout to argue as the umpires awarded R1 Muncy second base on the play, and Crew Chief Marvin Hudson had to explain baseball's catch-and-carry rule to the New York skipper, who had originally sought to challenge the boundary and runner placement call. Dodgers manager Dave Roberts chuckled when told Boone was not challenging the play after all.

Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(1) states that a batter is out when their "fair or foul fly ball (other than a foul tip) is legally caught by a fielder." In order for the catch to be legal, the fielder "must have one or both feet on or over the playing surface and neither foot inside the dugout or in any other out-of-play area."

OBR 5.06(b)(3)(C) states that each runner (other than the batter) may advance one base when "A fielder, after catching a fly ball, steps or falls into any out-of-play area." The one base award is made from the runner's "last legally touched base at the time the fielder entered such out of play area."

Accordingly, fielder Judge legally caught the fly ball while still on the playing surface, but then stepped into the bullpen and out of play, resulting in a dead ball. Pursuant to the rules, that meant R1 Muncy—obliged to remain on or go back to first base to tag up on the caught fly ball—was awarded second base on Judge's catch and carry.

Video as follows:

Ask the UEFL - Batted Ball Deflects Off Pitcher's Head

This quick Ask the UEFL came to us as a fairly simple question: "Is this an infield fly?" With one out and two on (R1, R2) in Cincinnati, Reds batter Donovan Solano hit a batted ball directly off Marlins pitcher Daniel Castano's head, the batted ball bouncing high in the air before settling into the glove of Reds third baseman Joey Wendle for the inning's second out. 

Stipulating that the pitcher's health is of greater importance than the play itself—especially when a concussion-inducing hit to the head is concerned—we were nonetheless asked about the rules implications of such an odd sequence as the ball remained live after the moment of injury.

Succinctly, this is not an infield fly—even though the ball careened high into the air and was caught at an angle similar to that of a fly ball. The definition of the term states, in part, "An INFIELD FLY is a fair fly ball (not including a line drive nor an attempted bunt) which can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, when first and second, or first, second and third bases are occupied, before two are out." Because the batted ball can best be described as a line drive, it is therefore ineligible for the infield fly rule. The third baseman could have allowed the ball to fall untouched and all runners would have been forced to advance (this is not an intentional drop, either).

Finally, we note that if R1 or R2 wished to try and advance to their next base, they would not have to wait until the third baseman ultimately caught the ball, but instead could have legally left their bases the moment the ball first touched the pitcher. Although Official Baseball Rule 5.09(c)(1) states: "Any runner shall be called out on appeal when—after a fly ball is caught, they fail to retouch their original base before they or their base is tagged," the definition of catch prevails because it directly addresses the concept of touch-without-catch: "Runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball."

Video as follows:

Baseball's Foul Tip Rules Change in Real Life

In this short video, we review professional baseball's 2020 rules change for foul tips at home plate using a real-life example from the Pacific League of Nippon Professional Baseball (Japan). The umpire's call on this foul tip would have been different had this 2021 play occurred just two years earlier.

Play: With two strikes, the batter hits a ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to the catcher's armpit and is ultimately held with the hand and caught.

2019 OBR: The Official Baseball Rules definition of FOUL TIP in 2019 would have ruled this a foul ball (not a foul tip): "A batted ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to the catcher's hands and is legally caught. It is not a foul tip unless caught and any foul tip that is caught is a strike, and the ball is in play. It is not a catch if it is a rebound, unless the ball has first touched the catcher's glove or hand."

2020 OBR: Baseball's Rules Committee changed the foul tip definition in 2020: "A batted ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to the catcher and is legally caught. It is not a foul tip unless caught, and any foul tip that is caught is a strike, and the ball is in play."

In other words, the 2019 rule required the batted ball to first contact the catcher's hand (or mitt) before, eventually, being firmly held by the catcher, as in a catch. The 2020 rules change thus eliminated the first touch requirement while keeping the final requirement that the ball be legally caught. This rule is shared by NCAA (college), while NFHS (high school) opted not to change from the circa-2019 rule, at least not quite yet.

As for the precise example from Japan, the only question is whether or not this ball could be considered lodged or stuck. Recall in the case of Dan Bellino "catching" a pitch in the crook of his arm in 2018, the ball was considered dead because Bellino held the ball against his body, thus satisfying OBR 5.06(c)(7)'s requirement of a ball remaining out of play: "The ball becomes dead and runners advance one base, or return to their bases, without liability to be put out, when—A pitched ball lodges in the umpire’s or catcher’s mask or paraphernalia, and remains out of play, runners advance one base."

In Japan, the catcher released the ball from his armpit in a timely manner and, OBR 5.06(c)(7)'s "remains out of play" clause unsatisfied, the umpire declared the batter out on the caught third strike via foul tip.

This is an illustration of the importance of knowing rules changes. | Video as follows:

MLB Ejection 175 - James Hoye (3; Bob Melvin)

HP Umpire James Hoye ejected Athletics manager Bob Melvin (Replay Review decision that overturned 1B Umpire Erich Bacchus' out call at first base) in the bottom of the 7th inning of the #Athletics-#Angels game. With one out and two on (R1, R2), Angels batter Luis Rengifo hit 2-2 changeup from A's pitcher Deolis Guerra on the ground to first baseman Matt Olson, who threw to shortstop Elvis Andrus to retire Angels baserunner R1 Jared Walsh, and onto first base as Rengifo arrived, originally ruled out. Upon Replay Review as the result of a manager's challenge by Angels manager Joe Maddon, Bacchus' out call was overturned to safe. Replays indicate A's pitcher Guerra did not maintain possession of the ball as necessary to establish a catch for the required tag of first base, the call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the A's were leading, 3-0. The A's ultimately won the contest, 3-1.

