Infield Fly in Wild Card Game

[DRJ1960]

Shouldn't the runners have "tagged up" after 1st contact? Aren't they vulnerable to an appeal?

[Toadman15241]

Originally Posted by DRJ1960

Shouldn't the runners have "tagged up" after 1st contact? Aren't they vulnerable to an appeal?

No.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by DRJ1960

Shouldn't the runners have "tagged up" after 1st contact? Aren't they vulnerable to an appeal?

The ball wasn't caught.

[jwwashburn]

Where did all the Mets fans come from? It makes no sense for them to be in Atlanta throwing garbage on the field.

[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.

[DUNDALKCHOPPER]

#1 Could the crew chief over-rule the Ump who called it an IFF. #2 shouldn't they have resolved it then and there rather than playing- since playing it out tomorrow if upheld is rather remote. Also let's face it- you can't protest a judgement call.

[DG]

#1 No
#2 It was resolved, protest was logged and they kept playing.

MLB will not overturn a judgment call.

[tmagan]

This is a problem with postseason baseball. Umpires, who are not stationed in the outfield all year long, are in the outfield in the postseason and are not just used to it, and their depth perception changes.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by tmagan

This is a problem with postseason baseball. Umpires, who are not stationed in the outfield all year long, are in the outfield in the postseason and are not just used to it, and their depth perception changes.

U3 called it from 3rd base. I can easily see it both ends of the stick on this one. Take your pick. The protest is a no-brainer denial.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

U3 called it from 3rd base. I can easily see it both ends of the stick on this one. Take your pick. The protest is a no-brainer denial.

U3 calls it after Holbrook and he's just reacting to what he'd done. The ball is already clearly going to fall when he puts his arm up.

[Dakota]

Judgment call, so protest goes nowhere, but it was poor judgment IMO.

[tmagan]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

U3 called it from 3rd base. I can easily see it both ends of the stick on this one. Take your pick. The protest is a no-brainer denial.

Only after the left field umpire called it. You and I know Nelson wouldn't have called it without Holbrook preceding it

[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.