Another infield fly situation...

[Rbn3]

This one was real crazy. Bases loaded, no outs, 14 year old game being played on 60-90 varsity field. Batter hits a looper over the shortstop's head. Shortstop does not get a real good jump on it, and ball lands about 20-25 feet on the outfield grass with shortstop still 10 feet away.

I was in the dugout as scorekeeper and I did not hear the field ump call the infield fly rule. Others told me he did call and signal but not until the ball was almost on the ground. I don't really have a beef with the infield fly rule being invoked - it was terrible judgement as the ball was clearly uncatchable by a 14 year old shortstop and it was called way too late, but it was a pure judgement call.

But then it got more complicated. The runner on second saw the ball drop and told me later he did not hear the infield fly rule being called. He broke for third and the left fielder picked the ball up and threw to third. The home plate ump called him out at third but there was not even an attempt at a tag. The runner got up and started for the dug out, but the bench yelled at him to return to the bag since there had been no tag. He tried to return to the bag, was tagged and called out again! Then the runner on first, with a very confused look on his face, was caught in a run down between first and second as he was sent by the first base coach, who did not know the infield fly rule had been invoked. What resulted was basically a quadruple play as the runner at third was called out twice.

Then to top it off, the field ump wanted the disallow the run scored by the guy who had been on third and who saw immediately that the ball was not catchable. He was in the dug out by the time the fourth out was recorded! The plate ump over ruled on that point, and the run was ultimately allowed. We went on to win the game by coming from behind in the bottom of the seventh.

We were then able to laugh at the whole comedic event, and the kid who hit the ball will always be able to brag that he hit into a quadruple play. But should some other result have occurred? It would seem to me that the wrong call at third showed that the plate ump was not aware that the infield fly had been called by the field ump and that resulted in an unfair outcome.

Life it not always fair and maybe there is no other option than to let the play stand. But here the umpires caused the very thing the infield fly rule is supposed to prevent.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Rbn3
This one was real crazy. Bases loaded, no outs, 14 year old game being played on 60-90 varsity field. Batter hits a looper over the shortstop's head. Shortstop does not get a real good jump on it, and ball lands about 20-25 feet on the outfield grass with shortstop still 10 feet away.

I was in the dugout as scorekeeper and I did not hear the field ump call the infield fly rule. Others told me he did call and signal but not until the ball was almost on the ground. I don't really have a beef with the infield fly rule being invoked - it was terrible judgement as the ball was clearly uncatchable by a 14 year old shortstop and it was called way too late, but it was a pure judgement call.

But then it got more complicated. The runner on second saw the ball drop and told me later he did not hear the infield fly rule being called. He broke for third and the left fielder picked the ball up and threw to third. The home plate ump called him out at third but there was not even an attempt at a tag. The runner got up and started for the dug out, but the bench yelled at him to return to the bag since there had been no tag. He tried to return to the bag, was tagged and called out again! Then the runner on first, with a very confused look on his face, was caught in a run down between first and second as he was sent by the first base coach, who did not know the infield fly rule had been invoked. What resulted was basically a quadruple play as the runner at third was called out twice.

Then to top it off, the field ump wanted the disallow the run scored by the guy who had been on third and who saw immediately that the ball was not catchable. He was in the dug out by the time the fourth out was recorded! The plate ump over ruled on that point, and the run was ultimately allowed. We went on to win the game by coming from behind in the bottom of the seventh.

We were then able to laugh at the whole comedic event, and the kid who hit the ball will always be able to brag that he hit into a quadruple play. But should some other result have occurred? It would seem to me that the wrong call at third showed that the plate ump was not aware that the infield fly had been called by the field ump and that resulted in an unfair outcome.

Life it not always fair and maybe there is no other option than to let the play stand. But here the umpires caused the very thing the infield fly rule is supposed to prevent.

As you say, it was not an infield fly, not even at the highest levels. You described a looping line drive. It's the perfect play for the defense to get a double or triple play -- legally. The runners must hold, the fielder doesn't catch the line drive, and two/three are out.

One fact we can deduce without trouble:

Either the plate umpire did not hear the base ump's call (remember, he called R2 out at third without a tag, meaning he didn't know the batter-runner was out);

OR

he simply kicked his call (forgetting a tag was required).

The plate umpire, not the base umpire, is the culprit in this [im]morality play. Not only did he blow his call (for one reason or another), he didn't rectify his mistake.

He should have put R2 back on third: His wrong call led to R2 being off the base, where he was "tagged out." Play resumes with one run in, two outs, and a runner on third. The umpire cannot protect R1; he was also off his base, but it was unconnected to umpire error. (The infeild fly stands, so when R1 leaves his base, he does so at his own risk.)

For those who say I'm applying a high school rule, I ask you to check BRD section 485 and JEA 9:6.

{Check the next two posts to see why this message was edited.)

[Edited by Carl Childress on May 18th, 2004 at 06:46 PM]

[brumey1107]

"...Play resumes with one run in, two outs, and runners on second and third. .."

Carl - Where did the runner on second come from? Wasn't he caught in a run down between first and second and became the second out?

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by brumey1107
"...Play resumes with one run in, two outs, and runners on second and third. .."

Carl - Where did the runner on second come from? Wasn't he caught in a run down between first and second and became the second out?

Yes, I had just one too many runners. Thanks. BTW: I'm going to correct the original post but leave this one as a monument to my error.