Braves now playing under protest on IFF call

[johnnyg08]

They will still argue. Fans = delusional.

[Jocko]

They will still argue. Fans = delusional.

some "umpires" = retards

Look at Rolo!

[dumbdumb]

Don't tell me everyone is going to agree with a "player", post #101, yet would not agree with an umpire, post #28.

[BillB1960]

I'm not going to sit here and start name calling or trading insults with people. Sometimes these forums bring out the worst in people. I'm standing by my opinion which isn't unique in the umpire community BTW and my 14 years of experience umpiring at all levels of baseball up to college level. I wouldn't have called that play an IFF and I don't think most of you would have either. People want to congratulate Holbrook for being a stud and making a gutsy call, that's fine, more power to them. I've explained my reasoning and I'm sticking to it.

[dumbdumb]

Just for the record, I was not trying to insult anyone or name call just in case (not saying anyone did) someone took it personally. I just wanted the ones who did not believe the call was correct, to make sure they disagreed with Reynold's (a former player) opinion, just like they disagreed with post #28 opinion. Those who still agree or disagree, I commend you for your call, but make sure if you disagree with the umpires, you also disagree with Reynold's. I was just "hoping" Reynold's opinion did not sway anyone to change their opinion, but if it did, that is just fine. No problem's from me whether one agrees or disagrees with the umpires. I welcome all opinions and reason's why someone does not agree with a call. I come here to learn and I learn from the explanations, both backing and not backing the calls that are made on the field.

[Haid D' Salaami]

I repeat, I repeat.. do not call a IFF rule when the ball reaches it's apex.. 1st off the umpire should not be looking at the baseball but watching the fielders they will tell you everything you need to know..once the Fielder has ordinary effort the IFF should be called...

[UMP45]

I'm not going to sit here and start name calling or trading insults with people. Sometimes these forums bring out the worst in people. I'm standing by my opinion which isn't unique in the umpire community BTW and my 14 years of experience umpiring at all levels of baseball up to college level. I wouldn't have called that play an IFF and I don't think most of you would have either. People want to congratulate Holbrook for being a stud and making a gutsy call, that's fine, more power to them. I've explained my reasoning and I'm sticking to it.

Don't let your "14 years of experience" get in the way of learning! :lookup

[bam]

Here are the undisputable facts

1) Force at 3B with >2 outs (sets the IFF scenario)

2) F6 was under the ball facing the infield

3) F6 raised both arms as if to call off other defenders (camps)

4) F6 could have easily caught the ball

5) Holbrook, seeing 1-5 are met, signals IFF (i.e. immediately when they are met)

6) The rule has no provision for judgement on possible DP

Like it or not, Holbrook, the appropriate man to make the call, judged correctly.

Codify the rule to include possibile cheap DP?

The rule protects the OT. The umpires enforce the rules.

Using technicalities to support poor judgement and bad mechanics is not a good practice IMO.

technicalities??? It's the rule IN BLACK AND WHITE.

Your opinion $3.59 will get you a gallon of gas. Facts are facts.

And technically by rule an umpire can take any position on the field to call balls & strikes. You want to start seeing balls & strikes called from behind the mound? Technically he may have been correct but Holbrook had bad mechanics and poor judgement.

That's just plain silly.

That's a tough play to call. If the SS let's that drop and then doubles up R2 and R1, THAT'S going to be a SH*#show. No win for the umps right there.

[bam]

Even though I'm still borderline and can see both sides this crap pisses me off.

These calls are what separates a good umpire from a great umpire.

Not so sure - I still think the call was correct. But if it had gone uncalled, noone would have said boo. Just something to think about.

[Guest]

One thing to add here:

The IFF is designed to prevent the defence from gaining an advantage. This advantage is commonly believed to only be the cheap double play, since 99% of the time that would result from not calling an IFF. However, has the thought occurred to anyone that if the IFF isn't called and you can't, for whatever reason, get the cheap DP, you can at least manipulate the base runners to your advantage?

