Infield Fly Fiasco

[spots101]

Bases loaded, no outs. Batter hits fly ball high enough for IF but the problem is that F6 is playing deep, isn't the most athletic kid on the team, and can't get to the ball before it hits the ground. I call nothing based on 3 words in the IF rule which states "with ordinary effort". What happens next is that F6 throws to F2 for the force at home, F2 throws to F5 for the force at third and F5 throws to F4 for the force at second. Triple play. Basically no one moved.

My question is, did I turn this into a 3rd world play by NOT calling the IF. I felt I did what the rule states by looking for ordinary effort but does that usually apply to balls hit over the fielders head on the grass instead of right on the infield? IOW, you look for the fielders shoulders to be square to you (when he's running out to get the ball) in order for it to be considered ordinary effort.

Thanks for your help.

[t2nyval]

Ive always interpreted the 'ordinary effort' part to balls hit on the outfield grass. If a ball is hit 'high enough' and could even possibly land in the infield, I.F is in effect. I dont know whether we(umpires) are to judge players individually with regards to what THEIR 'ordinary effort' is. I'd call IF, batter's out. Interesting scenario tho. Cant wait to hear what the...experts think. -T2ny

[Bfair]

Much like t2nyval states, if there is possibility that the "questionable fly" inside the infield could be considered an IF, I call the IFF. That same "questionable fly" when outside the infield will usually not draw my call.

The reason for that is based on the play you cited.
Plays within the infield are too easy to turn a DP with the runners holding whereas it's far less likely on balls outside the infield. The intent of the rule is not to allow a fielder to allow the ball to drop and take an easy double play.

Of course, if I'm certain that the fly inside or outside the infield cannot be caught with ordinary effort, then there's no call.

Based on factors of fly heighth and ordinary effort, if in doubt on calling IFF:

1. Inside the infield, then make the call
   
2. Outside the infield, then don't make the call

Just my opinion,

Freix

[spots101]

Thanks BFair. The very reason a triple play was executed made me think that I should have called the IF because that is the reason for the rule in the first place, at least for DP's anyway. doh!

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by spots101

Bases loaded, no outs. Batter hits fly ball high enough for IF but the problem is that F6 is playing deep, isn't the most athletic kid on the team, and can't get to the ball before it hits the ground. I call nothing based on 3 words in the IF rule which states "with ordinary effort". What happens next is that F6 throws to F2 for the force at home, F2 throws to F5 for the force at third and F5 throws to F4 for the force at second. Triple play. Basically no one moved.

My question is, did I turn this into a 3rd world play by NOT calling the IF. I felt I did what the rule states by looking for ordinary effort but does that usually apply to balls hit over the fielders head on the grass instead of right on the infield? IOW, you look for the fielders shoulders to be square to you (when he's running out to get the ball) in order for it to be considered ordinary effort.

Thanks for your help.

First and foremost the IF is to protect the offense against the defense getting an EASY DP or maybe a TP as your thread suggets.

With that in mind, IMO some umpires get bogged down on the ordinary effort part. IMO the reason that wording exists is because it's possible to call the IF when the ball is NOT in the infield but that would require a infielder to be right underneath the ball.

Whenever we have R1/R2 and R3 when the ball is popped up in the infield, they have to remain stationary to the bases or at most maybe a step or 2 off the base depending upon where the pop up is.

Therefore, if you don't call the IF and the ball lands anywhere near an infielders reach it's an almost certain DP. So whenever the ball is popped up in the infield with the IF in effect CALL IT because to do otherwise gives the defense an Advantage not intended by the rules.

Also, defenses are smart and if you don't call it they will start to play possum meaning PRETEND they don't have a clue where the ball is or they can't catch it with ordinary effort just so they can get the easy DP.

NOTE: My answer is based on ball for kids who shave.

Pete Booth

[BJ Moose]

I think you did.. turn it into Mars v Pluto. A refresher as to WHY the INF FLY exists would help.

It is to protect the offense, not give free outs for the defense. "Protect" as in protect against cheap double plays or godforbid, triple plays.

The fact that 3 outs were made testifies that you SHOULD have called the INF FLY. You had a fly ball, IN the infield, and these kids were skilled enough to make all those throws for force outs... good deke by the defense I would say.

Originally posted by spots101


My question is, did I turn this into a 3rd world play by NOT calling the IF. I felt I did what the rule states by looking for ordinary effort

[DownTownTonyBrown]

All have made good point but I'm not sure I agree with their final answer.

What was F6 doing? Was he attempting to get to the ball and just couldn't make it (and no one else could get there either) - not an in-field fly. You made the right NO-call.

Did you have a partner? If so, apparently he didn't think it was an in-field-fly either.

However, if F6 was lolly-gagging around and you felt he saw this high pop fly as an opportunity to fool the offense by not catching the easily fielded ball - then it likely was an in-field-fly and you should have made the call. Afterall there were at least three runners that thought he was going catch the ball - that is why they stayed on base.

I have never heard of any rule-of-thumb about squared shoulders and think this might confuse the issue of ordinary effort.

just some thoughts.... my first post here!