This is James Hoye (92)'s 3rd ejection of 2021.

James Hoye now has 5 points in the UEFL Standings (2 Prev + 2 MLB + 1 Correct-Crewmate = 5).

Crew Chief Mark Carlson now has 4 points in Crew Division (3 Previous + 1 Correct Call = 4).

This is the 175th ejection report of the 2021 MLB regular season.

This is the 80th manager ejection of 2021.

This is Oakland's 6th ejection of 2021, 1st in the AL West (OAK 6; SEA 5; HOU, TEX 4; LAA 3).

This is Bob Melvin's 5th ejection of 2021, 1st since Aug 28 (Tony Randazzo; QOC = N [Replay Review]).

This is James Hoye's 3rd ejection of 2021, 1st since July 9 (Terry Francona; QOC = N [Out/Safe]).

Wrap: Oakland Athletics vs. Los Angeles Angels of Wasting Trout's Contract, 9/18/21 | Video as follows:

No Catch - AZ Fielder Drops Ball After Colliding with Wall

With two outs and two on in the 2nd inning of Wednesday's Diamondbacks-Athletics game, A's batter Mark Canha hit a fly ball to deep left-center field. Arizona outfielder Ketel Marte attempted to catch the ball, which entered his glove, but after colliding with the wall, dropped the ball, ruled no catch/safe by 3B Umpire Mike Muchlinski. Upon Replay Review as the result of a challenge by D-Backs manager Torey Lovullo, the call was confirmed as an RBI triple (no catch). Should it have been?

In order to answer this question, we turn to the Official Baseball Rules' Definition of Terms: "A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in their hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing they do not use their cap, protector, pocket or any other part of their uniform in getting possession."

So far so good, but key to this play is the sentence that follows: "It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following their contact with the ball, they collide with a player, or with a wall, or if they fall down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drop 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."

Thus, because Marte after colliding with the wall dropped the ball, it is not a catch. Much like falling to the ground, the fielder must complete the act of catching the ball in order to receive credit for such a catch.

There is no magic "two steps" rule or similar football-esque vernacular regarding a catch. Instead, this is the metric umpires are given: "In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that they have complete control of the ball and that their release of the ball is voluntary and intentional. 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."

To be judged as voluntary and intentional, the ball's release must satisfy a key criterion: the fielder meant for the ball to fall out of their glove. During a throw—the "dropped on the transfer" provision of the rule—the fielder voluntarily opens their glove to retrieve the ball and the release of the ball is intentional in that sense, even if the end result (dropping the ball) is not.

In the Arizona-Oakland game, Marte does not intend to release the ball in this fashion after colliding with the wall and, the fielder not having demonstrated complete control to the umpire in the immediate aftermath of and while still under the effects of momentum from his collision with the wall, 3B Umpire Muchlinski properly rules the play a dropped ball (via safe mechanic), a call affirmed via Replay Review.

Video as follows:

Fielder Must Establish Catch Before Falling Out of Play

When Bear River high school (Utah) softball outfielder Olivia Taylor caught a batted ball while falling out of play beyond the center field fence, the student-athlete was rightly hailed for an athletic catch while we were asked what the rule is for such a play: was this catch, while impressive, legal?

The succinct answer, at all levels of play—high school, college, pro, softball, baseball—is yes.

Official Baseball Rule 5.06(b)(3)(C) Comment, for instance, states, "If a fielder, after having made a legal catch, should step or fall into any out-of-play area, the ball is dead and each runner shall advance one base, without liability to be put out, from their last legally touched base at the time the fielder entered such out-of-play area."

The minutiae of the rules are different, but largely agree: If a fielder establishes firm and secure possession in their hand or glove of a ball in flight prior to falling out of play, it is a catch ("the act of a fielder getting secure possession in their hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it"). What this effectively means is that, because the fielder in this play appears to catch the ball while still airborne with feet over the fence and not in contact with dead ball territory, this is a legal catch (OBR 5.09(a)(1) adds the requirement, "must have one or both feet on or over the playing surface").

If the fielder were to have juggled the ball while falling to and contacting the ground, or had the ball fallen out of the glove when the fielder's elbow/back hit the ground in dead ball territory, this would not be a catch: that's what makes this call tricker than it appears on the surface. The umpire must determine whether the fielder legally caught the ball (gained secure possession) prior to falling out of play.

The outcome for a legal catch and carry is a dead ball, batter declared out, and any runners awarded one base from time-of-pitch. If the umpire determined this was not a catch, the outcome would be to award the batter a home run.

Video as follows:

Chris Segal's KC Catch & Carry Scores Game Winner

Lack of rules knowledge led to a game-winning run in Kansas City when 3B Umpire Chris Segal awarded A's runners a base after Royals third baseman Chelsor Cuthbert caught batter Corban Joseph's fly ball, only to step with it into the third base dugout—what's known as a catch and carry and whose penalty is "Time" and a one-base award (batter is out).

Oakland won the game by a single run—the one that was awarded on the catch-and-carry, making it all the more painful and preventable when Cuthbert said after the game that he didn't know the rule.

