From an association quiz
 

We had the following situation on a test in our association a couple weeks ago. How would you rule.

R1 on 2nd, R2 on first, 1 out, B4 hits a high pop fly that lands in foul territory between home and first base then kicks (untouched) into fair territory. F2 fields the ball and throws to F3 who tags R2 as they are standing off the base.

We had a big discussion about one aspect of this play.

Would you call an infield fly on this play? (Edit: changed intentional to infield)

My argument is that it could be an intentional fly situation given that 1) It was a high pop fly on the play. In my opinion, without seeing the play, a high pop fly near a foul line in a high school game should be able to be caught with reasonable effort. 2) The ball ended up in fair territory, even though it hit in foul territory, which means it is a fair ball, thus being eligible for the infield fly rule given the way the rule is worded.

That would make this play a double play with the out on an infield fly being #2 and an out on the tag being the third out.

This is a situation where no matter what, a coach is going to be upset. The defensive coach will want both outs, the out on R2 who was tagged while off the base and the out for the infield fly. The offensive coach is going to be arguing that the only out should be R2 who was tagged off base, and that B4 (who we assume advanced to first while the high pop fly was in the air) should be safe on the play.

Intentional Fly?

Cutting through the irrelevant stuff, the answer to your question is that YES, the umpire can (and very likely should, in this case) retroactively rule an INFIELD fly and place runners accordingly. Umpires should have called it at its apex (IFF if Fair), but having failed to do so they MUST fix this error, call BR out, and leave the runners on 1st and 2nd.

NO, you should not allow a double play here, as the runner only advanced because of the umpire's error in not calling it an IFF when he was supposed to.

The purpose of the IFR is to protect the offense from a cheap double play. Who cares what the DC wants?

Let's assume for a moment that is what the OP is asking; it sounds more like attempting to invoke the intentionally dropped rule. It cannot be that, because 1) the infield fly rule would supercede, and 2) when a ball drops untouched, it isn't dropped.

To be more specific, the intent of the infield fly rule is to protect against a cheap double play resulting from runners being forced. Not so much against runners too stupid to stay on a base on a fair batted ball. Without seeing the exact play, and determining that the runner was in jeopardy for the umpire failing to call the IFR (meaning, she is now running to second thinking she is forced), as opposed to a runner too stupid to know this is a fair ball, live ball, and she is in jeopardy standing off the base, I am thinking I probably DO have a double play, based on the post "standing off the base".

That would make this play a double play with the out on an infield fly being #2 and an out on the tag being the third out.

The OP should have been infield fly, not intentional drop.

I did not say anything about when the IFR was called. In the event it is close to the line the proper mechanic is Infield Fly if Fair. If that call is made, then the only option on the play is a double play.

Now, as for the situation if the umpire does not make the call initially.

The proper ruling, which I just found in the casebook is:

B4 is out on an infield fly, even if it is not called initially the batter is out. Also, R2 is out for being tagged while off the base.

This is from the casebook play on page 15, (2.30 Situation B)

Ultimately it is up to the offensive team to know the situation. I can understand the idea of not counting the double play, but the proper situation for the offense in this case is to stay on the base. If no infield fly is rule, R2 is out when they are tagged standing on the base (force out). If the IFR is in play, they are safe while standing on first base, and the Batter is out on the IFR. The only bad option is to stand off the base, allowing yourself to be tagged out.

You didn't say it was called at all. If it WAS called, it changes the scenario completely. Including the fact that it was called is as important as mentioning a runner was tagged out - it's critical to the situation.

Omitting relevant information is not going to get you the answer you're looking for, most of the time.

If IFF was called, then you have a double play, and really don't have anything to discuss. Pretty straightforward in that case and coaches have nothing to argue about either.

Double play whether called or not.....

If we don't call an in field fly on a ball hit above the shortstop in this scenario,

we would still have a dp.....this scenario is no different....

Actually is does not change anything on the play. If the IFR is invoked, either when the ball reaches it's highest point, or prior to the next pitch, it is the same ruling.

The runner who is tagged while off base is out and the batter runner is out on the IFR.

It is still the responsibility of the offensive team to know the situation. There is no way a runner tagged out when off base is put back on the base because the umpires did not call the IFR.

That is not entirely true. If the umpire does not call the IFF in a situation where it should have been and the end result ends up with runners being put out who would not have been otherwise the umpire can and should invoke the IFF after the fact and put runners back on base.

I was addressing his comment about the coaches complaining, not whether the correct call was made.

It was presented as a test question, not a real situation.

I get that. And IFF was not called. Then chap said, "I did not say anything about when the IFR was called," - implying that it WAS called. Which, despite chap's insistence, CAN change the situation.

If the original scenario was presented on a test, but it said IFF was called... there would be nothing to discuss. The question would be easy. The DP would be obvious - and no coach with a quarter of a brain would complain.

IFF not called is the CRUX of this discussion. It brings into play the concern that the lack of call put someone at jeopardy - and if so, we must protect them. I do agree that if the runner is just wandering off base for no apparent reason (and not confused by the lack of IFF call, running, and then trying to return, or something like that), you probably still have a double play.

