Brandon502
Extra Hitter
Is there a written rule that states a foul ball must be higher than batter's head for it to be an out if caught by the catcher or is this a "backyard" rule?
USSSA Catcher catching foul tip
- Thread starter Brandon502
- Start date
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
The whole "no higher than the batter's head" portion of the foul tip rule has caused more confusion than almost any other rule other than the infield fly rule. Okay, here's what they're actually talking about.
A foul tip is any pitched ball that goes sharply and directly from the bat to the catcher's glove or hand, and is legally caught by the catcher. There's no perceptible arc to it, and it all happens so fast that if you blink, you might miss it. That definition is true in every softball organization out there. It comes from the fast pitch and baseball side of things where the batter struck at the ball, but their actions negligibly changed the path of the ball. It's treated exactly like they had swung at the ball and missed.
So where does this "no higher than the batter's head" phrasing come in?
Well, for some reason, the ones who wrote the rule decided to create an exception to what defined a "foul tip." They decided that if the ball did travel sharply and directly to the catcher's glove or hand, but the glove or hand was somehow above the batter's head, then it was NOT a foul tip. It would be ruled a catch, and the batter would be out.
Unfortunately, some people seem to think that a foul tip is any batted ball that somehow stays below the batter's head and is caught by the catcher. That would include a little blooper that somehow stayed below a batter's head (and yes, I've seen that happen plenty of times). That was never the intent of the rule, and those should not be called a "foul tip." Those should actually be ruled a catch for an out.
ASA did away with the whole "no higher than the batter's head" a long time ago. The wording had no relevance to the sport as it's played today, and only caused confusion, particularly on the slow pitch side of things.
A foul tip is any pitched ball that goes sharply and directly from the bat to the catcher's glove or hand, and is legally caught by the catcher. There's no perceptible arc to it, and it all happens so fast that if you blink, you might miss it. That definition is true in every softball organization out there. It comes from the fast pitch and baseball side of things where the batter struck at the ball, but their actions negligibly changed the path of the ball. It's treated exactly like they had swung at the ball and missed.
So where does this "no higher than the batter's head" phrasing come in?
Well, for some reason, the ones who wrote the rule decided to create an exception to what defined a "foul tip." They decided that if the ball did travel sharply and directly to the catcher's glove or hand, but the glove or hand was somehow above the batter's head, then it was NOT a foul tip. It would be ruled a catch, and the batter would be out.
Unfortunately, some people seem to think that a foul tip is any batted ball that somehow stays below the batter's head and is caught by the catcher. That would include a little blooper that somehow stayed below a batter's head (and yes, I've seen that happen plenty of times). That was never the intent of the rule, and those should not be called a "foul tip." Those should actually be ruled a catch for an out.
ASA did away with the whole "no higher than the batter's head" a long time ago. The wording had no relevance to the sport as it's played today, and only caused confusion, particularly on the slow pitch side of things.
Brandon502
Extra Hitter
Wow! So in slow pitch anything with an arc would pretty much be an out if caught considering that the ball is now travelling up when just an instant before it was travelling in a downward motion.
Brandon502
Extra Hitter
Thank you.
AH23
Addicted to Softballfans
It doesn't even have to have an arc to it to be an out. If the catcher makes a "play" on the ball (basically if it doesn't go directly to the glove), it's an out.
From the book (ASA) Rules Supplement:Foul Ball / Foul Tip
"The reference of the "height of the batter's head" as it relates to a Foul Ball and Foul Tip no longer applies. This chang, instituted in 2006, allows more opportunity for the catcher to obtain "outs" by catching foul batted balls the same as any other fielder who is playing closer to home plate. Umpire only need to judge whether the ball moves from the bat "sharply" and "directly" versus a ball the has a perceptible arc and / or if the catcher moves their glove / mitt to catch the ball after contact with the bat."
From the book (ASA) Rules Supplement:Foul Ball / Foul Tip
"The reference of the "height of the batter's head" as it relates to a Foul Ball and Foul Tip no longer applies. This chang, instituted in 2006, allows more opportunity for the catcher to obtain "outs" by catching foul batted balls the same as any other fielder who is playing closer to home plate. Umpire only need to judge whether the ball moves from the bat "sharply" and "directly" versus a ball the has a perceptible arc and / or if the catcher moves their glove / mitt to catch the ball after contact with the bat."
