Quote:
Originally Posted by NCASAUmp
Um, how? The rule is completely separate from IFF. For IFF, you must have runners on at least 1st and 2nd. For IDB, you only need at least a runner on 1B. Also, the IFF rule takes precedence over IDB.
So how is it "tantamount" to requiring a catch for IFF?
|
really?? can you not figure that one out for yourself?
whats the reasoning behind the IFF rule? its so, when runners on base, the defense cant turn a play, when the runners would be damned if they do, damned if they dont, into 2 or 3 "cheap" outs. I wont explain further bc Im assuming, as an umpire, you understand game a little about strategy.
now, regardless of what ASA's definition of "intentionally dropped" is, whats the reasoning behind the IDB rule? its so, when runner(s) on base, the defense cant turn a play, when the runners would be damned if they do, damned if they dont, into 2 or 3 "cheap" outs.
bc ASA has a very narrow definition of what "intentionally dropped" is, i was alluded to the fact that is it very similar as if the IFF rule was very narrowly defined. seeing as how in all my years playing baseball and softball, ive never seen an IF physically catch the ball, then drop it, in order to try and pull off an IDB situation, ive only seen IFers guide the ball to the ground, or not close their glove on the ball.
i really dont see how what i said was that hard to understand or to believe. i also understand that its your job as an ump to regulate the game as prescribed but that doesnt mean you have to blindly agree with every rule and fail to understand a bad rule's "hypocrisy"