New Umpire advise

[DG]

"High fly ball to SS over near 2b". Wind could be a factor in determining IFF, sun is not. It's not part of question 2 to assume something not presented. A high fly ball to SS over near 2b in this case is an IFF whether called or not. And why don't you just tell Grandma what really happened?

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by DG

"High fly ball to SS over near 2b". Wind could be a factor in determining IFF, sun is not. It's not part of question 2 to assume something not presented. A high fly ball to SS over near 2b in this case is an IFF whether called or not. And why don't you just tell Grandma what really happened?

Originally Posted by DG

Wind could be a factor in determining IFF, sun is not.

Wind is a factor. And you're joking about the sun right?

Originally Posted by DG

It's not part of question 2 to assume something not presented.

What part of my "contrarian" post do you not understand?

Originally Posted by DG

And why don't you just tell Grandma what really happened?

Apparently Grandma has a better understanding of what "grounder to first" means than you do.

[DG]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

Wind is a factor. And you're joking about the sun right?

What part of my "contrarian" post do you not understand?

Apparently Grandma has a better understanding of what "grounder to first" means than you do.

No I'm not joking. Do you make IFF calls when the ball reaches it's peak and then reverse the call when the fielder doesn't catch it because he lost it in the sun?

I understood your post completely. You read a simple play and questioned whether the positioning of the SS, the wind and the sun made it more difficult than it seemed (ie assumed something not presented) and therefore maybe not an IFF. I expect most others read "high fly ball to SS over near 2b" and instantly thought IFF.

A grounder toward F4 that F3 cuts off and throws back to F1 covering is not a grounder to first for most announcers of the game.

[3appleshigh]

I do declare, That I think Contrarian might mean the same as TROLL!

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

I do declare, That I think Contrarian might mean the same as TROLL!

When I wrote my post I thought I left enough room between the lines for everyone to catch my drift. Apparently I didn't dumb it down enough for the lowest common denominators among us.

Hopefully this will help.

I'm sure DG assumed that we would all assume it was an IFF,

Between the lines interp: I know DG was going for IFF in this sitch and I recognize it as such. But just for fun, since not every pop up in the IF is an IFF, lets see what the ruling would be in the event you, the umpire, judged this for whatever reason, as needing more than ordinary effort to make the play.
Also, since DGs original posting of this sitch was directed tongue in cheek at the new umps on the forum, it might be good to clarify that not every pop up in the infield has to be an IFF.


however, as a contrarian I chose not to make that assumption.