The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   Infield fly rule (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/43116-infield-fly-rule.html)

fitump56 Tue Apr 01, 2008 12:39am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbyron
In both instances the crucial judgment call is whether the fly ball "can be fielded by an infielder with ordinary effort."

Bzzzzzzzzt, wrong, INF do NOT have to be involved in an IFF. In Big Boy Ball, an OF can easily be determined inside the ordinary effort call to be the player who is putting out the ordinary effort hence = IFF.

dash_riprock Tue Apr 01, 2008 06:26am

Quote:

Originally Posted by fitump56
Bzzzzzzzzt, wrong, INF do NOT have to be involved in an IFF. In Big Boy Ball, an OF can easily be determined inside the ordinary effort call to be the player who is putting out the ordinary effort hence = IFF.

Bzzzzzt. That's not what mbyron said.

UMP25 Tue Apr 01, 2008 08:53am

Ding ding ding! You are correct, dash. fitump56 is wrong in his interpretation of what mbyron said. An Infield Fly IS judged solely on ordinary effort by an INfielder, but this does not preclude an outfielder from gloving a ball that can still be called Infield Fly.

Interested Ump Tue Apr 01, 2008 04:40pm

Originally Posted by mbyron
In both instances the crucial judgment call is whether the fly ball "can be fielded by an infielder with ordinary effort."

Quote:

Originally Posted by fitump56
Bzzzzzzzzt, wrong, INF do NOT have to be involved in an IFF. In Big Boy Ball, an OF can easily be determined inside the ordinary effort call to be the player who is putting out the ordinary effort hence = IFF.

A key to this interpretation is the ability for the fly ball to have considerable hang time. As you ponted out, this will often not be the case in the younger age groups even at 60/90 ball.

mbyron is incorrect in assuming that only an INF can be judged as attaining OE in the interpretation of the IFF rule. F7-9 if positioned in the infield, they are still charted as OF (feel free to see the Definition Of IFF), are INFs for the purpose of this call.

dash_riprock Tue Apr 01, 2008 04:55pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by UMP25
Ding ding ding! You are correct, dash. fitump56 is wrong in his interpretation of what mbyron said. An Infield Fly IS judged solely on ordinary effort by an INfielder, but this does not preclude an outfielder from gloving a ball that can still be called Infield Fly.

You didn't just say gloving did you?

UMP25 Tue Apr 01, 2008 08:39pm

Yes I did, to differentiate it from a catch, because the I.F.R. can be called with or without the catch being made.

dash_riprock Tue Apr 01, 2008 09:07pm

IFR can be called without a gloving as well.

UMP25 Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:33am

Really? Gee, I never knew that. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Interested Ump Wed Apr 02, 2008 09:40pm

You would be right and you two completely wrong.

UMP25 Wed Apr 02, 2008 09:42pm

Huh??? :confused:

fitump56 Thu Apr 03, 2008 09:19pm

IU is correct...as usual, so Huh? what?

UMP25 Thu Apr 03, 2008 09:25pm

Forget it. You and IU have no clue anyway, so it's pointless for me to try and explain what he didn't understand to begin with.

fitump56 Thu Apr 03, 2008 09:33pm

Ok, IU has got that piece down with you pat.

Btw, speaking of clues, the clues as to why we are posting like this are right in front of you.

Interested Ump Thu Apr 03, 2008 09:36pm

Would you be alluding to the fact that posters who answer by Quick Reply supposedly expect us to use mental telepathy to figure out to whom, about what and regarding Subject?

fitump56 Thu Apr 03, 2008 09:37pm

Why yes I would, IU Old Boy


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:48am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1