The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Softball (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/)
-   -   2-30 (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/97347-2-30-a.html)

DRJ1960 Sat Feb 22, 2014 02:54pm

2-30
 
I had an argument with another umpire at a clinic this am (not an instructor :)) who is adamant that you cannot call an Infield Fly if the person who will make the catch is an outfielder.

Rule 2-30 appears to leave room for the discussion. I come down on the side that says the purpose of the rule is to protect the offense from a deliberate miss that results in a double play.

Lcubed48 Sat Feb 22, 2014 03:50pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRJ1960 (Post 924172)
I had an argument with another umpire at a clinic this am (not an instructor :)) who is adamant that you cannot call an Infield Fly if the person who will make the catch is an outfielder.

Rule 2-30 appears to leave room for the discussion. I come down on the side that says the purpose of the rule is to protect the offense from a deliberate miss that results in a double play.

IMO, the rule that you quote allows for that possibility. Did you show or quote your colleague the rule? What was the basis for their position?

DRJ1960 Sat Feb 22, 2014 03:58pm

A) Only balls playable by infielders can be considered for the IF rule.

B) Because he says so.

CecilOne Sat Feb 22, 2014 04:11pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRJ1960 (Post 924175)
A) Only balls playable by infielders can be considered for the IF rule.

B) Because he says so.

Playable by infielders, yes, even if caught by outfielder.
Not playable by infielder (reasonable effort), no.

IRISHMAFIA Sat Feb 22, 2014 04:12pm

It is the weak definition of infielders as position players by the NFHS which could remotely allow for discussion.

I agree with the other umpire. If the player is stationed in the infield, they should be considered infielders.

IRISHMAFIA Sat Feb 22, 2014 04:17pm

OTOH, the umpire could make the call, it would just be wrong :)

CecilOne Sat Feb 22, 2014 05:19pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924177)
If the player is stationed in the infield, they should be considered infielders.

Is this too obvious or too subtle or ... ?? :confused:

Did Yogi ever say that? ;) :D :p

CecilOne Sat Feb 22, 2014 05:20pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924177)
It is the weak definition of infielders as position players by the NFHS which could remotely allow for discussion.

Now I have to get my books out. :rolleyes:

IRISHMAFIA Sat Feb 22, 2014 05:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 924186)
Now I have to get my books out. :rolleyes:

Unlike ASA definition which is based on the area which the player is covering, NFHS is specific to 3rd baseplayer (PC BS), 2nd, 1st and ss.

DRJ1960 Sat Feb 22, 2014 09:17pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924178)
OTOH, the umpire could make the call, it would just be wrong :)



Mile high pop up just behind the SS. Easy play for SS but Outfielder clearly heard calling the ball as he comes in from Left Field......
LF attempts / makes the catch...

I am calling IF all the way regardless of who actually plays the ball...

RKBUmp Sun Feb 23, 2014 07:03am

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRJ1960 (Post 924172)
I had an argument with another umpire at a clinic this am (not an instructor :)) who is adamant that you cannot call an Infield Fly if the person who will make the catch is an outfielder.

Rule 2-30 appears to leave room for the discussion. I come down on the side that says the purpose of the rule is to protect the offense from a deliberate miss that results in a double play.

This question is actually on this years FED test. It is question #62, "An infield fly cannot be ruled if an outfielder catches the ball." The correct answer is False.

CecilOne Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:57am

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924187)
Unlike ASA definition which is based on the area which the player is covering, NFHS is specific to 3rd baseplayer (PC BS), 2nd, 1st and ss.

Not in my copy of 2-30. Citation, please.

youngump Sun Feb 23, 2014 02:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 924287)
Not in my copy of 2-30. Citation, please.

Books are not handy but google suggests this was the rule as of 2011. Has it changed?
Quote:

SECTION 30 INFIELD FLY RULE
Infield fly rule is, when declared by the umpire, a fair fly (not including a line
drive or an attempted bunt) that can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort
when runners are on first and second or all three bases are occupied and before
there are two outs in the inning. Any defensive player positioned in the infield at
the time of the pitch shall be considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule.
The rule does not preclude outfielders from being permitted to make the catch.

