I had a quick look round the rules, and there's no real good definition of "fly ball" that talks about height. It's one of those "I recognise it when I see it" sort of things, I assume.
9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
- Famous Mortimer
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 3636
- Joined: November 14 14, 5:23 am
- Location: Cherokee
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
Tags:
- Joe Shlabotnik
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 23104
- Joined: October 12 06, 2:21 pm
- Location: Baseball Ref Bullpen
- Contact:
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
Can't be a line drive and has to be catchable with 'ordinary effort' by an infielder. It does NOT need to be caught on the infield as we Cardinal fans know from the infamouse Atlanta post-season game.Gashouse wrote: ↑September 28 21, 6:51 amWhat is the threshold for "fly" to call the infield fly rule? A minimum height?
In one of our Little League games this past year, there was a borderline infield fly rule no-call. Since it's Little League, we usually have runners on base, and with relatively little power on a bigger field, I'm surprised we don't have more IFR situations. Anyway, in our game, runners on first and second, and it was a pop up, but not very high - maybe 10-15 feet. If the SS was really quick thinking, then he could have let it drop on purpose. Still, he ended up missing it (definite error). After all was said and done, they got the force at 2nd and we ended up with runners on first and third with one more out. We ended up in a better situation, so I didn't argue for the IFR but still wondered why it wasn't called. We speculated that it wasn't quite high enough for the SS to make the conscious decision to let it drop.
I've learned to err on the the side of calling the IFF. If there's any arc on it and a infielder within the old 'step and a reach', I'm calling it, even if its after the fact which you can do in the travel ball and high school level games I umpire. Don't know if you can do that in LL. Too much insanity can result if you don't.
BTW, any intentional drop by an infielder with runners on base - whether IFF is on or not - is an immediate dead ball and the batter is out.
Online
- Popeye_Card
- GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
- Posts: 29876
- Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
I think they should get rid of the infield fly rule. If the defense wants to risk the sure out to try at a double/triple play, then more power to them. No different than the hitter grounding into a double play - if the defense can execute, let them.
- Joe Shlabotnik
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 23104
- Joined: October 12 06, 2:21 pm
- Location: Baseball Ref Bullpen
- Contact:
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
At high school and higher levels, its a guaranteed double and 50/50 triple play. Defenses would practice the hell out of it because of the gold mine of outs. It would change the game drastically.Popeye_Card wrote: ↑September 28 21, 8:06 amI think they should get rid of the infield fly rule. If the defense wants to risk the sure out to try at a double/triple play, then more power to them. No different than the hitter grounding into a double play - if the defense can execute, let them.
And if you aren't protecting the offense from IFF, might as well get rid of the dropped 3rd strike provisions. There's another gift wrapped triple play - especially with the bases loaded! Catcher doesn't catch, steps on home and easy pickings at the other bases.
Online
As for dropped 3rd strikes, they should just get rid of the rule where the batter can run to 1st anyway. Isn't that just some archaic remnant from early 1900's rules?
- Popeye_Card
- GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
- Posts: 29876
- Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
Sure, get rid of it. I mean they are fairly rare in the first place.Joe Shlabotnik wrote: ↑September 28 21, 8:15 amAt high school and higher levels, its a guaranteed double and 50/50 triple play. Defenses would practice the hell out of it because of the gold mine of outs. It would change the game drastically.Popeye_Card wrote: ↑September 28 21, 8:06 amI think they should get rid of the infield fly rule. If the defense wants to risk the sure out to try at a double/triple play, then more power to them. No different than the hitter grounding into a double play - if the defense can execute, let them.
And if you aren't protecting the offense from IFF, might as well get rid of the dropped 3rd strike provisions. There's another gift wrapped triple play - especially with the bases loaded! Catcher doesn't catch, steps on home and easy pickings at the other bases.
As for dropped 3rd strikes, they should just get rid of the rule where the batter can run to 1st anyway. Isn't that just some archaic remnant from early 1900's rules?
-
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 5032
- Joined: June 15 06, 6:11 am
- Location: Minneapolis
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
?? Is that an actual rule? If so, then what's the point of the IFF rule?Joe Shlabotnik wrote: ↑September 28 21, 7:48 am
BTW, any intentional drop by an infielder with runners on base - whether IFF is on or not - is an immediate dead ball and the batter is out.
Online
-
- "I could totally eat a pig butt, if smoked correctly!"
- Posts: 27273
- Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
- Location: Thinking of the Children
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
No way would I want to get rid of the IFR. Like Joe said, it would become an abomination of outs. Think about the situation where runners are 1st and 2nd, no outs, and batter hits a fly ball to the pitcher.
SS moves in to make the catch and is sitting under it (somewhere in the middle of the infield).
What do the runners on 1 and 2 do:
Go halfway? SS catches and at a minimum doubles off the runner on 2nd.
Go 1/4ish of the way? I think SS still catches it and doubles off the runner at 2nd.
Stay on the bag? SS drops and gets the force at 3rd and almost assuredly 2nd.
Without momentum (moving on the hit) the runner from 1st (or wherever) is going to have a tough time getting to the next base before the defense can turn 2.
