Quote:
Originally Posted by prekowski
I am no English major, but according to Webster declare means "to say or state (something) in an official or public way". stating or saying something generally means verbally announcing it (it could be also declared in writing but that would not be applicable here). So declaring something means saying it out loud. To infer that could be meant to be said after the fact would defeat the whole purpose of the rule. It is meant to be stated at the time of happening to advise both offense and defense of the call being made so they can react accordingly. Declared does not mean what is in the umpires head but goes unsaid 8-2-I clearly states the batter is out when an IFF is "declared".
I am not saying you are wrong, I am saying it is ambiguous. Subject to different interpretations, and it is not cut and dry either way. I still find no evidence in the rulebook that supports the notion that ASA says IFF is in effect when it takes place, not when it is declared. But I could be wrong if pointed to where it says that.
And 10-3-C allows an umpire to try and rectify a situation after the fact, but there is no way to rectify a situation that is so dependent on the declared nature of the call at the time of happening. Unless you have a time machine, you cant go back and recreate how the runners would have reacted by the dropped ball if IFF were declared versus what they did do when it was not declared.
Thanks for your input, but like I said, it is not cut and dry.
|
May 2010 ASA Plays and Clarifications.
Rule 8, Section 2I Batter-Runner is out
Play: R1 on 3B, R2 on 2B and R3 on 1B and one out. B5 hits, what appears to be, an infield fly that it is not called by the umpires. The ball was not caught and F5 picks up the ball and throws home for a force play with no tag being applied, and the runner is called out. After all play has ceased the defensive coach requests time to discuss the play with the umpires as they feel that the infield fly should have been called per ASA rules. After the umpires discuss the situation the plate umpire calls the batter-runner out on an infield fly and rules the runner that touched the plate safe for not being tagged. The offensive coach protests and asks if the umpires can legally call Infield fly after the fact?
Ruling: If after the umpires get together and agree this fly ball met the criteria of Rule 1, INFIELD FLY, and the umpire failed to make the correct call at the time, then Rule 9, Section 1A[1-4] allows the umpire to call “Infield Fly” when the opposing team brought this to the attention of the umpires. In regards to R1 at 3B, by the umpire not calling “Infield Fly” this put both teams in jeopardy. Rule 10, Section 3C allows for the umpire to rectify any situation in which a reversal of an umpire’s decision or delayed call places the offensive or defensive team in jeopardy. In the above case, the batter should be ruled out for Infield Fly and return R1 to 3B.
As to the question of whether the umpires can decide, after the fact, to call an Infield Fly or not, the following information should be noted:
1) If the umpires thought it was a fly ball that could be caught by normal effort (Rule 1 Definition Infield Fly) and did not call infield fly, then the opposing team could protest a misapplication of the playing rules under Rule 9A, Section 1-4.
2) Not calling infield fly put both the offense and defense in jeopardy, especially the runner from 3B attempting to score.
3) Rule 10 Section 3C allows the umpires to rectify any situation in which a reversal of an umpire’s decision or delayed call by an umpire places a batter-runner, runner or defensive team in jeopardy.
In this case, if the umpires decide, under protest, that the Infield Fly Rule should have been called, then they put the defense in jeopardy by not knowing that they had to tag the runner. The umpires should have returned all runners to the last base touched before they ruled the batter–runner out on the Infield fly rule that should have been called.