[Jerry]

For an IF to be called, it's totally irrelevant as to where the Infielders are standing or positioning themselves. The "ordinary effort" is a judgemental definition which does not refer to the actual physical talents of a specific ballplayer. Infielders may station themselves anywhere in fair territory, including standing against the home run fence if they're so inclined to do so. Or all fielders can "shift" to one side of the field for a known "pull" hitter. Or playing in close in anticipation of a bunt. The fact that the batter hits a popup over an area where an actual fielder is not positioned doesn't alter a call of "Infield Fly". In the scenario given, I would have treated it the same as if no Infielder had attempted to catch a routine popup in an Infield Fly situation, and called an "Infield Fly".
Jerry

[DownTownTonyBrown]

"For an IF to be called, it's totally irrelevant as to where the Infielders are standing or positioning themselves. The "ordinary effort" is a judgemental definition which does not refer to the actual physical talents of a specific ballplayer."

Jerry, I would say you are wrong. Agreeably, a player can position himself anywhere. But I believe you have taken what someone has explained as the definition of the "infield" and are using it to define "ordinary effort." Thereby, you have removed the ordinary effort part of the in-field-fly rule. It appears, you would simply call IFF based solely upon the location of the hit ball and the attributes of a fly. This is wrong.

The ball must be capable of being caught by the players that are on the field from their current locations.

The "infield" is anywhere that an infielder can cover. It includes areas in the grass where potentially, an outfielder could also cover. (This by itself is a judgemental call. A properly declared in-field-fly can legally be caught by an outfielder.)

Ordinary effort means the player, or players, can get there and make a catch. (Hence the original comment made by Spots101 about shoulders square to the umpire - although I have never heard of this.) If the ball is not capable of being caught by the defense from their current positions, the fly ball is a HIT and the runners should be advancing. In this case YOU are SACRAFICING the batter-runner to protect runners that should be running.

Any declared in-field-fly that drops to the ground must have intentionally/obviously been left to fall, unhindered by a defense, THAT COULD HAVE CAUGHT THE BALL. Otherwise the offensive coach will be screaming that you called an out that wasn't going to be made - and likely cost him a run. You exchanged his run for your out.

Positioning of the defense cannot be disregarded; they must be capable of getting to the ball and making the catch with ordinary effort.

[BJ Moose]

Ooowwww!

Originally posted by Tim C
and I believe that BJ Moose (a low level JV umpire in Seattle) hit the ball square

[GarthB]

In eighteen years I have never purposely failed to call the infield fly rule on a fly to the infield (with appropriate runners on base).

I don't look for boogers or try to create third world situations.

(God, I'm starting to sound like Tee)

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Well you guys all seem to be good friends. That is sweet. I can almost hear you guys slapping each other's butts in the background.

However, what Jerry said was wrong. But given your response I can envision the entire defense (besides the pitcher and catcher) leaning against the outfield/homerun fence, the batter hitting a high pop fly that will land in the infield where no one is located, and some dork umpire like Tim C calling an infield fly.

Honestly gentlemen, I didn't throw anything to the wolves. I didn't create any 3rd world situations or eat any boogers. As for arrogance, I haven't seen anything yet that says Tim C has the corner on arrogance. Ignorance possibly. My post was matter of fact. It was not arrogant. I may be new to this buddy-buddy forum but I am not new to officiating. My experience may very well be greater than yours. Perhaps you should quit slapping butts and listen.

Jerry was wrong when he said, "For an IF to be called, it's totally irrelevant as to where the Infielders are standing or positioning themselves."

The initial location of the players is ABSOLUTELY RELEVEANT. Once the ball is hit, the defense must be able to locate themselves in a position to catch the ball. That is ordinary effort. If the defense cannot position themselves so they can catch the ball it is called a HIT - not an infield fly.

Jerry was correct in saying that the rule does not refer to a player's physical talent. And perhaps I misunderstood what he was trying to say. I never meant any offense to Jerry. I just felt he was wrong.

To be honest with you again, you guys can call your game any way you like. This forum however, is for officials well beyond you few... buddies. In the future, when I make other posts, just assume that I am writing to those other, more professional officials.

[GarthB]

DDTB Said: "Well you guys all seem to be good friends. That is sweet. I can almost hear you guys slapping each other's butts in the background.

However..."


Tony:

That wasn't butt slappin' you heard, it was knee slappin'.

[Tim C]

DTTB:

You actually use the word "dork"?

Wow! I am injured.

Read your own post . . . check the tone of your post.

Now I don't really care if you try to jump my stuff. I get what I deserve, but I just ask you to stop, and read your own post.

Instead of criticizng the rest of us do a little introspection.

BTW Tony, I really suggest you don't start trying to compare umpire resumes with some of the guys on this board, you'll find yourself overmatched.

[Jackie W.]

Gee, I'm feeling left out. No one to butt slap with! Must be another strike against being a female umpire. You know, DTTB, there really is no reason to come on the board insulting other officials. There are far greater ways to earn the respect of your peers. Also, having buddies to "butt slap" with can be a very positive thing.

And this is just my opinion,

Jackie