The Season of Huh: Your 2013-14 Cleveland Cavaliers
April 16, 2014Indians expectations, end of the Cavs season and Alex Mack … While We’re Waiting
April 17, 2014I got into an argument over MLB’s new (old?) interpretation of what is a catch when Elliot Johnson “caught” a fly ball, took two steps, came up against the outfield wall and then dropped the ball as he attempted to throw the ball into the infield. It wasn’t ruled an out because the “definition of a catch” apparently includes a transfer, even for an outfielder who has taken multiple steps with the ball secured in his glove. It was a civil conversation with Sirius XM’s Mike Ferrin, but he and I had to agree to disagree on the topic. Then I brought up this question, which I haven’t seen an answer to just yet.
@MikeFerrinSXM What if CF catches the ball and runs in with a runner caught between 2-3? He runs 40 ft and then bobbles it. Is that a hit?
— Craig Lyndall (@WFNYCraig) April 9, 2014
Here’s the rule from the actual rulebook.
I wasn’t smart enough to take the argument to the next logical step, but thankfully Dave Cameron at FanGraphs is. While Cameron agrees while that the rule interpretation makes loads of sense at second base, the issue isn’t quite so clear when it comes to outfielders. The money passage from Cameron says it all.
At this point, it shouldn’t be too hard to spot the problem with using the same definition of a catch in the outfield as it is at second base; the drop at second base has no real impact on the runner’s decision making. The batter is sprinting down the first base line to try and beat out the double play, and probably will rarely even know the ball is dropped on the double play attempt. The runner going into second base is almost always sliding into the bag, and the dropped transfer does not result in the ball rolling far enough away for an advancement to third base. Until the play is over and the runners find out who is safe and who is out, they don’t really care too much about what the fielders are doing.
That is absolutely not true with runners and outfielders, however; the decision of whether to advance or return to base is entirely dependent on whether the outfielder is ruled to have safely caught the ball. Runners are taught to get enough of a lead off the base to maximize their potential advancement in case the ball is not caught while still retaining their ability to return to their previous base if it is. When the ball enters the glove, the runner returns to their prior base in order to avoid a potential double play. Only now, the ball entering the glove is no longer the determining factor of whether or not the catch was made; that is now the ball moving from the glove to the hand.
Enter Elliot Johnson. I never thought I’d have much opportunity to write that prior to the start of the Indians season. But if a catch determination isn’t made until the transfer of the ball to the throwing hand and Elliot Johnson’s two steps before maintaining possession of the ball into the outfield wall aren’t enough, then to quote the Indians, “What if?”
What if Johnson hits the wall and instead of looking to throw starts sprinting toward the infield where the runners are assuming it’s a catch. As he’s running in, he “bobbles” the ball on transfer thus rendering the “catch” not a catch at all. It’s an extreme example, but you kind of open yourself up to it, don’t you? As FanGraphs points out, this opens the game up to the exact thing that the infield fly rule was designed to eliminate.
24 Comments
Here’s the biggest argument that I got into over the call:
If it was the 3rd out in the inning, then would it have been called a catch?
(1) No.
Great, we are consistent. Oh, by the way, any IF or OF who catches the 3rd out of an inning that doesn’t seem to have a clean transfer when they flip the ball onto the field (as most do) should be awarded an error and the runners allowed to advance with the inning continuing. We need to make sure that players not only make the catch but transfer the ball to their throwing hand and hold the ball up to call time like we are in little league.
(2) Yes.
Ummmm, so it matters how many outs there are in an inning to determine if someone caught the ball? Alrighty then.
I don’t feel like looking this up in the rule book to confirm, but my understanding of the rules about tagging up are that a runner can leave a base once the ball enters the glove (not necessarily when the catch is made). This way if a fielder bobbles the ball the runner isn’t penalized for leaving early. Craig, if I’m understanding your point correctly, this would remove the ability for an Elliot Johnson to game the system like you and the Fangraphs writer are poking at.
