Should it not have been a ground rule double? Or at least considered a 4 base error? Did the scorers assume that because the ball was aiming for his giant dome that he had no shot at catching it?
2007-02-21 07:07:08 · 13 answers · asked by Willie 4 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Ok I get the anaolgy that it is like a ball witting a players glove and going over the wall, but did he not deserve an error for failing to catch the ball?
2007-02-21 07:21:18 · update #1
Here is the rule. Any fair fly ball is deflected by the fielder into the stands, or over the fence into foul territory, in which case the batter shall be entitled to advance to second base; but if deflected into the stands or over the fence in fair territory, the batter shall be entitled to a home run. However, should such a fair fly be deflected at a point less than 250 feet from home plate, the batter shall be entitled to two bases.
2007-02-21 07:57:38 · update #2
According to the last line should he not have only been allowed 2 bases?
2007-02-21 07:59:39 · update #3
The play should have been an error resulting in a HR. Canseco clearly should have made the catch, and due to his failure to catch the ball cleanly, the ball was dropped. I don't know whether or not the actual ruling was an error. If it was called a hit, it was probably because the official scorer wanted the batter to be credited with a hit or did not want to burden Canseco with an error.
Now onto the issue of HR or a double. It's simple: The ball never hit the wall or the ground, so it's considered to still be on a fly. Let me give you another example: A player bobbles the ball in the air and he (or a teammate) catches the ball before it reaches the ground. The ruling is still a catch. My point is that hitting a player does not count as a bounce.
In addition, Canseco was hit by the ball beyond 250ft from the plate. Canseco was hit maybe 10ft away from the wall in RF. There is no field in which the RF field fence, while still in fair territory, is 260ft or less away from the plate.
2007-02-21 10:02:24 · answer #1 · answered by x 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I always assumed that it was a four base error but if it isn't the only thing I can think of is that it was a homerun because it never touched his glove. It was just as if it hit the top of the fence and went over. Maybe the other reason was the scorer felt sorry for him and figured since he looked so rediculous he should be given a break from the error. No need to add insult to injury.
2007-02-21 07:16:54 · answer #2 · answered by Dah veed 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was a home run because it didn't touch the ground, an umpire, an offensive player, or any other object on the field of play. Canseco deflected it. By rule, that's a home run.
2007-02-21 08:43:32 · answer #3 · answered by Ryan R 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
they used the same reasoning they use if an OF goes up to make a catch at the wall, has it in his glove and it comes out of his glove over the fence. how many times have you seen that and never questioned why it was a home run? really no difference.
2007-02-21 07:16:08 · answer #4 · answered by Kenny 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because as long as it does not hit the ground and either hits of goes over the yellow line on the outfield wall it is a home run.
2007-02-21 07:39:14 · answer #5 · answered by Nolan B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
W-E-L-L, yes and no. You see the player himself is considered in play. Which means a ball going off his head is no different than a ball going off a bag. As far as an error goes, it could very well have been ruled an error. It is up to the official score keeper and the hometown score keeper is never going to rule against the hometown boys. EVER!!!! Hope I answered your question, Have a great season!!
2007-02-21 07:27:20 · answer #6 · answered by dinging53 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It was well over 250 feet from home plate when the ball hit him. Therefore, Home Run.
2007-02-21 10:03:44 · answer #7 · answered by ? 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it was ruled a home run because it went over the fence without touching anypart of the playing field. hitting a players head doesn't count.
2007-02-21 07:15:43 · answer #8 · answered by ribuckeye 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It didn't hit the ground and it didn't hit the wall so it couldn't be a ground rule double
2007-02-21 07:15:28 · answer #9 · answered by teddy w 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It didn't touch the ground, therefore, it is ruled a home run.
2007-02-21 09:03:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