Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ajjl22
because it is coming from a coach who obviously doesn't know the difference between dropping a ball and allowing it to fall untouched. This is a had to be there situation and you are assuming that the player caught the ball and dropped on purpose.
This question is coming from a coach who is obviously thinks they lost because of the umpire and is going to explain the situation to make it sound like he got screwed.
|
First, nothing he said would indicate that he "obviously" does or doesn't know anything. He said "dropped the ball." I have only that to go on, not some imagined "obvious-ness." I'm only assuming a dropped ball because he said "dropped the ball on purpose." I would just think that even the sub-100 I.Q. coach would say "let the ball bounce on purpose" if that is what happened.
Second, he did not make it obvious that he "thinks" the umpire cost him the game. He does, however, indicate the umpire did indeed give him a bogus answer to why an infield fly was not called. Backstop height, my butt.
Third, any way you look at it here, we have the correct call. It is one of 3 calls:
1.) If the fielder let the ball fall untouched, we know that 6.05(l) is not the correct call. Then it would be either an IFF, or nothing.
2.) If the fielder intentionally dropped the ball (which is what was said, BTW), then 6.05(l) should have applied, and a dead ball, the batter declared out, and runners returned.
3.) If the ball was actually high enough to be called an IFF, then the Infield Fly Rule should have been called.
The only way the umpire could have avoided molesting Fido is if call #1 were indeed the case here, and not an IFF. Still, he gave an improper determination of how to judge an infield fly, and his use of that criteria could be a protestable rule interpretation, IMO.