IRISHMAFIA Sun Feb 23, 2014 02:54pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 924287)
Not in my copy of 2-30. Citation, please.

The kicker is the definition of "infielder".

ART. 2 . . . Infielders. Infielders are usually the first baseplayer, second baseplayer, third baseplayer, shortstop, pitcher and catcher. The pitcher and catcher are also known as the battery.

Now, compare to ASA"

INFIELDER: A fielder who defends the area of the field around first, second, third or shortstop areas.

NFHS cites actual positions where ASA sites the area the fielder is defending. In NFHS, you can only have one F3, one F4, etc. In ASA, any fielder in the position to cover the areas noted is considered an infielder.

The OP clearly stated "person who will make the catch is an outfielder". I'm simply pointing out the ambiguity which permits the discussion The rule negates the definition since it states "Any defensive player positioned in the infield at the time of the pitch shall be considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule." However, since under that rule this defined "outfielder" is now considered an "infielder", how can an IF be ruled if the umpire has already determined the person making the catch will be an outfielder?

If you feel like this is going in circles it is because it is. When I said it "remotely" allow for discussion, I guess that was a misstatement as I was trying to convey my belief that it shouldn't call for discussion, if not for the wording of the definition and the OP.

CecilOne Sun Feb 23, 2014 04:39pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924344)
The kicker is the definition of "infielder".

ART. 2 . . . Infielders. Infielders are usually the first baseplayer, second baseplayer, third baseplayer, shortstop, pitcher and catcher. The pitcher and catcher are also known as the battery.

Now, compare to ASA"

INFIELDER: A fielder who defends the area of the field around first, second, third or shortstop areas.

NFHS cites actual positions where ASA sites the area the fielder is defending. In NFHS, you can only have one F3, one F4, etc. In ASA, any fielder in the position to cover the areas noted is considered an infielder.

The OP clearly stated "person who will make the catch is an outfielder". I'm simply pointing out the ambiguity which permits the discussion The rule negates the definition since it states "Any defensive player positioned in the infield at the time of the pitch shall be considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule." However, since under that rule this defined "outfielder" is now considered an "infielder", how can an IF be ruled if the umpire has already determined the person making the catch will be an outfielder?

If you feel like this is going in circles it is because it is. When I said it "remotely" allow for discussion, I guess that was a misstatement as I was trying to convey my belief that it shouldn't call for discussion, if not for the wording of the definition and the OP.

Not really a problem, given the bolded red. Yes, the ASA definition makes it simpler, but the definition does not justify the wrong opinion described in the OP.

Q: Does the ASA definition exclude the "battery"?

IRISHMAFIA Sun Feb 23, 2014 05:21pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 924359)
Not really a problem, given the bolded red. Yes, the ASA definition makes it simpler, but the definition does not justify the wrong opinion described in the OP.

But it is not wrong. Based upon NFHS rule and the fact the OP clearly stated the ball would be caught be an outfielder, IF is not the proper call.

Hey, it's their wording, not mine.

Quote:

Q: Does the ASA definition exclude the "battery"?
I know you have an ASA book :) Actually, when they defined Infielders it required an adjustment to the IF rule to include pitchers and catchers.

CecilOne Sun Feb 23, 2014 06:38pm

I have often wondered why we expect an educational institution's publication to be clear and grammatically correct. :rolleyes:

RKBUmp Sun Feb 23, 2014 08:00pm

2-30 says right in the rule, "The rule does not preclude outfielders from being permitted to make the catch."

MD Longhorn Mon Feb 24, 2014 09:31am

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924361)
But it is not wrong. Based upon NFHS rule and the fact the OP clearly stated the ball would be caught be an outfielder, IF is not the proper call.

No, the rule says that to be an IF, it must have been catchable by an infielder, not that it has to be actually caught by an infielder. The comment then backs this up.

IRISHMAFIA Mon Feb 24, 2014 12:37pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 924437)
No, the rule says that to be an IF, it must have been catchable by an infielder, not that it has to be actually caught by an infielder. The comment then backs this up.

