Do any of you remember this, when it happened, what was the ruling?

It was Lenny Randall and no it is not legal.. see story below

With Kansas City visiting, Randle pulled off a defensive play that I don’t think is calculated into Range Factor. Amos Otis hits a slow roller down the third base line. Since this is Amos Otis we are talking about, he is basically at first base already. Randle charges and decides that his best play is to get down on his hands and knees and blow on the ball until it rolls foul. The umps decided “Yeah... can’t do that” and still award Otis a hit. Randle, idiot that he his, claims that he was just trying to persuade the ball foul and wasn’t really blowing. Rene Lachemann (aww... a Forgotten Coach of the Moment candidate if there ever was one) blames the ball rolling foul on Randle’s bad breath.

Ah, Lenny Randle. I remember that, since I'm a Mariners fan.

It was ruled a hit.

Nick is correct that the rule book specifies that the status of a batted ball near the line depends on where it is "touched," (see 2.00 FAIR BALL and 2.00 FOUL BALL) so it would seem that it would be legal to blow on a ball to force it from fair to foul.

However, there is an official MLB interpretation regarding the Randle play. If a fielder blows on the ball to try to force it foul, it is declared a fair ball, live and in play, same as if it was touched in fair territory.

From the MLB Umpire Manual:

"6.19 INFIELDER INTERFERES WITH COURSE OF BALL - When a batted ball is rolling fair down the foul line between home plate and either first or third base and a fielder stoops down over the ball and blows on it or in any other manner does some act that in the judgment of the umpire causes the ball to roll onto foul territory, the umpire shall rule a fair ball. The ball is alive and in play."

i swear i seen arod do that..... but yea its a legit move, but i doubt it will really do much.