The Play: With one out and runners on second and third base in the top of the 9th inning of Thursday's Athletics-Royals game, Athletics batter Joseph hit a fly ball in foul territory near Oakland's third-base dugout. Kansas City fielder Cheslor Cuthbert reached over the dugout to make the catch and then jumped into the dugout so as not to fall.

Segal calls Cuthbert's catch in Kansas City.

The Call: 3B Umpire Chris Segal called the batter out on Cuthbert's legal catch (both feet were on the playing field at the time of the catch, as the top step or lip of the dugout is considered part of the live ball territory) and then called "Time" as a result of Cuthbert stepping fully into the dugout. Segal then awarded A's baserunner R3 Seth Brown home plate (from his origin at third base) and runner R2 Jurickson Profar third base (from his origin at second base).

The Rule: Official Baseball Rule 5.06(b)(3) states, "Each runner, other than the batter, may without liability to be put out, advance one base when—A fielder, after catching a fly ball, steps or falls into any out-of-play area" while 5.06(b)(3)(C) Comment states, "If a fielder, after having made a legal catch, should step or fall into any out-of-play area, the ball is dead and each runner shall advance one base, without liability to be put out, from his last legally touched base at the time the fielder entered such out-of-play area."

Finally, to cover all our bases, OBR 5.09(a)(1) Comment indicates, "A fielder may reach into, but not step into, a dugout to make a catch, and if he holds the ball, the catch shall be allowed. A fielder, in order to make a catch on a foul ball nearing a dugout or other out-of-play area (such as the stands), must have one or both feet on or over the playing surface (including the lip of the dugout) and neither foot on the ground inside the dugout or in any other out-of-play area."
Related Post: Case Play 2019-1 - Modified Catch & Carry [Solved] (5/6/19).

Cuthbert looks on as Segal enforces the rule.

Player Admits Not Knowing Rule: After the game, Cuthbert told the media that he didn't know the rule: "The umpire said the runners were going to advance a base. I didn't know that rule. Every day you learn something in baseball." With Oakland winning by a 9-8 final score, that lack of rules knowledge very likely hurt Kansas City's chances to win the game.

BONUS: Watch HP Umpire Bill Welke explain to Ned Yost and the Royals dugout the reason for Segal's call. This is what we mean by backing up a crewmate on a rudimentary rules-related play or call.

Video as follows:

MLB Ejection 060 - Fieldin Culbreth (1; Ron Gardenhire)

3B Umpire Fieldin Culbreth ejected Tigers Manager Ron Gardenhire (Replay Review decision that overturned Culbreth's drop [safe] call to a catch [out]; QOCY) in the bottom of the 9th inning of the Marlins-Tigers game. With one out and two on (R1, R3), Tigers batter Ronny Rodriguez hit a 1-0 slider from Marlins pitcher Sergio Romo on a fly ball to left fielder Harold Ramirez, who dropped the ball while attempting to catch and throw to second base ahead of Tigers baserunner R1 Brandon Dixon, preparing to tag up, ruled a dropped ball (safe) by 3B Umpire Culbreth and overturned on Replay Review to a sacrifice fly (out/catch) as the result of a challenge by Marlins Manager Don Mattingly. Replays indicate fielder Ramirez momentarily gained secure possession in his glove of the ball such that after the ball came to a complete stop, firmly held in his glove, his subsequent release/transfer was voluntary and intentional, during which process he dropped the ball, the call was correct.* At the time of the ejection, the game was tied, 4-4. The Marlins ultimately won the contest, 5-4, in 11 innings.

This is Fieldin Culbreth (25)'s first ejection of 2019.
Fieldin Culbreth now has 4 points in the UEFL Standings (0 Prev + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 4).
Crew Chief Fieldin Culbreth now has 2 points in Crew Division (1 Previous + 1 Correct Call = 2).
*OBR Definition of Terms: "A 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...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. 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."

This is the 60th ejection report of the 2019 MLB regular season.
This is the 30th Manager ejection of 2019.
This is Detroit's 4th ejection of 2019, T-1st in the AL Central (CWS, DET 4; KC 3; MIN 1; CLE 0).
This is Ron Gardenhire's 3rd ejection of 2019, 1st since May 11 (Hunter Wendelstedt; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Fieldin Culbreth's first ejection since Sept 16, 2018 (Andy Green; QOC = Y [Fair/Foul]).

Wrap: Miami Marlins vs. Detroit Tigers, 5/21/19 | Video as follows:

Case Play 2019-1 - Modified Catch & Carry [Solved]

After HP Umpire Will Little called "Time" when Nationals catcher Yan Gomes stepped into the dugout while keeping his mitt and the ball on the playing field, Joe West's crew awarded Padres baserunner R1 Eric Hosmer second base and R2 Manuel Margot home plate, prompting a nearly 10-minute Replay Review when Nationals Manager Dave Martinez challenged the crew's decision to score baserunner R2 Margot.

The Play (Saturday): With one out and the bases loaded Saturday night in DC, Padres batter Hunter Renfroe hit a 1-2 slider from Nationals pitcher Matt Grace on a fly ball to center fielder Victor Robles for a sacrifice fly, Padres baserunner R3 Manny Machado scoring. Robles' subsequent throw to catcher Yan Gomes bounced off Gomes' mitt and toward the Padres' third base dugout, enabling baserunner R2 Manuel Margot to advance to third base and baserunner R1 Eric Hosmer to advance toward second base. Gomes, in an effort to keep the ball on the playing field and out of the dugout, caught the ball in his mitt, and kept his mitt on the playing surface, while running into the dugout with both feet to keep his balance, before exiting the dugout with ball in hand.