But the OP is worded in a manner that states the ball WILL be caught by an outfielder. That isn't a may be or could be, but WILL. To me, that means it has been predetermined who will catch the ball. It seems many want to read into it with a "what if" scenario. That means the player had to start in the outfield at the pitch or, by rule, would have been considered an infielder.

That's almost like trying to read interfering with an IF because a runner was hit with a batter ball. :)

MD Longhorn Mon Feb 24, 2014 01:01pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924473)
But the OP is worded in a manner that states the ball WILL be caught by an outfielder. That isn't a may be or could be, but WILL. To me, that means it has been predetermined who will catch the ball. It seems many want to read into it with a "what if" scenario. That means the player had to start in the outfield at the pitch or, by rule, would have been considered an infielder.

That's almost like trying to read interfering with an IF because a runner was hit with a batter ball. :)

It doesn't matter that it will be caught by an outfielder. The ONLY thing that matters is whether it could be caught by an infielder (and you're making this decision near the apex, of course). In other words, for all intents and purposes, the fact that NFHS chose (stupidly, imho) to delineate who is an infielder and who is an outfielder in the definitions section doesn't make the application of this rule any different than ASA or anyone else.

Manny A Mon Feb 24, 2014 03:36pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRJ1960 (Post 924172)
I had an argument with another umpire at a clinic this am (not an instructor :)) who is adamant that you cannot call an Infield Fly if the person who will make the catch is an outfielder.

At a clinic?? SOOOoooo, what did the instructor(s) say when you brought it up to him/her/them??

DRJ1960 Mon Feb 24, 2014 05:06pm

My "opponent" took it to the top and got shot down.... said he plans to call Charlottesville (State Office / Interpreter) and talk to them.....

RKBUmp Mon Feb 24, 2014 05:50pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRJ1960 (Post 924515)
My "opponent" took it to the top and got shot down.... said he plans to call Charlottesville (State Office / Interpreter) and talk to them.....

Its already been covered in question 62 of the fed test.

MD Longhorn Mon Feb 24, 2014 05:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKBUmp (Post 924519)
Its already been covered in question 62 of the fed test.

It's also covered, specifically, in the comment after the rule... but apparently neither are good enough for that guy.

strike4 Mon Feb 24, 2014 07:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924473)
But the OP is worded in a manner that states the ball WILL be caught by an outfielder. That isn't a may be or could be, but WILL. To me, that means it has been predetermined who will catch the ball. It seems many want to read into it with a "what if" scenario. That means the player had to start in the outfield at the pitch or, by rule, would have been considered an infielder.

That's almost like trying to read interfering with an IF because a runner was hit with a batter ball. :)

What is a batter ball? :D

Dakota Mon Feb 24, 2014 07:10pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924473)
But the OP is worded in a manner that states the ball WILL be caught by an outfielder. That isn't a may be or could be, but WILL. To me, that means it has been predetermined who will catch the ball. It seems many want to read into it with a "what if" scenario. That means the player had to start in the outfield at the pitch or, by rule, would have been considered an infielder.

That's almost like trying to read interfering with an IF because a runner was hit with a batter ball. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 924479)
It doesn't matter that it will be caught by an outfielder. The ONLY thing that matters is whether it could be caught by an infielder (and you're making this decision near the apex, of course). In other words, for all intents and purposes, the fact that NFHS chose (stupidly, imho) to delineate who is an infielder and who is an outfielder in the definitions section doesn't make the application of this rule any different than ASA or anyone else.

I think I see what Mike is saying. The OP says "will be caught" not "is caught". I don't know if the OP meant it the way Mike seems to be reading it, but consider this situation...

The infield is in an extreme right shift, with F6 playing shallow center-right and F5 is playing in the nominal SS position, but shifted more toward 2B. F7 comes in to cover third, but still plays a bit deep. (You don't see defensive shifts much in fastpitch due to the small infield, but...) There is a pop up near 3B, F7 is the player who can catch the ball with ordinary effort, since F5 is in her shifted position, and F7 does make the catch. Taking the Fed rule literally, is this an Infield Fly?