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
He is asking about USSSA though. USSSA specifically says that a foul tip does not go above the batter's head
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
He is asking about USSSA though. USSSA specifically says that a foul tip does not go above the batter's head
Yes, but all that does is remove the possibility of calling a foul tip if it happens to go above the batter's head. It still has to go "directly" to the catcher's hands, which means it can't be a little blooper.
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
Why does directly not include a little blooper?
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
In USSSA as long as it does not go over the batter head and the first thing it hits is the catchers hands, it is a foul tip. The rule is right there in black and white.
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
I understand how reading it as it's written may appear that way, and that's almost exactly how the rule used to be written for ASA as well. However, that's not how it's interpreted.
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
Not exactly. It must still be direct to the hands. IOW, if there is an arc to it, it cannot be a foul tip, but doesn't say it cannot be caught for an out.
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
Why does direct not include an arc? If it goes from the bat to the hand without touching anything else, it is going directly to the hand. ASA may include that wording in their rules or the case book scenarios. USSSA does not say anything about that.
Further down it says a foul tip can only be caught for an out with 2 strikes
Further down it says a foul tip can only be caught for an out with 2 strikes
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
Yea the "directly and sharply" in the ASA book makes sense that there would be no arc. USSSA and NSA do not say "sharply"
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
There are plenty of rules where things are not as explicitly spelled out as we would like, but the interpretation given from on high clarifies exactly what they mean.
Let's go back a decade to 2005 and see ASA's definition of a foul tip:
Look familiar? Nothing mentioned about "sharply," and it included the "not higher than the batter's head." In fact, USSSA's rule is almost identical to ASA's (this may be because USSSA sprang from ASA in 1968 and used a LOT of the same verbiage). ASA clarified what was really meant by changing "sharply" to "sharply and directly" in the language. USSSA still hasn't done that.
ASA, in my opinion, does a MUCH better job at providing umpires the proper tools for their rule interpretations than any other organization (other than NFHS and the NCAA). USSSA, NSA, ISA... They're all catching up, and you're going to see a lot more of these "well, you know what we meant" situations in those organizations than you will in ASA.
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
I'm not arguing what ASA is saying. Having the word "sharply" makes it clear. However, since USSSA and NSA do not have the word "sharply" you cannnot say that if it has a perceivable arc, then it is not a foul tip. Just because it was similar in the past does not make any difference. The wording in the 2016 rule book for USSSA and NSA does not define a foul tip as needing to have no perceivable arc (i.e. moving sharply to the catcher hand)
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
yes and the rule says "hand" does that mean he has to catch it bare handed?
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
Rusty, I get what you're saying, but your argument doesn't hold water. Yes, it's bad phrasing. Yes, it should be cleaned up. ASA took the exact same language and made it reflect exactly what was intended. USSSA should do the same, but they haven't.
That doesn't change the interpretation that the umpires here have been offering.
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
My argument is that because ASA cleared it up doesn't mean that USSSA and NSA should have the same interpretation based on their common past
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
So a ball that is contacted below the batter's waist, rises to chin level and then falls into the catcher's glove is a foul tip?
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
in USSSA and NSA, yes
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
One of two things: Either USSSA is abusing the definition of "foul tip" to eliminate an out on any catch of a ball not over the batter's head or they just behind since the FP rule is closer to ASA's:
FOUL TIP. A foul tip is a batted ball, which goes directly and speedily from the bat to the catcher’s mitt or hand and is legally caught by the catcher, ball remains live. Note: Any batted ball that travels directly from the bat to any part of the catcher’s body or equipment other than the hand(s) or glove/mitt, is a foul ball and dead. It is not a foul tip.
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
It appears they want to keep it separate for FP and SP. ASA combines that for both.
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
The FP program in USSSA was developed completely independently from the SP side of things. Let's not read too much into that.
Look, we're going in circles here. You've got umpires with decades of experience at all different levels telling you what the rule actually means, but you're refusing to listen. Hey, knock yourself out.
RustyShakleford
Well-Known Member
it's called a discussion. sorry for inconveniencing you
