Worked with umpire last night who I thought had at least a few years experience. We were discussing the infield fly rule. He told me that on infield fly call, runner or runners on base must retouch their base before advancing to next base when the ball is not caught or is dropped. In other words, on infield fly, runner at second base takes three or four steps off 2B waiting for ball to come down. Ball is not caught or is dropped. The umpire I worked with said that runner at 2B has to go back and touch 2B before considering advancement to 3B. I thought that the runner could just take off for next base and not retouch base on a dropped infield fly (same as an uncaught or dropped fly ball to outfield). Please tell me that I am correct since that was my understanding of the rule during the entire high school season.

[Edited by Stair-Climber on Jun 16th, 2004 at 11:24 PM]

You are correct. A dropped or uncaught IF is the same as a dropped or uncaught fly at any other time.

The <big><big><big>only</big></big></big> difference between the infield fly and any other fly ball is the BR is out, which removes the force.

Otherwise, no difference at all in what runners can do, when the have to tag up, etc.

Though many of us cite our experience, longevity isn't a qualifier for being a good or intelligent umpire.

I still see guys who insist a SP pitcher must present the ball prior to beginning the pitch. There has been no such rule for over 15 years.

This is what happens when people don't go to clinics or just believe, "Hey, I've been doing this for (insert # here) years, what can they tell me that I don't already know."

It's sad, but there are quite a few people like that out there (Ol' Joe) and they make the rest of us look bad as a group.

How Long ? Who Cares ?
 

I concur with the above statements of reason and explination. But would also like to add that not only does time not make a good umpire sometimes but stubborness also is a sad case. I had this exact same rule problem in a indoor league this past winter and of course double checked the rule book after being unable to convince my partner of his error and also put this same question to this board and others and took copies of all of the replys to the umpire and he STILL defended his stance. Said it was an association thing. Some people just don't want to learn or admit where they are wrong. I just hope you were not in Indianapolis when this happened. Then maybe again it was the same umpire and he is the only one out there that believes himself. Maybe

<b>Said it was an association thing.</b>

Now there's an intelligent answer.

Odd how many umps think runners have to tag up on an uncaught infield fly, though. I worked with one ump who defined when they needed to tag as the moment the ump called IFR. So if the ump calls IFR at the peak of the popup, that constitutes a catch and the runners can tag and go. Then if the ball is caught while the runners are already standing on the next base, they have still properly tagged up.

When I ump alone (most of the time) I give myself the Infield Fly Rule Situation signal but putting my arm across my chest, to remind myself that I've got a potential IFC situation.

Two weeks ago, I had one, with R1 on 2B, R2 on 1B, and 1 out. B3 hit an ordinary pop up to to F4. I called Infield Fly when the ball was at its apex. F4 takes four very small backpedaling steps over the lip of the infield back onto the right field grass, and drops the ball, and not intentionally either. Offensive team members go crazy, and demand that I can't call an IFF on a ball that lands in the outfield. I tell them that where the ball lands does not define the IFF, but where the fielder is positioned before the play does, (in the infield) and F4 got to the ball with ordinary effort (even though he dropped it). Offense failed to realize that without IFF, they would have been doubled up on the play, since the runners held their bases when the ball was popped up, hence the purpose of the IFF. But they just wanted to disagree with the umpire, and tell him that he was wrong, but he wasn't.