UMP45 Mon Feb 24, 2014 07:46pm

2 things. 1, I think some people argue just to hear their head rattle. 2, SS is positioned on the warning track. Deep fly ball and he catches it. What is your call?

Dakota Mon Feb 24, 2014 08:29pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by UMP45 (Post 924534)
... I think some people argue just to hear their head rattle...

Is that introspection on your part?

IRISHMAFIA Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:22am

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 924479)
It doesn't matter that it will be caught by an outfielder. The ONLY thing that matters is whether it could be caught by an infielder (and you're making this decision near the apex, of course). In other words, for all intents and purposes, the fact that NFHS chose (stupidly, imho) to delineate who is an infielder and who is an outfielder in the definitions section doesn't make the application of this rule any different than ASA or anyone else.

I completely agree, but the OP doesn't state that. I'm taking the OP as fact and not reading anything into it. The OP has already determined the all to be caught by an outfielder, so lacking any additional information, I HAVE to assume the ball is in the outfield because the OP stated it as such, nor are there any indications that an infielder had the opportunity to catch the ball with normal/ordinary effort.

I have never disagreed that an outfielder "could" be the recipient of a batted ball ruled as an infield fly. After all, I was one of the first and few who defended the IF call in the NL series when the SS was under the all halfway to the fence. But at the time, that was a decision to be made.

In this case, the OP left little to the imagination to anyone who wasn't looking for a way around the argument. :)

UMP45 Tue Feb 25, 2014 06:36am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota (Post 924536)
Is that introspection on your part?

No Dakota. I'm saying some people would argue just for the sake of arguing.

IRISHMAFIA Tue Feb 25, 2014 08:22am

Quote:

Originally Posted by UMP45 (Post 924565)
No Dakota. I'm saying some people would argue just for the sake of arguing.

Do not! :D

Insane Blue Tue Feb 25, 2014 08:53am

Quote:

Originally Posted by UMP45 (Post 924534)
2 things. 1, I think some people argue just to hear their head rattle. 2, SS is positioned on the warning track. Deep fly ball and he catches it. What is your call?

1. True
2. In this case the SS is an Outfielder and not an Infielder.

MD Longhorn Tue Feb 25, 2014 09:13am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota (Post 924532)
I think I see what Mike is saying. The OP says "will be caught" not "is caught". I don't know if the OP meant it the way Mike seems to be reading it, but consider this situation...

The infield is in an extreme right shift, with F6 playing shallow center-right and F5 is playing in the nominal SS position, but shifted more toward 2B. F7 comes in to cover third, but still plays a bit deep. (You don't see defensive shifts much in fastpitch due to the small infield, but...) There is a pop up near 3B, F7 is the player who can catch the ball with ordinary effort, since F5 is in her shifted position, and F7 does make the catch. Taking the Fed rule literally, is this an Infield Fly?

In all honesty - I (and any umpire I've actually worked with, and not just read about on the internet) call IFF EXACTLY the same in Fed and ASA. So the wording is screwy in Fed - sometimes you just have to umpire.

Manny A Tue Feb 25, 2014 09:18am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota (Post 924532)
The infield is in an extreme right shift, with F6 playing shallow center-right and F5 is playing in the nominal SS position, but shifted more toward 2B. F7 comes in to cover third, but still plays a bit deep. (You don't see defensive shifts much in fastpitch due to the small infield, but...) There is a pop up near 3B, F7 is the player who can catch the ball with ordinary effort, since F5 is in her shifted position, and F7 does make the catch. Taking the Fed rule literally, is this an Infield Fly?

If you take the FED rule literally, and consider that F7 is still the left fielder, No.

But consider this: Since in FED players may change defensive positions at any time, coaches are not required to announce those changes, and umpires aren't required to record them, who's to say the defensive coach didn't turn F6 into F7, F5 into F6, and F7 into F5 for the shift, and then return them to their original designation after they return to their normal positions? ;)

Frankly, I'm not grabbing the sh!tty end of the stick and not making an IF call in your scenario.

