Infield Fly in Wild Card Game

[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 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.

[RPatrino]

Here is a question for debate.

The MLB comment states: The umpire must rule also that a ball is an infield fly, even if handled by an outfielder, if, in the umpire's judgment, the ball could have been as easily handled by an infielder. .

My question is, if the outfield is playing shallow and an outfielder makes a catch in a spot that 'in the umpires judgement' could have been easily handled by an infielder, does an infielder even have to make an attempt to catch the ball?

[JRutledge]

I finally saw the actual play and I have no problem with the call. It fits all the rule requirements that I am aware of. I guess I could understanding not calling this too, but then I would see people suggesting that someone was thrown out at 3rd or second as being unfair too.

Peace

[ozzy6900]

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?

I honestly don't know too many coaches who would even think of this (the play in the MLB video) as an IFF. Most of them would be questioning why it was called.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

I honestly don't know too many coaches who would even think of this (the play in the MLB video) as an IFF. Most of them would be questioning why it was called.

that's because they don't know the rules. They do now!

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

I honestly don't know too many coaches who would even think of this (the play in the MLB video) as an IFF. Most of them would be questioning why it was called.

That may be. But, I was just wondering if the answer would be in line with the rule. If an umpire "judges" it to not be in line with the rule, by all means, don't call it. Too many are saying b/c it was "too deep" or the level of play. Both are weak arguments and protestable. Also, if a HS could go out this far and get set to catch it without being "on the run", I think he deserves credit for the effort even if he drops it. Besides, the rule somewhat states the same thing.

[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?

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by asdf

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?

If you want to call an IFF with an infielder 40 to 50 feet out, go for it. I will not. I think you are picking up the $hitty end of a rotten stick by calling this. I do not see the intent of the rule (prevent the unearned DP) being served with the infielder so far out. If you want to have $hit on your hands and a coach in your face, by all means, enjoy it.

Remember, I never said it was wrong, I simply said I will not call this under these conditions. Were I evaluating an umpire and he made this call, I would not mark him negatively as long his explanation for the call so far out was in line with the rule. In other words, as long as the umpire knew why he called this, I would have to accept it as a correct call in the evaluation.