I wondered if anyone else was considering that.

I certainly hope that was not a test consideration. :eek:

I'm kind of bothered that it was a test question ... if it actually was.

Just on it's own ... what's the question?

Well, the OP said "How would you rule. ", presumably what the test said.

I obviously don't know how the test question was presented, but I like the situation presented as part of a test and/or discussion question. It has a number of interesting aspects that could drive how a multiple choice question is completed or how a discussion could proceed.

That would be incorrect

How would it be incorrect?

IM -

Please explain your logic....

The ball is a fair ball when it is touched. If runners that are on base, make the IF rule applicable, then the rule must be enforced. Runners advance at their own
risk. They run get tagged out = double play ( two outs )....

Am I missing something.....

Can an administrator also put this on the baseball site with an explanation as to why it was added.

Am curious what fed baseball guys would have....

Ifr
 

As a baseball guy, I would have 2 outs. IFR does not need to be called, if it is great, if not, sorry, but the situation still warrants it. Runners need to know the rules as well.

Have a great day!

STRIKES AND OUTS!!!

i am a varsity high school umpire in orange county ny our interp stated to us if neither umpire calls infield field that shame on you and ball is live all runners and batter runner at own risk,

While this might not apply to the OP, the advice you're being given is wrong (from the top).

Better scenario to illustrate this:

Runners on 1st and 2nd. Typical infield fly to the pitcher, but for whatever reason, not called. Ball drops. F1 picks up, throws to third, F5 throws to 2nd. Double play, because the umps screwed up putting the offense in jeopardy.

This is EXACTLY the scenario where the umpire MUST fix it, call the batter out, and put the runners back on bases.

This is from a baseball game and I know this is the softball side.
This is a scenario that I saw last Friday in a 3A baseball game. The umpires were not from our chapter, thankfully.

Bases loaded, 1 out. Batter hits a high pop up, PU signals IFF, pop fly lands in fair territory about 4' in front of the edge of the infield and rolls across the 1B line, fair ball. As soon as the ball hits the ground, Runner from 3B leaves to score. F3 picks up the ball. The runner on 2B tries to run to 3B but the coach sends him back. While the runner is returning to 2B, F3 throws the ball to F6 covering 2B. F6 catches the throw and touches the base, not the runner. BU calls the runner out for the third out.

I was livid. I don't know how the offensive HC didn't get thrown out. At least the umpires scored the run. These umpires didn't know they had something that needed to be fixed.

Buy him/her a rule book. :o

The failure of the umpire to make the ruling in a timely manner placed the runner in jeopardy.

If anyone is a nysso ump they would know in the Manuel on page 41 it states
If the batted ball lands uncaught and the umpires failed to declare an infield fly, the umpires shall not declare and infield fly
Rationale to call infield fly so late would lead. To further confusion
THis is. Nys interpretation not ASA

Rule 8-2-9 note and casebook 2.30 B ruling seem told support all outs on this play. What rule trumps these?

I think there is a difference between the OP and the discussion about putting a team obviously in jeopardy by not calling he IFF. In the case of the discussed items, the DP resulted from out called as force outs on both runners, when they should not have been forced to advance.

In that case you are putting both teams in jeopardy by not calling the IFF. First, you require runners to advance when they should not be forced to advance. Second, the defense will likely only tag the base for the force out, which is not a legal out since the IFF should have been called. When the DP is two force out plays, the only proper procedure is to negate the penalty both teams would incur, rule the Batter out, and put the runners on the bases they should be on had they not been forced to advance.

This used to be in the casebook somewhere, although I don't recall the location,

This is different from the OP which is a case the runner was off base and was tagged. You can't rightfully put the runner back on a base when it was their mistake that caused them to be off the base because that penalizes the defense which rightfully tagged the runner who was off the base out.

Yeah, you can. If the IF was called, would the runners be more likely to hold the base or leave?

This is brain surgery and the interp isn't new. The umpire ****ed up and you cannot hold either team responsible for your stupidity.

Generally, NFHS 10-2-3-m, using the wording "rectify any situation" can trump any other. Use of that rule has to be judiciously applied. But, if you judge one team was put in jeopardy as a result of reversing a decision (didn't call the infield fly, applying it retroactively is a reversal), you have the authority and obligation to fix it.

That said, based on the OP (not force outs, just bad baserunning), I have two outs on THAT play. While the thread has morphed, I believe IrishMafia is addressing those that state it will always be a double play if the rule is applied retroactively, not so much the initial post.

I'm going to respectfully disagree with Steve.

What else do you expect runners to do that see the ball roll fair and the umpire has NOT made the appropriate call that protects them? After all, they cannot read what is in the umpire's mind as to whether s/he judges the ball to be catchable with ordinary effort. You may call it dumb base running, I may call it indecision based upon an umpire failure.

IF the umpire does make the call retroactively, I don't believe s/he has a choice than protect BOTH teams.