Infield Fly Or Not? This was really strange.

[Gre144]

[/B][/QUOTE]

Greg,
By your statement above, especially the portions that I
have underlined, I, and JMHO, feel you had an infield fly.
An infield fly should be called when the ball reaches its
highest point based on nearest player, and your description
indicates that problems occurred when the two infielders
incorrectly played the ball. (However, I really like Rich's
Keystone-cop Routine reply). You said because of the
hesitation by the two fielders the ball was no longer a
routine fly! The fact that they goofed does not change the
balls *routine fly* status.

glen [/B][/QUOTE]

I guess my point is is that if I were to have called the infield fly, then the defense would be awarded an out even though they didn't derserve it. It seems to me that the purpose of the infield fly is to prevent the defense from getting an easy out on either r1 or r2 on the force. In my siutation that I described, it would have nearly been impossible for F5, after having dropped the fly, to get the advancing R1 or R2 out. The only way that F5 could have gotten an out was by catching the ball.

I think the infield fly should only be invoked if the routine fly would not allow either r1 or r2 to advance easily if the fly were to be dropped.
It seems to me that the infield fly is appropriate when the defense player is well underneath the ball, but the ball pops out of his mitt. On the contrary, if the defensive players make a bad judgement thus making it difficult to catch the ball, you have a situation that penalizes the offense upon invoking the infield fly rule. Shouldn't the batter-runner and all other runners have the right to advance on an infield fly situation if it is probable that the infield fly will not be caught because of the defense's misjudgment of the ball?

Thanks,

Greg