Catcher Hedges also played a wild throw.

The Play (Sunday): With one out and none on Sunday, Nationals batter Howie Kendrick hit a ground ball to Padres first baseman Hosmer, who threw wildly beyond first base, backed up by catcher Austin Hedges, who similarly attempted to save the loose ball from rolling into the opposing dugout. Unlike Gomes, however, Hedges placed his gloved hand in order to tap the ball, keeping the ball rolling freely along the warning track while he stepped into the dugout. Hedges then exited the dugout and, after placing a foot onto the warning track, retrieved the ball.

Gomes disagrees with decision to score R2.

The Call (Saturday): HP Umpire Will Little called "Time" and ruled that because Gomes left the field of play, the ball was dead. As a result, the umpires awarded R2 Margot home plate and R1 Hosmer second base, ruling that Hosmer hadn't yet reached second base at the time Gomes stepped out of play, while Margot had already achieved third base.

Replay Review Decision: Following Nats skipper Martinez's dispute with the crew's runner placement in awarding R2 Margot home (and R1 Hosmer second base), the Replay Official affirmed Margot's placement, but overturned Hosmer's status, instead placing Hosmer at third base, resulting in the rare Manager's Challenge that actually hurt the team requesting the review.

West and crew discusses the play.

So while this statistically is a Manager's Challenge that Martinez won by virtue of the overturned call, the result is a Pyrrhic victory: TSP increases, but the baserunner advances an extra 90 feet.

Case Play Question (Saturday): Given that Replay Review placed Hosmer at third base, was this the proper ruling (not necessarily runner placement, but was the one-base award from time of the dead ball proper?)? Is this a catch-and-carry, given that the fielder did not physically carry the ball out of play?

The Call (Sunday): HP Umpire Joe West ruled the ball live and in play as Nationals batter-runner Kendrick took second base on Hosmer's throwing error.

Case Play Question (Sunday): Was the Hedges play properly ruled a live ball? After stepping out of play, was Hedges entitled to return to the playing field and legally play the ball?

Answer: The first thing to notice about the OBR library is that 5.06(b)(3) refers to a catch of a fly ball. According to the Definition of Terms, "A FLY BALL is a batted ball that goes high in the air in flight." This is reinforced by the following: "A 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."

In other words, 5.06(b)(3) applies to batted balls, which these plays were not; the ball was thrown. By rule, this isn't a catch; it's a false catch, to play on the terminology.

Rule 5.06(b)(4)(G) states that runners, including the batter-runner, advance: "Two bases when, with no spectators on the playing field, a thrown ball goes into the stands, or into a bench..."

SIDEBAR: Another way you can tell 5.06(b)(3) applies only to a batted ball is that the batter is explicitly excluded from the base award. Why? Because the batter is out on the caught fly ball.

Because this wasn't a first play by an infielder, the runners are awarded two bases from the time of the throw (first play by an infielder would be two bases from time of pitch). On Saturday, that places R2 at home and R1 at third base. Thus, Replay Review in overturning the crew's placement of R1 at second base corrected far more than a judgment call—it fixed an incorrect application of the rules. Under no circumstances with a thrown ball going out of play would R1 be awarded one base.

As for the difference between Saturday & Sunday, the MLB Umpire Manual States, "A fielder is considered to be in the dugout—and therefore unable to make a valid catch—when the fielder has one or both feet on the surface inside the dugout."

It also states, "If a fielder, after making a legal catch on the playing surface, steps or falls into any out-of-play area at any point while in possession of the ball...the ball shall be dead."

This is where we take a surgeon's knife to the rule to piece together only what is applicable. On Saturday, catcher Gomes was considered in the dugout when he stepped into it. Because he retained possession of the ball while in the dugout, the ball was dead. On Sunday, catcher Hedges was no longer in possession of the ball when he left the playing field and stepped into the dugout. Similarly, he returned to the field by stepping out of the dugout and back onto the warning track before picking up the baseball, thus keeping play alive.

Official Baseball Rules Library
OBR 5.06(b)(3): "Each runner, other than the batter, may without liability to be put out, advance one base when—A fielder, after catching a fly ball, steps or falls into any out-of-play area."
OBR 5.06(b)(3)(C) Comment: "If a fielder, after having made a legal catch, should step or fall into any out-of-play area, the ball is dead and each runner shall advance one base, without liability to be put out, from his last legally touched base at the time the fielder entered such out-of-play area."
OBR 5.09(a)(1) Comment: "A fielder may reach into, but not step into, a dugout to make a catch, and if he holds the ball, the catch shall be allowed. A fielder, in order to make a catch on a foul ball nearing a dugout or other out-of-play area (such as the stands), must have one or both feet on or over the playing surface (including the lip of the dugout) and neither foot on the ground inside the dugout or in any other out-of-play area. Ball is in play, unless the fielder, after making a legal catch, steps or falls into a dugout or other out-of-play area, in which case the ball is dead. Status of runners shall be as described in Rule 5.06(b)(3)(C) Comment."

Videos (Saturday/Gomes & Sunday/Hedges) x2 as follows:

UEFL Case Play 2018-7 - What's the Hold Up? [Solved]

The Colorado Rockies defeated the Astros in come-from-behind fashion thanks in part to a wild sequence in the 7th inning when baserunner Raimel Tapia sprinted home on batter Nolan Arenado's pop foul out to Houston third baseman JD Davis along the warning track outside his team's dugout.

