Blowing on the ball to make it go foul

[Big Daddy Michigan]

We've all seen the video of Lenny Randall blowing the slow roller foul, but some people were questioning the outcome on a Facebook thread if this happened in a softball game. Now considering it's Facebook, and therefore everyone is an expert, there were a plethora of "rules" being quoted. I'm not proficient on some rulesets, and haven't read a rulebook in the last few years since my retirement, so I was curious as to the ruling.

The answers were "interference"-dead ball award batter first- all other runners advance a base.

Immediate dead ball batter gets first & all runners advance.

Fair ball-just like if it hit the fielder's glove and bounced foul. Play is live.

Let it play out then award one extra base as a penalty.

What I want to know is what is the actual ruling & does it differ in various rulesets?

 

[Comp]

As far as I know NCAA is the only ruleset that even mentions blowing on the ball. No other ruleset has any rule or case play that even addresses the issue.

Th vast majority of the comments in that thread are people making stuff up because it is not addressed.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Big Daddy Michigan]

So if you were the umpire would you treat it like a ball deflected off a glove into foul territory. Just a fair ball and play on.

 

[Comp]

No, I would rule fair or foul based on where the ball ultimately ended up. The rule says touched while on or over fair territory, blowing on the ball is not touching it.

Until a pay grade higher than me addresses the issue I am going with what the rule book says and not making anything up or trying to apply rule 10.

 

[marriard]

So if you were the umpire would you treat it like a ball deflected off a glove into foul territory. Just a fair ball and play on.

I disagree with @Comp on how to rule this one.

If I felt the fielder attempts to make the ball change direction then I am making the appropriate call based on where the ball is at that time. So if it is fair, it is fair, foul it is foul. As far as I am concerned it is an outside force having an effect on where the ball ends up and a fielder shouldn't be allowed the change where an untouched ball should end up. Sure it isn't addressed specifically in the rule book or case book, and while I haven't seen the thread I am sure someone will consider breathing an act from the fielder equivalent to fielding or touching the ball. Breath is clearly physical to me so there you go.

Of course if this actually happened it will either be 1) funny or 2) ejections. Umpires HATE people who put us in these sorts of BS positions of having to make a call so I am NOT going to be happy with the fielder so it better be funny or they are not going to happy.

 

[Gambler Bob]

I disagree with @Comp on how to rule this one.

If I felt the fielder attempts to make the ball change direction then I am making the appropriate call based on where the ball is at that time. So if it is fair, it is fair, foul it is foul. As far as I am concerned it is an outside force having an effect on where the ball ends up and a fielder shouldn't be allowed the change where an untouched ball should end up. Sure it isn't addressed specifically in the rule book or case book, and while I haven't seen the thread I am sure someone will consider breathing an act from the fielder equivalent to fielding or touching the ball. Breath is clearly physical to me so there you go.

Of course if this actually happened it will either be 1) funny or 2) ejections. Umpires HATE people who put us in these sorts of BS positions of having to make a call so I am NOT going to be happy with the fielder so it better be funny or they are not going to happy.

If a player farted at a ball and the fart made the ball go foul. Would that be funny enough not to be ejected from the game by you?

Another question. Would a fart be considered a physical or a natural occurence?

 

[marriard]

If a player farted at a ball and the fart made the ball go foul. Would that be funny enough not to be ejected from the game by you?

Another question. Would a fart be considered a physical or a natural occurence?

Oh the blowing on the ball won't cause the ejection. It will always be the coach or player who doesn't like the decision they forced me to make.

Added: Going to expand on this. You can see Comp and I differ on how we would probably call this if it actually happened.

Rulebooks in all sports try to avoid addressing ridiculous or stupid situations because the rulebook is already long enough and complex (and open to interpretation) enough as it is without adding rules in for one off or unforseen scenarios and rely somewhat on spirit of the game or leaving the decision up to the onfield umpire where a rule may not exist for a situation. That is generally a good way to handle except when 'loophole' coaches try to find an advantage that wasn't foreseen or someone does something weird or stupid that affects play. Being forced to rule on a scenario because someone thinks it is funny or has a mental breakdown or whatever is never fun for an umpire.

When I ran rec I used to name added local rules for the &#@*&# coach who was looking for an advantage and made me put the rule in so everyone knew why the rule existed. Things like "Rob's Rule" - (catcher in coach pitch had to be in position to catch to provide a target for the coach pitcher) and "Al's Rule" - (Batter's in coach pitch had to swing - Coach Al could literally hit the bat within their coach pitch # of pitches if the player just stood there holding the bat in the strike zone)

 

[grmerrill]

I disagree with @Comp on how to rule this one.

If I felt the fielder attempts to make the ball change direction then I am making the appropriate call based on where the ball is at that time. So if it is fair, it is fair, foul it is foul. As far as I am concerned it is an outside force having an effect on where the ball ends up and a fielder shouldn't be allowed the change where an untouched ball should end up. Sure it isn't addressed specifically in the rule book or case book, and while I haven't seen the thread I am sure someone will consider breathing an act from the fielder equivalent to fielding or touching the ball. Breath is clearly physical to me so there you go.

Of course if this actually happened it will either be 1) funny or 2) ejections. Umpires HATE people who put us in these sorts of BS positions of having to make a call so I am NOT going to be happy with the fielder so it better be funny or they are not going to happy.

There's a legal case to support this. Guy was arrested for assault for farting on a cop.
Wish i was joking, but I'm not. And if a breath is a touch, you could breath on the base for a force out.
Don't take rules where they aren't supposed to go.

 

[uncdrew]

What about waving your hands at the ball, in attempt to "blow" it foul.

Probably the same stance as blowing on the ball.

 

[The Man In Blue]

@Comp and @marriard are both correct and there are rules to support them.

NFHS 10-4 and 10-2-2
USA Softball 10-1
USSSA Softball 14-8 and 14-12-M

Those are the rules that grant umpires the authority to use their judgment and absolute authority on situations not covered in the rule book.