infield fly "if fair"

[Little Jimmy]

This got me thinking this weekend. USSSA game but all rulesets appreciated. Runners at 1st and 2nd, no outs, infield fly potential. Batter hits a towering fly straight up and then drifting toward the backstop fence. Backstops are at least 15 -20 feet back. Catcher fades back and camps out directly under the ball as it starts coming down. As she reaches out to touch the fence she momentarily looses sight of the ball, and it drops straight down, missing the catcher and the fence by inches. The ball takes a big kick back toward fair territory and would have went beyond the foul line into fair territory if the 3rd baseman, who was also in, hadn't have reached down and picked it up before it crossed the line. Basically a foul ball.

But here's where I started thinking (after the game of course). If the ball would have crossed the foul line into fair territory would I have had an infield fly? Wouldn't this have been the same as if the catcher was right on the line and the pop up would have landed a few inches foul before it rolled fair? In that scenario I would have called "infield fly, if fair...". In the actual play I did not use those terms because the ball was 15-20 feet in foul territory and I thought the "if fair" wouldn't apply. But it almost did.

As I was looking for some guidance, I ran across this info. The Umpires Handbook of Softball Rules Differences 2011 seems to draw a difference between Utrip and Fed interpretations. It states that an infield fly must be declared by the umpire (USSSA 8:17 H) ( as well as NCAA 1.68). Fed 8-2-9 (note) leaves a situation for declaring the infield fly after the fact even if it was not declared at the time.

My questions are...

1. Mechanically speaking, should an umpire use the phrase "if fair" even if the ball seems to be much too far over foul territory to ever roll back in (even though it almost did in my scenario)? Should the words "infield fly" even be used when the ball is that far over foul territory?

2. NCAA 11.18 note 1 speaks of when to use the words "if fair". Does any other organization have have that addendum written down? I use it for all the ball I do but don't really know where else it is stated.

3. In my original scenario, would that play have resulted in in an infield fly being declared if the ball would have indeed crossed the foul line and then was touched or stopped moving?

Thoughts from any ruleset would be appreciated.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Little Jimmy

This got me thinking this weekend. USSSA game but all rulesets appreciated. Runners at 1st and 2nd, no outs, infield fly potential. Batter hits a towering fly straight up and then drifting toward the backstop fence. Backstops are at least 15 -20 feet back. Catcher fades back and camps out directly under the ball as it starts coming down. As she reaches out to touch the fence she momentarily looses sight of the ball, and it drops straight down, missing the catcher and the fence by inches. The ball takes a big kick back toward fair territory and would have went beyond the foul line into fair territory if the 3rd baseman, who was also in, hadn't have reached down and picked it up before it crossed the line. Basically a foul ball.

But here's where I started thinking (after the game of course). If the ball would have crossed the foul line into fair territory would I have had an infield fly? Wouldn't this have been the same as if the catcher was right on the line and the pop up would have landed a few inches foul before it rolled fair? In that scenario I would have called "infield fly, if fair...". In the actual play I did not use those terms because the ball was 15-20 feet in foul territory and I thought the "if fair" wouldn't apply. But it almost did.

As I was looking for some guidance, I ran across this info. The Umpires Handbook of Softball Rules Differences 2011 seems to draw a difference between Utrip and Fed interpretations. It states that an infield fly must be declared by the umpire (USSSA 8:17 H) ( as well as NCAA 1.68). Fed 8-2-9 (note) leaves a situation for declaring the infield fly after the fact even if it was not declared at the time.

My questions are...

1. Mechanically speaking, should an umpire use the phrase "if fair" even if the ball seems to be much too far over foul territory to ever roll back in (even though it almost did in my scenario)? Should the words "infield fly" even be used when the ball is that far over foul territory?

2. NCAA 11.18 note 1 speaks of when to use the words "if fair". Does any other organization have have that addendum written down? I use it for all the ball I do but don't really know where else it is stated.

3. In my original scenario, would that play have resulted in in an infield fly being declared if the ball would have indeed crossed the foul line and then was touched or stopped moving?

Thoughts from any ruleset would be appreciated.

