quote:

You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt." By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.

A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.

quote:

Originally posted by Brilliant Mind:

quote:

You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt." By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.

A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.

Proper mechanic is to signal it.

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Brilliant Mind:

quote:
You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt." By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.

A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.

Proper mechanic is to signal it.

Agreed..........there is a signal mechanic for the call and I see it used at all levels of baseball....

Sometimes with players of a higher level, you may see umpire mechanics be somewhat less emphasized. (read MLB here)......I do not have that luxury, nor have I earned that luxury.......

Recently I saw AAA Salt Lake Bees game.......the umpire mechanics were crisp and to the point on book..........and they signal Foul tip....

The poster is right in the final analysis it is just a strike.........but there is a mechanic and a signal and we should use it.........

The reason for the signal is to let everyone know you had a touch on the bat. If not you get the questions from the dugout. Show it and everyone knows you have control of the plate.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:

quote:

Originally posted by Brilliant Mind:

quote:

You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt." By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.

A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.

Proper mechanic is to signal it.

Question "proper mechanics" which add little to the quality of play and are performed because of historical reasons, not practical ones.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
The reason for the signal is to let everyone know you had a touch on the bat. If not you get the questions from the dugout. Show it and everyone knows you have control of the plate.

I quit the foul tip mechanic years ago. On rare occasion have I been questioned as to whether a caught strike was foul-tipped or not. I respond with (almost always to a coach)..

"Yes, sir, foul tip"

The coach then is forced to think through his question.

I never have been asked twice in one game.

So what have you proven by making the coach think through his question?

It seems to me that one virtue of the foul tip mechanic is that it keeps the umpire in the habit of judging if the pitch is nicked or not. That's actually important when the pitch isn't caught.

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709:
So what have you proven by making the coach think through his question?

Both our times are better served with other things.

A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.

What about the check swing that nicks the ball? I would like to know without having to ask if my guy took a swing, if the pitch was in the zone or if it was a foul tip.

Also, maybe the sound everybody heard could have possibly been catcher's interference instead of a foul tip.

There are plenty of good reasons why to do it. Those are the only two I could come up with and I am sure that others could of better ones.

quote:

Both our times are better served with other things.

A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.

The vast majority of us are associated with chapters and as such are subject to evaluation. In all my evaluations, the proper use of accepted signals is a requirement.

I understand your thoughts, but advocating applying individual mechanic options does not serve the majority of working umpires upon who the eval system applies to....

Umpries should check with their individual chapters to determine what mechanics are required or expected.

Does the offensive player have to make an effort to get out of the way of the ball even if he is in the batters box? Another random question... Do the corner infielders have to have both feet in fair territory when the ball is pitched?

Are you asking if the batter needs to try to avoid a pitched ball, the answer is yes in all codes except NCAA. They allow the batter to simply take a pitch with-in the confines of the box.
The corners do have to be in fair with a foot when the ball is pitched. It is a balk in Fed and a don't do that in all other codes. In every code the umpire isn't going to go looking for it. If asked about it he will enforce it equally for both teams. Also, being in fair means one foot touching the foul line.

MST,

A minor nit-- in OBR a player needs to have both feet in fair ground. See PBUC 1.16, which also says don't do anything about it unless the offensive team complains.

Second thing: In NCAA, there is a penalty, but I wonder how often it would be invoked.
NCAA 5.4:
c. Other than the pitcher and catcher, all other fielders may position themselves anywhere in fair territory.
PENALTY for c.—The play, if it benefits the defense, shall be nullified. If it is an appeal play, the appeal is lost.

I stand corrected 3finger. However, even in OBR most only have one foul and many times that foot is touching the line. Touching counts as being in. I see many put their foot against the back of the bag. I consider it as being in fair. YMMV