I think we have a different opinion of the definition of ordinary effort.
To me your definition is "ordinary effort considering the skill of players" or "whether the SP catcher is eating his Fruity Twist at the time of the play so couldnt get to the ball" .. Certainly at any adult level (conceding the 10U was probably a poor example) .. and ordinary fly ball that could be caught is a IFF.
The book says "...caught by an infielder with ordinary effort..".
A catcher who cant catch is not "ordinary effort" at all.. its rather extraordinary
.
Re Your described situation is more of a ball not in the reach of an infielder and no effort could have caught the ball - and was probably the correct call... but even then maybe not. Why are you changing a call based on whether the ordinary effort was made?
What about this.. you know the catcher cant catch..
a)F2 gets under the ball and bobbles the catch and it drops to the ground...
or..
b) He is 1/2 blind and sets up for the catch and you can tell he is out of position and wont make the catch..
Do you not call the IFF because he cant catch?
I think you are reading too much into the rule and especially with a newer umpire expecting him to consider to many things..
When I'm working .. me and the partner do the IFF signal when its on .. and its called.. end of story. IMO, at any regular skill level virtually any IF is IFF, barring something really unusual like wind or sand storm, UFO distracting the player, or whatever.
Even then it would probably be called and reversed if necessary.
---------------------------------
A fair fly that can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort..
F3 picking her nose and missed the play did not make ordinary effort, but had they, they could have.. its IFF IMO.
Ordinary effort is not affected by whether they made ordinary effort .. the IF that CAN be caught by ordinary effort is the key to IFF.
[Edited by wadeintothem on Feb 1st, 2006 at 11:01 AM]