I apologize for the lack of details, this play came up on a highlight tape I saw today so I think it just happened.
Two fielders were going for a fly ball, one obviously more in position. He catches the ball in his glove but the glove rotates back and ejects the ball. Player number two is still closing fast so he dives for it and catches it just at ground level. Great situational awareness. Not that I watch a lot of baseball but I don’t recall seeing that before.
Dennis
Must have seen highlights of the Brewers game yesterday. It’s rare but it does happen from time to time.
It happens sometimes on infield or foul ball pop ups. If you search on Youtube you’ll find some compilations of them.
No dives, but it’s happened a couple times in World Series games:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjIFmsCqvS0[quote=“journeyman_southpaw, post:4, topic:815793”]
No dives, but it’s happened a couple times in World Series games:
[/QUOTE]The Boone to Rose assist is very well known. The simple unforced bobble happens often enough, there are also cases where a player diving for a ball manages to keep it the air long enough for the backup to grab it. It is rare, the majority of fly balls are caught for an out and mostly with no else close enough to help out if the ball isn’t caught cleanly. I’ve seen many more players ‘assist’ themselves and grab a ball they got a glove on but didn’t pull in on the first attempt.
That’s it, in fact they made two of them. The one I saw was caught by Cain at about 1:00 into the video. He sure was happy, look at that smile.
DennisThere is also the opposite. To be considered a catch you must successfully take the ball out of your glove. There are some clips of routine catches where the fielder drops the ball making an out into a hit.
Not baseball, but if you liked that, you might like these examples from cricket: - YouTube - not all involve 2 players, if anything those with only one player involved are even more impressive. In case it’s not obvious, if a cricket fielder touches the boundary rope with any part of their body (or steps over it) the catch does not count and instead it is no out, 6 runs to the batting side. Hence their great efforts to avoid doing so. As long as they are in the air when they release the ball (and then catch it again), it’s all good.
That’s not the rule. A catch can be subsequently disallowed if the fielder loses possession of the ball by colliding with the ground, a fence/wall, or another fielder. However, the rules specifically allows for loss of possession if the ball is taken out of the glove in an effort to make another play; “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.” (All of this Rule 5.09a) This is often called dropping the ball “in transfer” though that phrase isn’t the official term of art.
There is no wording that says a fielder must remove the ball from his glove for a catch to be legal and of course there are many circumstances where there would be no need to demonstrate this; for instance, an outfielder catches a ball for a third out and simply starts jogging off the field. It’s still clearly an out.
Does the first player to have touched the ball officially get credit for an assist?
mixdenny:
He’s got the greatest smile. As a Royals fan, I’ve been privileged to see it quite a lot.
Actually the first catch in that clip is now not a legal catch.
Since Sep-17 for a catch on the boundary to be legal, the fielder must either be grounded inside the boundary or their last contact with the ground before touching the ball must have been inside the boundary.
In the example this would now be scored as not out and a 6 to the batsman.
No, simply because there is no concept of an “assist” in cricket. The scorecard would note “caught X, bowled Y”, with Y being the bowler prior to the ball being struck (obviously) and X being the player to finally claim the catch - no mention for the ‘assisting’ player.
Interesting - thanks! Seems like a small thing to go to the trouble of changing, wonder why they bothered really but there we go. Also seems harsh to score it as a 6 given that had the fielder in that scenario failed to catch the ball, it would have been (probably) 3 runs or so scored. But then any other number wouldn’t be perfect either.
It’s just a clarification of the original rule from back in the day when the fence was the boundary.
You could lead over the fence to take a catch, but you can’t lean on the fence.
Now they rope the boundary in a couple of yards and these types of catches are possible, but the principle remains.
Nice - thanks again.
I know almost nothing about cricket, but I think the new rule also makes things more consistent internally and easier to judge (which is why every other sport I’m aware of does it that way). With the old rule, if a player starts out of bounds, jumps, catches and throws the ball back in bounds before landing, then lands out of bounds, is the ball in or out? Neither answer is very good.
Thanks for that info, though I was asking about baseball, not cricket. (Isn’t that waht the OP was about? Now I’m confused. :))
I suspect the answer is still No, but I’m not sure. I consider myself pretty knowlwdgeable about baseball, but this is a question I’ve never pondered before.
You are quite right, my apologies - I totally hijacked the thread, there. Maybe one of our knowledgable baseball Dopers like RickJay or OldGuy will pop back in with the answer.
Yes. This most commonly occurs when the pitcher deflects a ball that another infielder fields and then throw a runner out. This is true whether the deflection is deliberate or not.
Well, that makes sense. If a pitcher deflects a ground ball, it would be scored, say, 1-4-3. So, yeah, a deflected pop-up from the third baseman to the shortstop would go as 5-6 putout. I should have realized as much. :smack: