I was just watching the Yankees-Rays game, and in the 5th inning, there was a grounder hit along the third base line. It hit the ground inside the foul line, then bounced up and landed again on the other side of the line, and was ruled a foul. Why wasn’t the ball fair? It hit inside the line first. Is there some rules nuance I’m missing?
The ball has to cross over (or inside) the (in this case the 3rd base) bag to be ruled fair. I reckon the 3rd base umpire pointed (with the thumb & index finger) into foul territory. Thus foul. 
This does sound unusual. I’ll take back what I said till I see the play. I’ve been watching the Islanders and Mets games. From St. Petersburg. It has been a berry berry good day.
If it goes foul before passing 1st or 3rd base, it’s foul - regardless of where it first bounced. It’s why fielders will sometimes wait and watch a rolling bunt to see if it goes foul. (Or, in some cases, blow it foul.)
For a ground ball to be fair, it must be in fair territory the last time that it strikes the ground inside of first or third base, or when it is touched by an fielder inside of first/third. In the case that you describe it sounds like the ball skipped out of fair territory and landed in foul territory before it passed third base, so the ball is foul.
To be more specific, if the ball strikes the ground before first or third base, then passes first or third, its position at the time it passes first or third determines if it is fair or foul. If it does not pass first or third, then it is where it comes to rest or is first touched. If it passes first or third, but does not touch anything before that, then where it first touches something determines whether it is foul or fair.
Not quite. If it’s bouncing, it is not the last touch before 1st or 3rd, but its position as it crosses the line through second base and the base in question. So if it last touches in fair then bounces outside of third base before passing it, it is foul. The opposite is also true, but I think I’ve never seen it happen. It would probably require some kind of spin on the ball.
This is true for balls that land in the field of play. If it goes out of the field of play (a home run) it’s fair if it goes over the fence, wall, etc., in fair territory. This rule was changed in 1931. That was during Ruth’s career and he lost an estimated 75 career home runs because of it. He also lost one home run due to the rule that in what is now a game-ending home run would only score as many runners as needed to beat the visiting team by 1 run and the batter was credited with a hit of as many bases as that runner needed to score. Finally in those days if the ball cleared the fence but bounced back off something it was in play and not automatically a home run. He lost two home runs in 1930 due to that rule and presumably others over the years.
Well, that’s what the umpire is supposed to do to indicate a fair ball - point vigorously into fair territory to signal the ball is fair and in play.
To call a ball foul, the umpire is supposed to throw both hands up in the air and yell, “Foul ball!” A foul ball is automatically dead, so no further action can occur - hence, the strong visual and auditory signal to let all players know it’s foul.
Interesting situation I saw in youth baseball the other day - the pitch was high and behind the batter, so he ducked toward the plate. The pitch struck his bat and bounced into foul territory near the batters’ box, but then rolled up the third base line and crossed into fair territory, before reaching the base. That’s actually a fair ball - except the home-plate umpire, caught by surprise from the unusual situation, threw up his hands and called it foul. If umpires call a foul ball - even mistakenly - the ball is dead and the play stops (because you don’t want some players continuing to go full-out while others who saw the foul call are letting up).
I stand corrected, sir.
Back in the day, Coach Morris Buttermaker would have stormed out of the dugout with his beer in hand to kick some dirt at the umpire.
Do you have any cites for your Babe Ruth claims? I would love to see them. I would also love it if someone actually found the stories accurate and up his lifetime HR total to get him beyond Bonds. That would be poetic justice.
As to the question… The answer is mostly in here.
If a ball is hit on the ground, even if it initially comes down in foul territory, can roll into fair territory and be called “Fair” by the umpire if 1) the ball stops rolling and is in fair territory, or 2) a defensive player touches the ball in fair territory.
If the ball is hit on the ground and starts in fair territory, and rolls foul, it can actually roll back into fair territory if no one touches it. This is why most guys who follow a bunt or slow roller down the line and watch it go over the foul like into foul territory touch it immediately. Once touched, the ball is either fair or foul based on where it was touched by the defensive player.
If an umpire throws his hands up and yells “foul”, the ball is dead. An argument can ensue if he’s thought wrong, but he kills the play and everyone goes back to where they began the play.
A ball does not need to be touched by a defender for it to be called foul. If a player bunts doen the third base line, and the ball rolls foul and stops in the grass, the umpire cal call the ball foul to save everyone a few steps.
Clearly it’s been far too long since I’ve been an umpire. Thanks for the correction.
From the rules (2.00)
I don’t know if it will confirm that post, but there is a book called The Year Babe Ruth Hit 104 Home Runsthat may cover that.
What about a pop-up that lands on the pitcher’s mound below the rubber and somehow rolls into foul territory untouched?
Same as any other foul ball if it goes into foul territory before it passes first or third base.
I don’t know, but I assume the notation of the rubber is to indicate that it is no different than the other cases. Baseball rules are full of specifics determined after a dispute to clarify the matter. That rule might have been introduced soon after the pitchers rubber came into use.
No, he didn’t. That would be a more than 10% increase in his career home run total. Ten percent of home runs do not land in foul territory. (It’s probably more like 1%.)
To be totally accurate, no home runs land in foul territory. 
I know what you meant but I had to take my turn at being needlessly pedantic. 
According to that book, Ruth hit one that officials estimated the length at 650 feet. The Babe was awesome, but no, I’m not buying that.
Well it was an estimate. I don’t think it was actually impossible, but it seems to be based on the estimated distance over the wall that the ball was last seen, and an estimate that the ball was still rising. And since it was estimated by officials at an exhibition game in the Wyoming Valley in PA I’d estimate that they were wrong.
Interestingly Wikipedia also listed the longest actual official distance of 565 feet hit by Mickey Mantle in 1960 at Griffith Stadium. I was at a Senators game at Griffith in 1960 where Mantle did hit a home run. Possibly I was there for that record setter, though I was only 4 years old and not clear just what was going on. But my cousin did catch a foul ball that Mantle hit that day.