We run into situations All. The. Time. in little league where we have a runner on 1st (or 1st and 2nd) and the batter hits it to shallow OF. Because kids are 8/9 they're not bombing many balls well beyond the infield so the outfielders are playing shallow, maybe 10-20 feet off the infield. If the runner on 1st (or 2nd), goes halfway on a flyball/even line drive to shallow OF, they can get doubled off pretty easily. If they stay near the bag to prevent being doubled off, they risk being forced out at the next bag if the OF doesn't make the catch....which is at least better than being doubled off.
Same principle with the IFR. There shouldn't be a situation where a hit ball overwhelmingly favors the defense turning a DP, imo, except a ground ball that requires the defense to make good plays.
SS moves in to make the catch and is sitting under it (somewhere in the middle of the infield).
What do the runners on 1 and 2 do:
Go halfway? SS catches and at a minimum doubles off the runner on 2nd.
Go 1/4ish of the way? I think SS still catches it and doubles off the runner at 2nd.
Stay on the bag? SS drops and gets the force at 3rd and almost assuredly 2nd.
Without momentum (moving on the hit) the runner from 1st (or wherever) is going to have a tough time getting to the next base before the defense can turn 2.
We run into situations All. The. Time. in little league where we have a runner on 1st (or 1st and 2nd) and the batter hits it to shallow OF. Because kids are 8/9 they're not bombing many balls well beyond the infield so the outfielders are playing shallow, maybe 10-20 feet off the infield. If the runner on 1st (or 2nd), goes halfway on a flyball/even line drive to shallow OF, they can get doubled off pretty easily. If they stay near the bag to prevent being doubled off, they risk being forced out at the next bag if the OF doesn't make the catch....which is at least better than being doubled off.
Same principle with the IFR. There shouldn't be a situation where a hit ball overwhelmingly favors the defense turning a DP, imo, except a ground ball that requires the defense to make good plays.
- Joe Shlabotnik
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 23104
- Joined: October 12 06, 2:21 pm
- Location: Baseball Ref Bullpen
- Contact:
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
IFF covers unintentional as well as intentional drops and balls that never touch a defender. This rule only affects a play where the fielder has touched the ball and then let it intentionally drop.Gashouse wrote: ↑September 28 21, 8:30 am?? Is that an actual rule? If so, then what's the point of the IFF rule?Joe Shlabotnik wrote: ↑September 28 21, 7:48 am
BTW, any intentional drop by an infielder with runners on base - whether IFF is on or not - is an immediate dead ball and the batter is out.
-
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 5032
- Joined: June 15 06, 6:11 am
- Location: Minneapolis
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
Thanks. So, if the fielder lets the ball fall without touching it - batter is out and runners can advance at their own risk. If the fielder touches the ball and intentionally let's it drop, then dead ball, batter is out, and runners can't advance since it's a dead ball.Joe Shlabotnik wrote: ↑September 28 21, 8:48 amIFF covers unintentional as well as intentional drops and balls that never touch a defender. This rule only affects a play where the fielder has touched the ball and then let it intentionally drop.Gashouse wrote: ↑September 28 21, 8:30 am?? Is that an actual rule? If so, then what's the point of the IFF rule?Joe Shlabotnik wrote: ↑September 28 21, 7:48 am
BTW, any intentional drop by an infielder with runners on base - whether IFF is on or not - is an immediate dead ball and the batter is out.
- Joe Shlabotnik
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 23104
- Joined: October 12 06, 2:21 pm
- Location: Baseball Ref Bullpen
- Contact:
Re: 9/26 GDT: Cardinals(Woodford) @ Cubs(Thompson) 1:20 PM CT
In a case where IFF is NOT involved IE: runners at 1st, or 1st and 3rd and the infielder lets the ball fall without touching it, it's a live ball. If the fielder touches it and intentionally let's it drop, dead ball, batter out, runners to their time-of-pitch base.Gashouse wrote: ↑September 28 21, 9:14 amThanks. So, if the fielder lets the ball fall without touching it - batter is out and runners can advance at their own risk. If the fielder touches the ball and intentionally let's it drop, then dead ball, batter is out, and runners can't advance since it's a dead ball.Joe Shlabotnik wrote: ↑September 28 21, 8:48 amIFF covers unintentional as well as intentional drops and balls that never touch a defender. This rule only affects a play where the fielder has touched the ball and then let it intentionally drop.Gashouse wrote: ↑September 28 21, 8:30 am?? Is that an actual rule? If so, then what's the point of the IFF rule?Joe Shlabotnik wrote: ↑September 28 21, 7:48 am
BTW, any intentional drop by an infielder with runners on base - whether IFF is on or not - is an immediate dead ball and the batter is out.
The reasoning behind the rule is that on a ball that is not touched, it is reasonable to assume the batter-runner will get to first before a play can be made there, thus, no easy double play. The defense trades the out on the fly ball for an out at 2B. If the fielder touches it and let's it drop, it could be because of a practiced defensive play where the fielder has been told by another fielder there is a double play available to them.
These rules may seem arcane but they have been put into the rule book because teams have taken advantage of the corner cases exposed.