Astro teammates hold Tapia up at Coors Field.

With Davis all but falling into the dugout if not for the actions of his teammates after the fly ball disappeared into his glove, the question then becomes whether or not the ball should have been declared dead, and a base awarded, based on the rationale that Davis would have fallen into the dugout, if not for the actions of his teammates holding and appearing to even push him back onto the playing field.

The Play: With one out and the bases loaded, batter Arenado popped out to Davis, who began to fall over the railing into the dugout, but was held up and pushed by his teammates back onto the playing field before he ever had a chance to touch the dugout ground, resulting in an out call from 3B Umpire Vic Carapazza, who kept play alive. During this event, Rockies baserunner Tapia tagged up and hustled home as Davis threw wildly, allowing the trail Rockies runners to each advance a base, effectively allowing each runner to advance one base on the play, same as what would have occurred had the ball been declared dead for a player "falling" into the dugout, stands, or other out of play area.

Question: Is this a live ball or a dead ball; should the runners have been given a base automatically pursuant to Rule 5.06(b)(3)(C) Comment or does Rule 5.01(a) Comment apply, even though the fielder may have already caught the ball when he was "held up" and assisted by his teammates? Assume no runners tagged up on the play—would you award R3 home plate (and thus, R2 third base and R1 second base, as well)?

Answer: The umpires properly officiated this play. The relevant rule in the Library below is 5.01(a) Comment/Definition of Terms (Catch) Comment, which allows bench personnel to hold or brace a player attempting to catch a live ball with no penalty.

U3 Marquez rules 3BC Anderson interfered.

Unlike base coach interference, which results in an out (it is interference when, as in Rule 6.01(a)(8), "In the judgment of the umpire, the base coach at third base, or first base, by touching or holding the runner, physically assists him in returning to or leaving third base or first base", or 6.01(a)(9), "the base coach leaves his box and acts in any manner to draw a throw by a fielder," or 6.01(b), "The players, coaches or any member of a team at bat shall vacate any space [including both dugouts or bullpens] needed by a fielder who is attempting to field a batted or thrown ball"), the 5.01(a) Comment pertains to both teams, rather than just the team at bat.
Related Post: Umpire Odds & Ends: Interference Ends Game (Alfonso Marquez/3B Coach) (9/5/10).

In other words, a fielder reacts to a live ball and runs towards the dugout without regard to which team the dugout belongs to, and, accordingly—other than the case of the offense's dugout actually interfering with the fielder—the rule does not discriminate between the dugouts of the team at-bat vs the team in the field, and accordingly does not deem players bracing a fielder as illegal assistance in the same way a base coach who holds or pushes a runner is deemed to have illegally assisted the runner in advancing or returning to/remaining on a base.

As for the argument that the rule pertains to "attempting a catch" and the fielder has presumably already caught the ball...this isn't true. Had the fielder in this play dropped the ball in the dugout, chances are the play would be ruled a foul ball—no catch. We know per the catch rule that the criteria for deeming a catch legal include, "getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it," "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," and, perhaps most importantly, "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."

Until the fielder's momentum is arrested and he emerges from his precarious position on the railing, this remains and attempted, but not a completed, catch, which means Rule 5.01(a) applies, even by the strictest of standards pertaining to the phrase, "attempting a catch at the end of the dugout."

This is a legal play and, as long as the fielder does not fall onto or stand upon the ground in dead ball territory, the fielder is authorized to complete the play and throw the ball if so desired.

Official Baseball Rules Library
OBR Rule 5.01(a) Comment & Definition of Terms (Catch) Comment: "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."
OBR 5.06(b)(3)(C) Comment: "If a fielder, after having made a legal catch, should step or fall into any out-of-play area, the ball is dead and each runner shall advance one base."

Video as follows:

Yadier Molina's Foul Tip - Hands First, Body Last

Cardinals catcher Yadier Molina caught a foul tip in unorthodox fashion when a batted ball came to rest between his right thigh and torso as HP Umpire Chris Segal declared the play a legal catch and strikeout, explaining to Padres Manager Andy Green why the odd rebound resulted in strike three.

Video: A foul tip vs a foul or lodged ball.

This play highlights the importance of knowing Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(2) as well as the Definition of Terms regarding a foul tip and catch. Not only is the batter's status as a strikeout victim (if a foul tip) or being able to continue the at-bat (if a foul ball) in question, if there were runners on base, stolen bases or other advancement could come into question (if a foul tip, the ball is live and any steals would be valid; if a foul ball, the ball is dead and any steals would not count).

The Play: With two strikes, the batter swings at the pitched ball, his bat making contact with the ball and sending it sharply and directly toward the catcher, whose hand/glove/mitt either (A) does, or (B) does not, touch the ball, after which it comes to rest trapped between the catcher's thigh and torso. The catcher slowly stands up and retrieves the ball with his bare hand; the ball never touches the ground. Is this a foul tip or a foul ball?

Answer: In (A), it is a foul tip and results in the third strike on the batter; the batter is out and the ball remains live, meaning any stolen bases or other runner movement would stand. In (B), it is a foul ball; the batter remains at bat and the ball is dead, nullifying any stolen bases or other runner advancement.
Related Post: An Unconventional Foul Tip in the Big Apple (4/10/17).