Dakota Tue Feb 25, 2014 11:23am

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 924586)
In all honesty - I (and any umpire I've actually worked with, and not just read about on the internet) call IFF EXACTLY the same in Fed and ASA. So the wording is screwy in Fed - sometimes you just have to umpire.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manny A (Post 924587)
If you take the FED rule literally, and consider that F7 is still the left fielder, No.

But consider this: Since in FED players may change defensive positions at any time, coaches are not required to announce those changes, and umpires aren't required to record them, who's to say the defensive coach didn't turn F6 into F7, F5 into F6, and F7 into F5 for the shift, and then return them to their original designation after they return to their normal positions? ;)

Frankly, I'm not grabbing the sh!tty end of the stick and not making an IF call in your scenario.

The correct call is IF. I was only pointing out the seed of the argument that exists in the way the NFHS rules are written.

DaveASA/FED Tue Feb 25, 2014 01:11pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manny A (Post 924587)
If you take the FED rule literally, and consider that F7 is still the left fielder, No.

From the fed book:

Infield fly rule is, when declared by the umpire, a fair fly (not including a line drive or an attempted bunt) that can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort when runners are on first and second or all three bases are occupied and before there are two outs in the inning. Any defensive player positioned in the infield at the time of the pitch shall be considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule. The rule does not preclude outfielders from being permitted to make the catch. The ball is live, the batter is out, which removes the force, but runners may advance at their own risk. The runners may tag up and advance as soon as the batted ball is touched by a fielder. If a declared infield fly becomes foul, it is treated as a foul ball, not an infield fly.

Maybe I am just looking at this wrong, but to me the above bold underlined text says we could have 9 players we consider possible to have an IF on a given play.

Now if we are argueing what is the infield again the definition of that is:
The infield is that portion of the field in fair territory that is normally skinned and covered by the pitcher and infielders.

This is to give someone a guideline not a hard fast dividing line. If SS is playing back 1 step in the grass is she no longer in the infield? I say she is still in the infield, and we could still have an IF in the case that she could field a ball with ordinary effort. How many fields are made to exact book standards when it comes to how much of the infield is skinned? Not very many, I know the local high school in my area had to get 12 yards of sod for one side and take out about 8 on the other to make it per the book when they redid it and made it per the book last year. I guess what I am saying is I see enough "wiggle" room with the normally skinned wording to enforce NFHS and ASA the same.

Manny A Tue Feb 25, 2014 03:33pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED (Post 924625)
From the fed book:

Infield fly rule is, when declared by the umpire, a fair fly (not including a line drive or an attempted bunt) that can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort when runners are on first and second or all three bases are occupied and before there are two outs in the inning. Any defensive player positioned in the infield at the time of the pitch shall be considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule. The rule does not preclude outfielders from being permitted to make the catch. The ball is live, the batter is out, which removes the force, but runners may advance at their own risk. The runners may tag up and advance as soon as the batted ball is touched by a fielder. If a declared infield fly becomes foul, it is treated as a foul ball, not an infield fly.

Maybe I am just looking at this wrong, but to me the above bold underlined text says we could have 9 players we consider possible to have an IF on a given play.

Now if we are argueing what is the infield again the definition of that is:
The infield is that portion of the field in fair territory that is normally skinned and covered by the pitcher and infielders.

This is to give someone a guideline not a hard fast dividing line. If SS is playing back 1 step in the grass is she no longer in the infield? I say she is still in the infield, and we could still have an IF in the case that she could field a ball with ordinary effort. How many fields are made to exact book standards when it comes to how much of the infield is skinned? Not very many, I know the local high school in my area had to get 12 yards of sod for one side and take out about 8 on the other to make it per the book when they redid it and made it per the book last year. I guess what I am saying is I see enough "wiggle" room with the normally skinned wording to enforce NFHS and ASA the same.

No disagreement. I was merely addressing Tom's scenario where F7 is still playing deep enough into the outfield that she may still be considered an outfielder at the time of the pitch, but then comes in to make the catch near the infield. The FED wording of the rule would not support making the IF call in this case.

