Infield Fly in Wild Card Game

[Steve Meyer]

Originally Posted by aceholleran

I just watched the replay (again!), and I maintain R2 was only about 1/3 of the way to 3B.

Amazing how the pundits take it for granted that--without this call--the Braves would have gone on to a stellar inning.

About THIS hypothetical. Kozma camps out, Holliday peels off, no IF is called, Kozma lets it drop and gets the force at 3B. Now the Braves would be SCREAMING for the IF to be called.

Plus, this ballsy, gutsy call is the lead story by many wags. Forget the Braves' errors, leaving men on base, et al.

Okay so the runner gets thrown out at 3rd. Infield fly or not you still have runners at 1st and 2nd with an out made on the play. Why would Braves fans been screaming for the IFF?

Ballsy, gutsy not hardly. Kozma peeled off, and Holliday was almost on the warning track when the ball was hit.

Holbrooke bailed St. Louis out for their lack of communication, or whatever it was.

I was shocked. I was shocked I tell ya, when it was announced that an infield fly had been called.

Those that harken for the abilities of MLB players to make this play easily, apparantly didn't compensate for their mental ablities to actually know how to properly execute said play, or the umpire to do the same in the botched situation.

I wasn't discussing who, or who didn't win. You brooched the subject. If the call was so ordinary, why are we even having a discussion?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Steve Meyer

If the call was so ordinary, why are we even having a discussion?

This question could easily be asked differently:

If the call was so obviously wrong, why are we even having this discussion?

[dileonardoja]

Originally Posted by DG

Does not look like one to me.

The rule is supposed to protect the offense from easy double plays, no chance of that here.

This is the answer. If it is a questionable IFF this should be what makes up your mind

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by dileonardoja

This is the answer. If it is a questionable IFF this should be what makes up your mind

Or this one I took off another forum:
Example:
R2 is the fastest runner in the league. R1 is the slowest runner in the league. The batter is the 2nd slowest. For the point of my example, Holbrook does not call IFF and the infielder immediately recovers the ball and throws out R2 at 3B. You have now allowed a more advantagous out and eliminated a base running threat from scoring position.

It is in place for more reasons than you may think. Call it consistently and none of this is even a factor. The rule does not have any provision of "unless a DP cannot be turned". It is to protect the offense as much as possible.

The criteria was met for the rule. Depth is not one of them and neither is "if there is no chance to turn a DP". If the runners were not half way during the play and it wasn't called, then a DP could have been turned possibly and then, the umpires would have screwed up the rule.

[Carl Childress]

Originally Posted by Ump29

IMO way too deep for IFF.

The umpire saw this: The infielder drifted back, turned to face the infield, did the sweep (Stay away !) signal. That's when the umpire must decide.

Now, those runners are not running. The fielder was perhaps 60 feet from third base. Are you trying to say that a runner can get from second to third before a ball thrown by a professional can trevel 60 feet?

I agree if it had been high school, perhaps even college, that would probably not have been called. But this was a big league call for a big league game.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Lapopez

Is that Manny's point, Rita?

That was my point. The rule calls for the catch to be made using ordinary effort. It doesn't require an actual catch. The fielder may use more than ordinary effort to start out, but as the play progresses, he may get into position to make the catch easily.

And an easily caught ball could turn into an equally easy drop to turn the DP. Which is why the rule exists.

For those who continue to argue that the ball went too deep into the outfield, consider the Thome shift that more and more teams are using against him and other dead-pull hitters. Are you going to suggest that a can-of-corn fly ball to F4 playing in short right-center field can never be an IFF?

[ozzy6900]

Protestable? - No, it was a judgment call.
Good Judgment? - I guess for MLB it was - I don't agree.
Would I call this exact play? - Not even in a HS game! I would give infielders about 10 to 20 feet back on the outfield grass. After that I am not call an IFF.

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Protestable? - No, it was a judgment call.
Good Judgment? - I guess for MLB it was - I don't agree.
Would I call this exact play? - Not even in a HS game! I would give infielders about 10 to 20 feet back on the outfield grass. After that I am not call an IFF.

Just a question: If a coach asked you why it wasn't an infield fly when his F6 was waiting for the ball to come down when his fielder was 40' in the grass?

[SAump]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

Just a question: If a coach asked you why it wasn't an infield fly when his F6 was waiting for the ball to come down when his fielder was 40' in the grass?

Sorry, but that wasn't your garden variety can of corn. Another rule covers the situation to protect the base runners from falling victim to a DP. Hopefully, in the future, a crew will reconsider the rule and make the determination that ordinary effort was not a factor in this play.

The crew convened to discuss the rule and stuck with the call, and then MLB used the word judgement to exonerate the crew. The wrong call was made. The crew should have used better judgment to overturn that original call. MLB cannot do it for them. We find ourselves with another blown judgement call at the end of the day.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Would I call this exact play? - Not even in a HS game! I would give infielders about 10 to 20 feet back on the outfield grass. After that I am not call an IFF.

And when the coach asks you to show him where in Rule 2-19 it says anything about 10-20 feet, are you going to show him the rule, ignore him, or are you going to just make something else up?

[asdf]

Originally Posted by SAump

Another rule covers the situation to protect the base runners from falling victim to a DP.

And that rule is ??

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by SAump

Sorry, but that wasn't your garden variety can of corn. Another rule covers the situation to protect the base runners from falling victim to a DP. Hopefully, in the future, a crew will reconsider the rule and make the determination that ordinary effort was not a factor in this play.

The crew convened to discuss the rule and stuck with the call, and then MLB used the word judgement to exonerate the crew. The wrong call was made. The crew should have used better judgment to overturn that original call. MLB cannot do it for them. We find ourselves with another blown judgement call at the end of the day.

Another rule does not cover if the ball falls untouched or accidentally. This is the only rule which applies when the ball is still in the air. And, as soon as F6 is there under ordinary effort, it is a "can of corn" especially at that level. But, at any level, if the infielder is camped under it or showing he is moving with the ball under ordinary effort, it is IFR and should be called regardless if this is HS, 10 year olds, or MLB.

The reasons I have heard so far not to call it are not covered by the rule. The only thing that applies is judgment, not depth and not level.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

Another rule does not cover if the ball falls untouched or accidentally. This is the only rule which applies when the ball is still in the air. And, as soon as F6 is there under ordinary effort, it is a "can of corn" especially at that level. But, at any level, if the infielder is camped under it or showing he is moving with the ball under ordinary effort, it is IFR and should be called regardless if this is HS, 10 year olds, or MLB.

The reasons I have heard so far not to call it are not covered by the rule. The only thing that applies is judgment, not depth and not level.

Even a MLB shortstop couldn't make the play on the Texas Leaguer which fell for a base hit. The only way to catch the ball was over the shoulder, and this shortstop turned the wrong way. In my judgment, there was no need to protect the grown man running into the outfield who couldnt catch up with a fly pop.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by SAump

Even a MLB shortstop couldn't make the play on the Texas Leaguer which fell for a base hit. The only way to catch the ball was over the shoulder, and this shortstop turned the wrong way. In my judgment, there was no need to protect the grown man running into the outfield who couldnt catch up with a fly pop.

The ball landed where the shortstop's feet was prior to bailing away from the charging outfielder.

[johnnyg08]

With a well coached team, they might use the fact that you won't call this at the FED level to swap runners. Maybe they pinch ran a speedster or a fast courtesy runner on 2B for the game winner. Now you don't call IFF and they lose their runner. The rule does more than protect from a cheap double play.