Rule 5.09(a)(2): This rule simply states that a batter is out when the third strike is legally caught by the catcher. The important portion of this rule relative to the Molina foul tip play is in the rule's comment:

If a foul tip first strikes the catcher’s glove and then goes on through and is caught by both hands against his body or protector, before the ball touches the ground, it is a strike, and if third strike, batter is out. If smothered against his body or protector, it is a catch provided the ball struck the catcher’s glove or hand first.

This is an example of a foul ball.

The Definition of Terms resembles Rule 5.09(a)(2) Comment, and states that, "A FOUL TIP is a batted ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to the catcher’s hands and is legally caught."

For instance, the accompanying image of a batted ball that strikes the catcher's mask immediately after it is hit by the bat would be an example of a foul ball. Though this particular play ended up as a lodged ball (the ball was stuck in the mask), had the ball fallen out of the mask and into the catcher's hand, it would still be deemed a foul ball.

Recall that a 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." A fielder may smother the ball against his body and complete the catch simply by holding the ball in his hand or glove, but the fielder may not use a cap, chest protector, mask, pocket, or other item not natural to the fielder's person in order to complete the catch. It is similarly not a legal catch if at any time prior to secure possession the batted ball touches the ground, an umpire, or an opponent (it may touch a teammate).

To reiterate, a foul tip requires the batted ball
a) Go sharply and directly from the bat to the catcher's hands;
b) Touch the catcher's hands, mitt, or glove;
c) Be legally caught.

Video as follows:

Caught By Uniform - Jersey-Assisted Catch or Single?

A batted ball lined into a pitcher's jersey during Monday night's Dodgers-Phillies game, ruled a catch and out by HP Umpire Brian O'Nora proved most impressive, yet left one key question: what is the difference between a ball in the uniform and a legal catch?

Pivetta's shirt catches Barnes' line drive.

The Play: With two out and none on in the top of the 6th inning, Dodgers batter Austin Barnes hit a first-pitch fastball from Phillies pitcher Nick Pivetta on a line drive toward Pivetta's midsection, the Phillies pitcher spinning around in reaction to the careening comebacker. Replays indicate that as Pivetta spun, the batted ball found a hole in the placket of Pivetta's uniform shirt, and snuck inside as Pivetta reached for the ball with his right hand. Pivetta then reached inside his shirt to retrieve the baseball, ruled an out on the catch.

Was this a Legal Catch? Rules & Analysis: Official Baseball Rule 5.09 (Making An Out) states "a batter is out when: (1) His fair or foul fly ball (other than a foul tip) is legally caught by a fielder." What exactly constitutes a legal catch? Fortunately, 5.09(a)(1) continues, as does the Definition of Terms:

A 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.

In short, if the ball bounces off a fielder's person (think of a ball bouncing off Bartolo Colon's stomach), and he subsequently gloves it, that is a legal catch, even though the ball technically "touched" the uniform. If the player, however, actively uses his uniform to help gain possession, that is not a legal catch. The difference to consider is whether the ball touched the uniform/cap/pocket or whether the player used the uniform/cap/pocket to get possession.

Is there a penalty or remedy if a fielder does "use his cap, protector, pocket or any other part of his uniform in getting possession?"

Rule 5.06(b)(4) has limited applicability: "Each runner including the batter-runner may, without liability to be put out, advance...(B) Three bases, if a fielder deliberately touches a fair ball with his cap, mask or any part of his uniform detached from its proper place on his person. The ball is in play and the batter may advance to home base at his peril; (C) Three bases, if a fielder deliberately throws his glove at and touches a fair ball. The ball is in play and the batter may advance to home base at his peril; (D) Two bases, if a fielder deliberately touches a thrown ball with his cap, mask or any part of his uniform detached from its proper place on his person. The ball is in play."

Though 5.06(b)(4)(A)-(D) imposes penalties and awards for detached equipment, this is not such a case: the shirt was not deliberately placed so as to touch a ball in play, and it certainly wasn't thrown.

Brian O'Nora can only watch from behind.

Answer: Fortunately, the MLB Umpire Manual interprets Rule 5.01(b) (which pertains to an umpire calling "Time" and the ball becoming dead) in the following fashion: "If a batted or thrown ball inadvertently goes inside a player or coach's uniform (or lodges in the catcher's face mask or paraphernalia), the umpire shall call 'Time.' He will, using common sense and fair play, place all runners in such a manner that, in the umpire's judgment, will nullify the action of the ball going out of play. In no case may any outs be recorded on such a play."

Thus, because batter Barnes' line drive appeared to inadvertently go inside pitcher Pivetta's uniform prior to Pivetta getting secure possession of the baseball in his hand or glove, the MLBUM interpretation shall apply: the ball is dead and no out may be recorded. By rule, the batter—because he has become a runner by virtue of hitting a fair ball—must be placed at one of the bases: most likely at first base, and credited with an infield single. The discretion afforded to the umpire by a "nullify the act" clause is expressly qualified by the statement, "In no case may any outs be recorded on such a play."

This is not a situation in which the player may retrieve the ball before "Time" is called so as to nullify its effect and keep the ball alive: the ball is dead immediately upon its entry into a player's uniform.

Why This Call Was Missed: As diagramed on the above graphic taken from the mid-home camera angle in the press box, plate umpire O'Nora was, obviously, at home plate as the line drive reached Pivetta. As captured on the image at the beginning of this article (and the thumbnail featured in the video, below), Pivetta spun around so that he faced center field as the ball entered his jersey: O'Nora from his position at home plate could not see how the ball came to rest in Pivetta's possession, since Pivetta's back was to home plate.