But you won't see me not making that call.

Insane Blue Tue Feb 25, 2014 04:14pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manny A (Post 924652)
No disagreement. I was merely addressing Tom's scenario where F7 is still playing deep enough into the outfield that she may still be considered an outfielder at the time of the pitch, but then comes in to make the catch near the infield. The FED wording of the rule would not support making the IF call in this case.

But you won't see me not making that call.

2014 NFHS rulebook 2-30

Infield fly rule is, when declared by the umpire, a fair fly (not including a line drive or an attempted bunt) that can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort when runners are on first and second or all three bases are occupied and before there are two outs in the inning. Any defensive player positioned in the infield at the time of the pitch shall be considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule. The rule does not preclude outfielders from being permitted to make the catch. The ball is live, the batter is out, which removes the force, but runners may advance at their own risk. The runners may tag up and advance as soon as the batted ball is touched by a fielder. If a declared infield fly becomes foul, it is treated as a foul ball, not an infield fly.

But Manny it states it right there in 2-30 The rule does not preclude outfielders from being permitted to make the catch.

youngump Wed Feb 26, 2014 06:04am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manny A (Post 924652)
No disagreement. I was merely addressing Tom's scenario where F7 is still playing deep enough into the outfield that she may still be considered an outfielder at the time of the pitch, but then comes in to make the catch near the infield. The FED wording of the rule would not support making the IF call in this case.

But you won't see me not making that call.

If F7 can get into the infield in time to make this play, she was probably close enough to be considered an infielder. If not the ball was so high that F6 from the shift (or F1) could have made the catch, so call the infield fly for that.

Manny A Wed Feb 26, 2014 06:08am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Insane Blue (Post 924662)
2014 NFHS rulebook 2-30

Infield fly rule is, when declared by the umpire, a fair fly (not including a line drive or an attempted bunt) that can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort when runners are on first and second or all three bases are occupied and before there are two outs in the inning. Any defensive player positioned in the infield at the time of the pitch shall be considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule. The rule does not preclude outfielders from being permitted to make the catch. The ball is live, the batter is out, which removes the force, but runners may advance at their own risk. The runners may tag up and advance as soon as the batted ball is touched by a fielder. If a declared infield fly becomes foul, it is treated as a foul ball, not an infield fly.

But Manny it states it right there in 2-30 The rule does not preclude outfielders from being permitted to make the catch.

All that is saying is that if an infielder could make the catch with ordinary effort, but an outfielder calls her off and ends up making the catch instead, that doesn't invalidate an infield fly call.

IRISHMAFIA Wed Feb 26, 2014 08:31am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Insane Blue (Post 924581)
1. True
2. In this case the SS is an Outfielder and not an Infielder.

But not by the Fed's definition of infielder. The wording is goofy and yes, sometimes we just need to umpire.

Facts I believe we all agree upon:

In spite of the wording, ASA & NFHS infield fly rulings and application to the player's position are relatively the same.

An outfielder is one who does not meet the qualification of an infielder at the time of the pitch.

An infielder is someone in the infield area at the time of the pitch, not someone who can simply get there quick enough to make a catch.

An infield fly is ruled by the umpire when it is determined the batted ball which qualifies as one to which the IFR can be applied can be caught with ordinary/normal effort by any player which qualified as an infielder at the time of the pitch.

Are we all on the same page so far? Now, to my statement concerning the OP. It is stated that the ball WILL be caught by an outfielder. Not may be or could be, I'm well aware that a ball ruled an IF may end up being caught by an OF. But the possibility of an infielder catching this ball has, IMO, already been precluded by the matter-of-fact statement that it WILL be caught by an outfielder. So, if the umpire has already determined that, how can s/he possible rule an infield fly?

ASA/NYSSOBLUE Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:37pm

Can I ask what may be a silly question about all of this?? Why does it matter WHO catches the ball? After all, have not we already declared the batter out BECAUSE of IFR?? And actually by rule, even if no one touches the ball and it falls to the ground - we still have the out - 41 or 38 to go. So if the the CF catches the ball with the SS or 2B in the area....what does it matter - except that they put this in the book just so you can tell a coach/player, "It's in the book..blah blah blah"

Or am I missing something here? :confused: I am assisting at our HS clinic this month, and will ask our instructors, one of whom is the ASA UIC for New York....

