Baseball rules corner: determining a "legal catch" can sometimes be tricky

Baseball Digest, Nov, 2004 by Rich Marazzi

IN A MAY 1 GAME BETWEEN THE Rockies and Braves, Colorado third baseman Vinny Castilla reached into the stands in foul territory to make a catch. It appeared that Castilla had the ball in his glove and the hat of a fan.

But before he had a chance to remove the ball from his glove, a fan took the hat and ball out of the surprised third baseman's glove.

The umpire ruled the play "no catch" because Castilla did not make a voluntary and intentional release of the ball. And because he was on the spectators' side of the barrier, he was open game, which means he was not able to get a call of fan interference.

"I go for the ball," said Castilla. "When I got the ball, I got a fan's hat and the ball. He (the fan) pulled it (the ball) and the hat out of my glove. They called it no catch."

Fast forward to the Blue Jays--Yankees game at the SkyDome on July 26. Toronto first baseman Carlos Delgado suffered the same indignity. After catching a foul ball in the stands along the first base line, a fan snatched the ball out of his glove. Once again, the play was properly ruled no catch giving the Yankees an extra out.

Three things are required to make a legal catch of a batted ball. A fielder must have control of the ball, secure possession of the ball, and must make a voluntary and intentional release of the ball. In the case of catching a thrown ball, a fielder merely needs to have control. For some reason, there is a much higher standard to make a legal catch of a batted ball.

The tricky term is "voluntary and intentional release." It has been the bane of many on-the-field controversies over the years.

Keep in mind that a fielder must make a voluntary and intentional release of the ball every time he catches it whether or not the ball is in the field of play, and whether or not it is fair or foul. Richie Garcia, who is currently one of six major league baseball supervisors of umpires, tells this story:

"I think it was in 1989, George Bell was playing left field for Toronto in a game at Anaheim. He caught the ball in fair territory in the stands. A guy took it out of his glove. Because he made no attempt to voluntarily transfer the ball, the batters was awarded with a home run."

The ambiguous term "voluntary and intentional release" and its interpretation are open to debate. How is it defined? Is it universally interpreted? Is it consistently enforced?

"When a player actually reaches into his glove and is in the act of pulling the ball out is what constitutes voluntary and intentional release," said veteran arbiter Tim McClelland. "Involuntary release is hitting a fence and having it pop out. Voluntary release is the choice of the fielder, not some extraneous factor like running into a wall or grandstand, colliding with a teammate, or falling to the ground." Unlike football, the ground can cause a fumble in the game of baseball.

In essence, a fielder could make what appears to be a great running catch until he runs into a wall or falls to the ground and drops the ball after securing and carrying it for several feet. Take what happened in the Atlanta--San Diego game played on September 26, 1982, in Atlanta.

In the top of the third inning with two outs, the Padres' Gene Richards lofted a fly ball to left field. Braves' left fielder Terry Harper speared the ball after making a long run. He caught the ball in fair territory, then crossed into foul territory. His momentum carried him across the line into the bullpen railing. Trying to cushion, his landing, he grabbed the railing to brace himself before tumbling into the bullpen area.

At about that time, he dropped the ball and umpire Ed Vargo ruled Harper's play "no catch," and Richards cruised around the bases. The official scorer ruled the play a four-base error, but the league office overruled the scoring, and called the play an inside-the-park home run.

Why wasn't Harper credited with a catch? Everybody repeat, "Because he did not voluntarily and intentionally release the ball before crashing into the bullpen railing." From the standpoint of common sense, it seems unfair for a fielder to do all that work and risk life and limb only to be told that his hustling effort was made in vain.

Strange but true, when a teammate removes the ball from a fallen fielder's glove, this satisfies the voluntary and intentional release requirement. In Game 4 of the 1999 American League Division Series played between the Indians and Red Sox at Fenway Park, Cleveland center fielder Kenny Lofton legalized a catch made by second baseman Roberto Alomar in the bottom of the first inning.

With one out, Nomar Garciaparra hit a fly between Alomar and right fielder Manny Ramirez. Alomar caught the ball and fell to the ground without making his voluntary and intentional release of the ball. While Alomar lay on the ground, Lefton wisely took the ball out of his glove to complete the voluntary and intentional release part of the rule. How many fielders do you think are aware of that rule?

There are various scenarios that can create knotty problems for the men in blue when it comes to interpreting those sacred words "voluntary and intentional release." Let's look at a few.