Pivetta retrieves the ball from his abdomen.

The two umpires with potential knowledge of the ball-into-uniform property of this play are the first and second base umpires. Due to Pivetta's speed in spinning toward center, and his right hand obstructing a view of the jersey, 1B Umpire Paul Emmel may not have had a clear look at the middle portion of the play (after the ball entered the jersey), though he may have been able to see the aftermath as Pivetta spun back toward first base while simultaneously retrieving the ball from inside his uniform shirt. Then again, Pivetta's sleight of hand may have similarly obstructed the view.

2B Umpire Chad Whitson, however, would have had a glance at a ball-sized bulge underneath Pivetta's jersey, though he would likely not have seen the ball actually enter the uniform top. Recall, however, that the second base umpire, with no runners, is stationed in shallow center field. It thus stands to reason that he similarly would not have had an entirely convincing look at the ball underneath Pivetta's jersey due to the time and distance associated with this play.

Finally, a white ball with red stitches underneath a white uniform with red pinstripes may have certainly played the role of chameleon to Philadelphia's advantage. In all, with no umpire having seen the ball enter Pivetta's jersey, there was no conference and no detection—by anyone on the playing field, including Barnes—of the ball in the player's uniform.

Video as follows:

Tmac's Teachable Moments - Staying with the Catch

We're staying with the catch for today's umpire edition of Tmac's Teachable Moments.

Umpires like to use the phrase that we have two ears and one mouth for a reason. We also have two eyes, and those come in very handy when it comes to adjudicating the completion of a catch. Today's Teachable Moment looks at a play where 1B Umpire Alfonso Marquez uses his eyes and is so relaxed and seamless in his mechanics, thanks to some excellent timing.
Related Post: Greg Gibson Reminds All Umpires: Patience is a Virtue (7/15/12)

U1 Marquez follows the ball, not the foot.

Fonzie's play begins as a routine ground ball to third and, even after a slight misplay, the end result should still be an out. Marquez is focused on the 1st baseman's right foot which he correctly judges to have left the bag before secure possession is garnered by the 1st baseman. Here is where the play becomes complex. Fonzie IMMEDIATELY goes to the glove and looks for a tag (with a pulled foot, a tag is the only logical way the fielder will be able to put out the runner).

Think this is easy? It's a skill acquired over 1000s of repetitions whether you have a play at first base with a pulled foot or not. Marquez sees the tag attempt and is so focused, he follows the ball as it caroms out of the 1st baseman's glove and rolls toward second.

Fielder's glove collides with runner's leg.

Sidebar: Quick Rules Review regarding interference. OBR 6.01(a)(10) puts the runner out for interference if he "intentionally interferes with a thrown ball." The MLB Umpire Manual interpretation extends the out call to a tag attempt: "While contact may occur between a fielder and runner during a tag attempt, a runner is not allowed to use his hands or arms to commit an obviously malicious or unsportsmanlike act—such as grabbing, tackling, intentionally slapping at the baseball, punching, kicking, flagrantly using his arms or forearms, etc.—to commit an intentional act of interference unrelated to running the bases." Batter-runner Abreu's interaction with F3 Myers is not intentional interference, and, regardless, the question of interference is not subject to Replay Review.

Watch the catching action to its conclusion.

As far as the definition of a catch, "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." Although the parameters of Replay Review allow for a batter/runner to be ruled out via video review at the moment the ball first touches the fielder's glove (provided the fielder maintains simple possession and at some point gains secure possession), the fielder must nonetheless hold onto the ball "long enough" to demonstrate complete control. In other words, real-time calls should never really be made at the moment the ball first touches the fielder's glove: good timing generally means waiting until that specific phase of the play is complete before making a call. As for Wil Myers, he never really had complete control nor secure possession.

Here's the finale. There's no need for a theatrical safe call here. Marquez gives a relaxed obvious safe so as to not draw unneeded attention to himself on this complicated play. Notice how he watches the ball as it leaves the mitt. This is a thing of beauty.

---

This strategy applies to any catch play.

Let's change the play to any routine catch—a fly ball to the outfield, line drive in a trouble spot, or thrown ball to first base, it doesn't particularly make a difference. Follow the ball until it's released from the glove. Make sure you follow the ball or the voluntary release. This stops from the potential disasters of turning away and having the fielder drop the ball and you're watching a tag up.

Speaking of tagging up, yes, the runner can leave the base at first touch, but, again, what benefit is there for calling an out right away other than a potential missed call, and how can a fielder demonstrate that he has "complete control" and that "his release is voluntary and intentional" if the out call is made before the fielder has a chance to release the ball? A faster calling cadence may be appropriate for some calls due to the smaller time window which they are defined by (e.g., fair/foul, interference, obstruction, or an out of the base path call, to name a few), but catches are not one of them.
Related Post: Clearing Up a Myth - Timely Retouch of a Bobbled Fly (4/27/17)

A fair/foul call will precede the catch/drop call.

That runner's tagging either way, and, if you're wrong and the ball is dropped, the runner's probably making it to the next base regardless of the premature (and erroneous) out call...unless of course there's a rule against that...

