Two Questions

1. He’s an idiot that can’t read a rule. A catch occurs when a fielder gains secure possession of a ball, and maintains possession until they voluntarily or intentionally release the ball. In other words, possession was defined as having complete control of the ball. None of that in the vicinity crap.

2. Yes, dome and retractable roof stadiums are climate controlled. Texas’ new ballpark is set at a nice comfortable 75 degrees which has been really nice on those 108 degree days.

Whoever said that about the “area of the glove” is a huge BS’er. I hate listening to the home broadcasters on some of our away games. Last night I turned the sound off. Went on about 30 minutes about how great Harper is-blah blah blah!
Yes they have climate control.

Bill Clem simplified the entire thing…”It ain’t nothing until I call it.”

Chris Welsh is not the only announcer who says the out at 1B is determined by when the ball “enters” or “is in” the glove and not when the ball “hits” the leather or “back of the glove.” This “in the glove” thing is only for interpretations by the replay umps, not by umps on the field. In real time on the field, the umps’ human senses are not precise enough to discern the difference between the two. The difference is discernible on a super slo-mo replay where the video advances at a rate of 1,500 frames per second. The caveat is the ball must then be controlled by the defender for it to be as an out. I guess you could say it’s an out before it’s an out if the player secures the ball, lol.

There is justification for Welsh and others who say this. It evidently isn’t stated as such in the MLB rulebook, but it was supposedly in some clarification provided by MLB for how the replay umps were to interpret catches by players on force outs.

All I can tell you is to google John Farrell and replay catches. He was in a dust up over this several years back and it got some attention at that time. Farrell talked about the “guidance” MLB provided on how the replay teams were to interpret when a ball was “caught.” Like it or not (and I think the logic is suspect), it’s easy to find some discussion on the internet about this, so it was “a thing.” On a quick search just now, I can’t find anything where MLB disputed, clarified or changed the guidance that Farrell brought to light.

Damn, I just took more time to talk about Chris Welsh than I have about the Cards in the last month…..such as this season is.

I was at a game in Arizona a few years ago in April where the game time temp was 90 degrees They left the dome open for that game and iirc it went 14-15 innings.

Interesting on that whole “sphere of the glove” business. I guess the angle of the video might be that all a replay observer sees is the ball disappear into the “sphere” of the glove, and if it does that before the runner’s foot hits the bag it is an out.

But the time difference in that and when the ball hits the back of the glove is almost nil, so I would think for practical purposes the “sphere” and the back of the glove are the same thing.

And when talking about the ball in the sphere, I assume the ball has to be entirely in the sphere, not just the front edge barely entering the sphere, to be a catch.

You know 1TD if those oven mitts are getting so much TV time on replays they should start renting out advertising space on ’em!

Yeah, those mitts should always be displayed alongside the fielder’s throwing hand simply because almost every play involved both hands to secure the baseball and complete the play for an out.