IRISHMAFIA Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:43pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASA/NYSSOBLUE (Post 924854)
Can I ask what may be a silly question about all of this?? Why does it matter WHO catches the ball? After all, have not we already declared the batter out BECAUSE of IFR?? And actually by rule, even if no one touches the ball and it falls to the ground - we still have the out - 41 or 38 to go. So if the the CF catches the ball with the SS or 2B in the area....what does it matter - except that they put this in the book just so you can tell a coach/player, "It's in the book..blah blah blah"

Or am I missing something here? :confused: I am assisting at our HS clinic this month, and will ask our instructors, one of whom is the ASA UIC for New York....

If the left fielder caught a ball 10 feet short of the fence that was not aided by the wind, would that be an infield fly?

ASA/NYSSOBLUE Thu Feb 27, 2014 10:31am

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924856)
If the left fielder caught a ball 10 feet short of the fence that was not aided by the wind, would that be an infield fly?

IM - we have a league where the guy built his field on his farm, and the RF fence is only about 130 ft from HP - with a 30 ft mesh fence, literally a reverse Fenway (or Baker Bowl throwback if you will). So it is highly possible that on a pop fly during the IFR situation, that the 2B person could go out there with 'ordinary effort', thus triggering the IFR call, and the RF catching the ball like you said. :cool:

The situation I am talking about - and is going to actually happen is the pop up to shallow RF/CF/LF, with the SS/2B converging with whatever outfielder is appropriate. Whatever happens after the IFR call is made here is pretty much a moot point, as me and my partner are now concentrating more on the base runners actions. If the CF/LF/RF catch the ball - fine; if they don't - we still have the out, and the runners don't have to tag up.

IRISHMAFIA Thu Feb 27, 2014 12:38pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASA/NYSSOBLUE (Post 924882)
IM - we have a league where the guy built his field on his farm, and the RF fence is only about 130 ft from HP - with a 30 ft mesh fence, literally a reverse Fenway (or Baker Bowl throwback if you will). So it is highly possible that on a pop fly during the IFR situation, that the 2B person could go out there with 'ordinary effort', thus triggering the IFR call, and the RF catching the ball like you said. :cool:

The situation I am talking about - and is going to actually happen is the pop up to shallow RF/CF/LF, with the SS/2B converging with whatever outfielder is appropriate. Whatever happens after the IFR call is made here is pretty much a moot point, as me and my partner are now concentrating more on the base runners actions. If the CF/LF/RF catch the ball - fine; if they don't - we still have the out, and the runners don't have to tag up.

Why is it I'm not surprised that the response was a non-response?

MD Longhorn Thu Feb 27, 2014 01:20pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924913)
Why is it I'm not surprised that the response was a non-response?

I didn't know how to respond to you either. You asked if a fly ball to the wall was an infield fly. Why would you ask that? Of course not. It didn't require a response.

Dakota Thu Feb 27, 2014 03:09pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924856)
If the left fielder caught a ball 10 feet short of the fence that was not aided by the wind, would that be an infield fly?

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 924913)
Why is it I'm not surprised that the response was a non-response?

What I got from his answer is, "depends on where the fence is." ;)

ASA/NYSSOBLUE Thu Feb 27, 2014 05:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota (Post 924949)
What I got from his answer is, "depends on where the fence is." ;)

DING DING DING - we got a winner!

Its a very fun field to work, as the league plays straight Modified A, using a nice dead Clincher ball. Pop flies that become HRs? Yes! Balls hit off the mesh that become forces at 2B or1B? YES! Still waiting for that first 9-5-3/9-6-3 DP though....:D

LF, btw, is VERY deep - about 300 ft :eek:

IRISHMAFIA Thu Feb 27, 2014 05:32pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota (Post 924949)
What I got from his answer is, "depends on where the fence is." ;)

And the beat goes on! :)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1