Baseball Riddle #1

[Forty_four]

Figures an umpire would provide that trivia. Once the ball is "touched", even by the illegal glove it is still a fair ball. So of course the umpire through us off by stating that 3 runs scored whit out a batted fair ball.

 

[Sonny44]

But, when the fielder throws his mitt and touches the ball, the ball is in fair territory and thus the ball becomes fair the moment his glove touches it. Yes, the batter is awarded third base, but if he can make it home on the play he's entitled because the ball is still considered to be in play. I don't think it's true that a ball is not fair or foul until it reaches 1st or 3rd. It's fair until it goes foul before reaching the base.

So, the batter in this riddle did hit a fair ball.

Here are the rules I think would govern:

Definition: A FAIR BALL is a batted ball that settles on fair ground between home and first
base, or between home and third base, or that is on or over fair territory when bounding to
the outfield past first or third base, or that touches first, second or third base, or that first
falls on fair territory on or beyond first base or third base, or that, while on or over fair Rule 2.00
territory touches the person of an umpire or player, or that, while over fair territory, passes
out of the playing field in flight

Rule 7.05 Each runner including the batter-runner may, without liability to be put out,
advance—
Rule 7.05 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.

I think this makes sense. It's kind of like a delayed call in hockey, where the ref lets the play happen before stopping play so as not to penalize the batter. Perhaps there is a rule that is an exception to what I've outlined above. Regardless, thanks for posting it. It's an interesting scenario, and I'll try to come up with another one.

But, the ball had not been determined to be fair or foul at that point. It could have been in foul territory ready to roll back in and the pitcher prevented it from becoming fair.
See the definition. The ball had not settled, it never passed the base either, nor did it touch a base or touch an ump or player.
What do you think of doggy's comment that no RBI's would be awarded?

 

[doggydaddy]

But, the ball had not been determined to be fair or foul at that point. It could have been in foul territory ready to roll back in and the pitcher prevented it from becoming fair.
See the definition. The ball had not settled, it never passed the base either, nor did it touch a base or touch an ump or player.
What do you think of doggy's comment that no RBI's would be awarded?

Maybe one rbi, as the run would have scored on the hit ball, but once the glove was thrown at the ball, the batter had nothing to do with the runs scoring.

 

[Bestiarius]

But, the ball had not been determined to be fair or foul at that point. It could have been in foul territory ready to roll back in and the pitcher prevented it from becoming fair.
See the definition. The ball had not settled, it never passed the base either, nor did it touch a base or touch an ump or player.
What do you think of doggy's comment that no RBI's would be awarded?

Sorry, I misread your original question thinking it was in fair territory and the fielder knocked it out. I'll have to look at the rule book again to see if that scenario is covered. Interesting....

 

[Bestiarius]

Rule 10.16 (d) No run shall be earned when the scoring runner’s advance has been aided by an
error, a passed ball or defensive interference or obstruction, if in the official scorer’s
judgment the run would not have scored without the aid of such misplay.

This is talking about earned runs not RBIs. But, it looks like it's up to the official scorer to make a decision as to what would have happened if the interference didn't occur. In this case the scorer could have decided that the ball would roll into fair territory and grant 3 RBIs. Maybe there's something in the rules, but I couldn't find anything that covered this exact scenario. It's probably a good question to pose to an umpire's site to see if they could come up with a clearer answer. Good one, Sonny.

 

[Sonny44]

Rule 10.16 (d) No run shall be earned when the scoring runner’s advance has been aided by an
error, a passed ball or defensive interference or obstruction, if in the official scorer’s
judgment the run would not have scored without the aid of such misplay.

This is talking about earned runs not RBIs. But, it looks like it's up to the official scorer to make a decision as to what would have happened if the interference didn't occur. In this case the scorer could have decided that the ball would roll into fair territory and grant 3 RBIs. Maybe there's something in the rules, but I couldn't find anything that covered this exact scenario. It's probably a good question to pose to an umpire's site to see if they could come up with a clearer answer. Good one, Sonny.

Thanks Bestiarius. If you know of such a site please go ahead.

Meanwhile, I have another one to post tomorrow. Hope you come up with a couple too.