I'd defer to the experts on this one. But my thought is that I would rule that in my judgment that ball that close to the backstop couldn't have been caught with ordinary effort and not have an infield fly.

All infield flies are only infield flies if fair regardless of the declaration. But not all fly balls are infield flies just because they are fair and end up in the infield.

[BretMan]

That's an odd one.

Do you consider a catcher going from a squat, running back 15-20 feet, stationed right next to the fence and, apparently, having to reach out to "feel" the fence to gauge where it is as "routine effort"? Sight unseen, I'd tend to say it's not.

If you do, then you don't really have any other choice but to call this an infield fly if the ball does eventually become fair, as all requirements of the rule would have been met.

Admittedly, this probably isn't the sort of situation they had in mind when the infield fly rule was crafted. But if it did roll fair, wouldn't the runners already on base deserve the protection that the infield fly rule is designed to afford them?

Here's one on the other end of the spectrum. Infield fly situation. Batter hits high pop up toward F4. F4 is camped under it waiting for it to come down. Umpire calls the infield fly. Ball lands a foot behind the fielder, then shoots out into centerfield. Batter keeps running and winds up on second base.

You're probably going to get some sort of argument from the offensive coach, who thinks that you just robbed his batter of "a double". But all the requirements of the rule were met and you don't really have any choice other than to enforce the out and remove the retired batter from the bases.

This play and your play are at two opposite ends of the spectrum. There is a vast array of possible infield fly scenarios in between...most of them that actually resemble plays that the rule was designed to cover. On the fringes, you get this kind of "Twilight Zone" stuff.

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by BretMan

That's an odd one.

Do you consider a catcher going from a squat, running back 15-20 feet, stationed right next to the fence and, apparently, having to reach out to "feel" the fence to gauge where it is as "routine effort"? Sight unseen, I'd tend to say it's not.

If you do, then you don't really have any other choice but to call this an infield fly if the ball does eventually become fair, as all requirements of the rule would have been met.

Admittedly, this probably isn't the sort of situation they had in mind when the infield fly rule was crafted. But if it did roll fair, wouldn't the runners already on base deserve the protection that the infield fly rule is designed to afford them?

Here's one on the other end of the spectrum. Infield fly situation. Batter hits high pop up toward F4. F4 is camped under it waiting for it to come down. Umpire calls the infield fly. Ball lands a foot behind the fielder, then shoots out into centerfield. Batter keeps running and winds up on second base.

You're probably going to get some sort of argument from the offensive coach, who thinks that you just robbed his batter of "a double". But all the requirements of the rule were met and you don't really have any choice other than to enforce the out and remove the retired batter from the bases.

This play and your play are at two opposite ends of the spectrum. There is a vast array of possible infield fly scenarios in between...most of them that actually resemble plays that the rule was designed to cover. On the fringes, you get this kind of "Twilight Zone" stuff.

And when the offensive coach comes out to argue, that's when I inform him the rule is designed to protect his team from becoming the victim of a cheap double play. Can't have it both ways, coach.

[tcannizzo]

I only call "if fair" if the play is near a foul line. Would probably be considered OOO to call it near the back-stop.

This is probably a great case to use an example when discussing that IFF can be applied "retroactively" when it was not verbalized in real time.

[Little Jimmy]

BretMan said..."Do you consider a catcher going from a squat, running back 15-20 feet, stationed right next to the fence and, apparently, having to reach out to "feel" the fence to gauge where it is as "routine effort"? Sight unseen, I'd tend to say it's not".


In this case, the catcher was was giving quite an ordinary effort. She popped up, located the ball, and was camped out under it for 2-4 seconds, waiting for it to come down. Something about her reaching out to touch the fence made her loose sight of the ball for a second. She had been quick to get up all game long.

How about the question where in NCAA and USSSA the infield fly needs to be declared. Is that other people's understanding? No retroactive declaration? Even if "forgotten".

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by youngump

i'd defer to the experts on this one. But my thought is that i would rule that in my judgment that ball that close to the backstop couldn't have been caught with ordinary effort and not have an infield fly.

+1