2 feels a lot like the NFL where rules about a catch are different depending on if you’re in the end zone, going out of bounds, or going to the ground. All around this is pretty dumb. In every league as technology has improved the enforcement of some of the rules has gotten really wonky.
The player doesn’t have to reach up and call time, just do enough to demonstrate the ball wasn’t being bobbled in the glove. You seem to be unable to flip the ball from you glove to the ground after the third out, but doing so with your hand will be fine.
The Elliot Johnson catch was a catch but I’ve already seen enough other plays where it wasn’t so discernible. This is one of those unfortunate results of replaying just about every single questionable play. I think MLB made replay available to entirely to many situations to fast. They should have worked up to an all encompassing oversight IMO but it’s to late now.
An interesting part of the rule says that if it hits a part of your uniform, it is not a catch?
What happens on a catch for the third out in foul territory and the player offers the ball to a fan with an open glove?
This is correct. And how I, as an umpire, would rule it.
Think the point is that a runner would be required to run to the next base once the ball is “dropped” as the batter technically becomes a base runner himself.
With runners on first and second and no outs:
Catch ball
Take three steps towards the infield with ball in glove
“Drop” ball on transfer
Pick it up
Throw to third (runner standing on second, assuming the ball caught)
Out
Throw to second (runner standing on first, assuming the ball caught)
Out
Throw to first (runner heading to the dugout, assuming the ball caught)
Out
He quickly learns not to do that.
I’m sympathetic to the instances where the player can game the system like Cameron describes above, but not so much to instances where a player carelessly forgets to do something as easy as take it out of the glove himself.
unless you inadvertently bobble the ball (or the umpire thinks you bobble) when making that flip. to be safe, as a manager, I would require my players to call time. it’d be the only fool-proof way to not lose outs
also, I would do it because it would get picked up on by media guys and MLB would be called to the carpet for their stupidity, which is a nice bonus.
always good to add any little thing to make the game just a tad worse for fans.
it brings up an interesting point though. if the fan grabs the ball and then the player grabs it back with his bare-hand, is it still ruled a catch? I have seen foul balls caught that obviously hit the fans glove/hand/etc. first, but am not sure if the umpire is just letting it go or if it is in fact part of the rule.
If you bobble the ball when pulling it out of the glove, the ump won’t give you time out.
Come on, that’s a bit of a reach.
you are much less likely to bobble the ball if you are not going to flip/throw it but are stationary and putting it over your head.
not sure why you do not agree that this is a stupid, ridiculous rule. it is a stupid, ridiculous rule and I am trying to understand any counterpoint, but am not seeing it thus far. apologies if I am missing something here.
?? Players cannot risk tossing the ball into the stands at the end of innings because the umpire might rule that they didn’t have control on the transfer. Unless, of course, they do so after calling time-out 🙂
I have definitely seen a ball bounce off a jersey and still be called a catch. I cannot think of an occurrence when it hit the bill of a hat though I could imagine that happening as well. If Jose’s head-HR had just popped up in the air and he caught it, then by this rule it would have NOT been a catch?
Players cant let fans pick the ball out of their glove, they can toss them into the stands.
if they are willing to let the umpire decide if they had full control when they make that toss. one of a manager’s chief jobs is to limit the amount of judgement calls that may go against his team.
It’s not a good rule in that it can be gamed like Cameron described. The reason it’s not a good rule is not because it forces players to be a tad less careless with the ball.
Once you start pulling the ball out of your glove, the ump will deem you have control. Anything you do past that point is on you, not anyone else.
Have always wondered this…
Bottom of the 9th, game tied, 1 out, runner on third. Fly ball to deep CF which would normally be a sacrifice fly. Based on definition of ‘fully securing ball’, why would CF not bobble the ball intentionally without hitting the ground (sort of like a beach ball) while running all the way into the IF as-to prevent the runner from tagging (i.e., can’t leave the base until catch is made)?
Not quite- if a defender touches the ball, then it hits an offensive player or an umpire, then a different defender catches it, it doesn’t count as a catch.
A runner can tag up as soon as a fly ball is touched. So, while you’re juggling your way in, he can be running.