We saw this during the 2017 NCAA Baseball Super Regional on a fly ball to right-center, initially fielded by the outfielder, who dropped the ball during the transfer action, but ruled "no catch" by the first base umpire. Bearing in mind that college has slightly different mechanics for fly balls in the four-person system, there should still be an eye on this play through voluntary release. By the time the ball is out of the glove, much less on the ground, it's too late to travel back and try to reconstruct how it got there.
Related Post: NCAA Rule - Reversing a Catch Call's Runner Placement (6/13/17)

Quicker timing is appropriate for some calls.

So, what did we learn here? That Alfonso Marquez is a great umpire in the prime of his career. We also must realize this play isn't easy if you are looking at the wrong thing. Once you no longer have a foot on the base (on a thrown ball to first situation), go to the glove, which may require an adjustment in head or even body positioning. Next, have good timing. Don't sell a pulled foot or a tag until the play is complete. This is the dictionary definition of good umpiring and it's no surprise who the umpire is. Lastly, have fun.

Video via "Read More"

Boundary Call - Spectator Interference vs Out of Play

A fielder reached into the stands to catch a foul fly ball, and ended up with a fan's hat in his glove alongside it. Today's lesson from the UEFL University concerns boundaries: specifically, what constitutes a legal catch, spectator interference, and a ball deemed out of play.

UEFL University

About the UEFL University: In conjunction with the UEFL Video Rulebook, the UEFL University is a perpetual work-in-progress educational program that discusses various Official Baseball Rules. Eventually, the various "Rules Reviews," "Video Analyses," and "Tmac's Teachable Moments" will be catalogued and organized by topic. For now, though, refer to the Labels system to browse for a specific rule or concept (e.g., the label "Umpire Interference" corresponds to all archived discussions concerning that concept).

The Play: With none out and none on, Indians batter Edwin Encarnacion hit a fly ball toward the boundary wall in foul territory beyond first base. Rays first baseman Logan Morrison prepared to field the descending fly ball, and reached into the stands in order to do so, ultimately catching both the baseball and a wayward Cleveland fan's hat in his glove as 1B Umpire Gabe Morales declared Encarnacion out on the catch.

Topic of Discussion: On such a boundary call, when is a ball considered live vs dead—in play vs out of play—a catch vs a foul ball—spectator (aka "fan") interference vs a no-call?

Fan interference only exists on/over the field.

Analysis: In order for spectator interference to occur, the following definition of spectator interference must be satisfied: "a spectator reaches out of the stands, or goes on the playing field, and (1) touches a live ball or (2) touches a player and hinders and attempt to make a play on a live ball." Furthermore, the spectator must reach beyond the plane of the field-facing front of the padded wall for interference to exist.

For ballpark security administrators considering whether or not to eject the fan pursuant to MLB and stadium regulations, note that a ball that sits atop a wall, or is touched by a spectator while over the flat portion of any boundary wall, is not spectator interference for the spectator is required to reach out of the stands and over the playing field's airspace for interference to exist. This type of a top-of-the-wall-touch is simply considered "out of play" (not interference). Think: tie goes to the fan.

Diagram of potential fan interference.

In other words, imagine that the field-facing plane of the wall extends infinitely to the sky. Fans are allowed to do nearly anything on their side of the extended plane, as long as they don't cross over into restricted airspace (see accompanying diagram from Game 2 of the 2013 Detroit-Boston ALCS).

The penalty for spectator interference is: "the ball shall be dead at the moment of interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference. APPROVED RULING: If spectator interference clearly prevents a fielder from catching a fly ball, the umpire shall declare the batter out" (Rule 6.01(e)).

Bartman did not interfere, either.

Replays indicate fielder Morrison reached into the stands to attempt his catch (his arm, thus, left the airspace over the playing field), meaning that spectator interference does not apply: "No interference shall 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. However, should a spectator reach out on the playing field side of such fence, railing or rope, and plainly prevent the fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectator’s interference."

With the interference question solved, we turn to the definition of in- vs out-of-play: in this situation, what else could cause the ball to become dead?

Specifically, we're looking to answer the question of whether the ball simply touching a fan's person, clothing, or accessories over dead-ball-territory (aka out of play, the stands, etc.) is enough to kill the play.

The answer is "yes," and comes from Rule 6.01(e) Comment: "There is a difference between a ball which has been thrown or batted into the stands, touching a spectator thereby being out of play even though it rebounds onto the field and a spectator going onto the field or reaching over, under or through a barrier and touching a ball in play or touching or otherwise interfering with a player."

We're specifically isolating the portion of the rule that states, "...touching a spectator thereby being out of play..."As soon as a spectator or any other object (a chair, a bird, or even a fan's hat) touches or is touched by a ball on the dead-ball side of the demarcation or boundary line, the play is dead.

Morrison's glove catches two objects.

That said, it appears fielder Morrison was able to pocket the baseball on one side of his glove while gathering the fan's hat on the opposite side. But did the hat help Morrison hang onto the ball—what if it did?

Rule 5.09(a) specifies that a batter is out when: "his fair or foul fly ball (other than a foul tip) is legally caught by a fielder." The rule continues, "A 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... 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."

Conclusion: As long as the fly ball did not touch the hat prior to the ball's entry into the glove, and, in the umpire's opinion, Morrison did not use the hat to gain possession of the ball, this is a legal catch. Naturally, if the ball touched the foreign cap prior to entering the glove—or assisted Morrison in getting possession after entry—this is not a legal catch, and, based on the preceding analysis, is not fan interference, either (it is simply "out of play"). That said, had this entire sequence occurred on the playing field side of the boundary wall, it would be subject to consideration of spectator interference and the corresponding penalty.

Video via "Read More"