Infield Fly?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by yawetag

Actually, the first condition is placement of runners. Second is number of outs. Third is fly ball or not. Fourth is "ordinary effort."

Actually, the placement of the runners, as well as the number of outs, are stipulated, as the Infield Fly situation already exists. There is no need to think about these conditions during a play. The only real considerations are (a) sufficient arc to distinguish it from a line drive and (b) can it be caught with ordinary effort by an infielder.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

(a) sufficient arc to distinguish it from a line drive

You would actually call a little bloop to the infield an IFF as that it doesn't meet the distinction of a line drive?

Not in my game, Brother.

[SanDiegoSteve]

I don't consider a blooper to an infielder as an infield fly. I meant that the ball should have a sufficient arc on it, as in a fly ball. I consider bloopers to be "soft liners."

If I don't have the time to call "Infield Fly, batter's out," then it isn't of sufficient arc.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I don't consider a blooper to an infielder as an infield fly.

The rule mentions fly balls and line drives (well, bunts too, but that's not relevant). It does not mention bloopers. The umpire must judge whether it's a fly ball or a line drive in order to decide whether to invoke IFF.