Quote:
Originally Posted by umpjim
The rule was designed to keep the defense from an advantage, a cheap DP, not to keep the offense from being disadvantaged. So why, if the defense was not advantaged and the offense was not dissadvantaged, would the umpires not reverse their IFF call. In this case, the cheap DP did not happen and was not possible so why not reverse the IFF call. They have reversed much other calls this year.
Certain IFF calls can certainly be reversed. Why not this one?
|
If this would have been changed, then it would have been protestable. It met the requirements and judged that way. As soon as the umpire says "There was no possibility of a DP", he just misapplied the rules and that is protestable. The Cardinals would have had a very good argument. Regardless of why the rule was made, it does not have the provision "unless there is no chance for a cheap DP". It only says where the runners are, where the ball has to be, how many outs there are, and if the ball can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort. That was all met on this play. It was an IFR call and IMO, the correct call.