Clipping:A point of play: catching the ball in one's hat
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 |
| Add a Clipping |
| Date | Sunday, September 15, 1872 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Boston vs. Athletic 9/14/1872] In the seventh inning of the Athletics, Anson and Reach were at second and first bases, and one man was out, when Malone hit a high ball that George Wright caught in his cap, and then passing the ball to third, second and first bases, a scene of great confusion arose–the Reds claiming that they had put the side out by their not very creditable piece of sharp practice, and the Athletics claiming that only the striker was put out. Finally, after ten or fifteen minutes’ discussion, the umpire decided to allow Malone to strike again, and the Bostons protesting against the decision, took the field, and two men were put out without adding a run. Philadelphia Sunday Mercury September 15, 1872 [Boston vs. Athletic 9/14/1872] Malone, weak fly, taken by George Wright with his hat. Wright threw the ball to Spaulding, who threw to third base, Schafer promptly throwing to second, G. Wright coming in claiming that the side was thus put out, Anson and Reach being “forced” by his “catch.” {The “point” here is in regard to catching a ball in the hat.} Fifteen minutes talk!!! {The Umpire decided that Wright’s sharp play amounted to nothing, and sent Malone again to the bat!} ... The rule in regard to a ball caught by a players hat or cap, is as follows: “If a fielder stop the ball with his hat or cap, no player can be put out unles the ball shall first have settlled in the hands of the pitcher while he stands within the lines of his position.” This, of course, compelled Anson to run to third, and Reach to second, and the umpire therefore showed a most disgraceful want of knowledge regarding the rules, in not deciding them out. Evening City Item September 16, 1872 [Boston vs. Athletic 9/14/1872] [Anson at second, Reach at first] ...Malone popped up a high ball that George Wright waited for, and instead of catching it in his hands, caught it in his hat, and as Anson and Reach remained on their bases, George fielded the ball to third and second bases. Judgment was asked on Anson and Reach being forced out, and as the umpire, who was first rather confused by the novelty of the point presented to him, decided that Malone was only out. An indescribable scene of confusion arose, both nines clustering around the umpire, and the Red Stockings were very demonstrative in their appeals to the umpire to decide it a double-play on the ground that no striker can be put out when the ball is caught in a fielder’s hat, and therefore both Anson and Reach were forced off their bases. The Athletics, however, produced the rules which distinctly says, “if an adversary stops the ball with his hat or cap, ... no player can be put out, unless the ball shall firs have been settled in the hands of the pitcher,” &c., and claimed that in case the picking of the ball out of his cap by George Wright as it most undoubtedly did, that the section of the rule providing that “the ball should have been settled in the hands of the pitcher” had not been complied with, and therefore no one could be put out, not even the striker. After some fifteen minutes discussion over the childish quibble raised by the Bostons, the umpire finally decided to call it a “dead ball,” and allow Malone to strike over again, and the Reds agreed to play the balance of the game out under protest. New York Clipper September 21, 1872 [from answers to correspondents] The match you refer to was reported by our regular Philadelphia correspondent whom we have hitherto found reliable. In his deciding that the ball caught by George Wright was a catch, however, he was in error. The point of play arranged by Harry Wright to be tried on the Athletics in this game was based on an erroneous interpretation of the rules, inasmuch as in base ball, as in cricket, a ball caught by a player with his hat or cap is dead for putting the striker it. In the case in point the striker was not only not out, but he had to strike over again. This rule needs amending so far as to make this catching a ball by the cap a dead ball in every respect, as it has hitherto been considered. Had we been umpire in the game we should have decided the striker not out, the ball dead to the extent of forcing the striker to run first base, and consequently dead as to forcing the other men off the bases. If this cap catching were allowed there would be endless disputed on points of play difficult to judge which would result from it. New York Clipper October 5, 1872 |
| Source | Philadelphia Sunday Mercury |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | Edit with form to add a comment |
| Query | Edit with form to add a query |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Origin | Initial Hershberger Clippings |
Comments
<comments voting="Plus" />