Example:

R2 is the fastest runner in the league. R1 is the slowest runner in the league. The batter is the 2nd slowest. For the point of my example, Holbrook does not call IFF and the infielder immediately recovers the ball and throws out R2 at 3B. You have now allowed a more advantagous out and eliminated a base running threat from scoring position.

Another reason why none of the external factors matter and Sam got this one right. Sometimes, you gotta have the balls to make the tough calls.

[BillB1960]

I'm not going to sit here and start name calling or trading insults with people. Sometimes these forums bring out the worst in people. I'm standing by my opinion which isn't unique in the umpire community BTW and my 14 years of experience umpiring at all levels of baseball up to college level. I wouldn't have called that play an IFF and I don't think most of you would have either. People want to congratulate Holbrook for being a stud and making a gutsy call, that's fine, more power to them. I've explained my reasoning and I'm sticking to it.

Don't let your "14 years of experience" get in the way of learning!

Nothing to learn on this one.

[UMP45]

I'm not going to sit here and start name calling or trading insults with people. Sometimes these forums bring out the worst in people. I'm standing by my opinion which isn't unique in the umpire community BTW and my 14 years of experience umpiring at all levels of baseball up to college level. I wouldn't have called that play an IFF and I don't think most of you would have either. People want to congratulate Holbrook for being a stud and making a gutsy call, that's fine, more power to them. I've explained my reasoning and I'm sticking to it.

Don't let your "14 years of experience" get in the way of learning!

Nothing to learn on this one.

:blah

[BillB1960]

Just for the record, I was not trying to insult anyone or name call just in case (not saying anyone did) someone took it personally. I just wanted the ones who did not believe the call was correct, to make sure they disagreed with Reynold's (a former player) opinion, just like they disagreed with post #28 opinion. Those who still agree or disagree, I commend you for your call, but make sure if you disagree with the umpires, you also disagree with Reynold's. I was just "hoping" Reynold's opinion did not sway anyone to change their opinion, but if it did, that is just fine. No problem's from me whether one agrees or disagrees with the umpires. I welcome all opinions and reason's why someone does not agree with a call. I come here to learn and I learn from the explanations, both backing and not backing the calls that are made on the field.

I've never been a Harold Reynolds fan and I've seen and heard him make some real bonehead comments. Regardless of all the whiz bang bells and whistles and arrows and circles and cutesy graphics the fact is that the ball was deep and the call was late. In fact the ball was so deep that Sam Holbrook now has the distinction of calling the longest infield fly in the history of modern baseball. Good thing to have on your resume dontcha think?

[Mr Umpire]

I'm not going to sit here and start name calling or trading insults with people. Sometimes these forums bring out the worst in people. I'm standing by my opinion which isn't unique in the umpire community BTW and my 14 years of experience umpiring at all levels of baseball up to college level. I wouldn't have called that play an IFF and I don't think most of you would have either. People want to congratulate Holbrook for being a stud and making a gutsy call, that's fine, more power to them. I've explained my reasoning and I'm sticking to it.

Yes, I will. And, I think if this same play developed and the umpire saw "ordinary effort", most, especially the ones saying the call was correct, WILL call IFR.

[BillB1960]

I'm not going to sit here and start name calling or trading insults with people. Sometimes these forums bring out the worst in people. I'm standing by my opinion which isn't unique in the umpire community BTW and my 14 years of experience umpiring at all levels of baseball up to college level. I wouldn't have called that play an IFF and I don't think most of you would have either. People want to congratulate Holbrook for being a stud and making a gutsy call, that's fine, more power to them. I've explained my reasoning and I'm sticking to it.

Don't let your "14 years of experience" get in the way of learning!

Nothing to learn on this one.

OK wise one. Please impart some of your wisdom and explain to me exactly what I should be learning from an IFF called so deep and so late that the LF had a better angle on it than the SS who bailed on the ball because he was afraid the LF was going to cream him?

I'm all ears...

[Mr Umpire]

Just for the record, I was not trying to insult anyone or name call just in case (not saying anyone did) someone took it personally. I just wanted the ones who did not believe the call was correct, to make sure they disagreed with Reynold's (a former player) opinion, just like they disagreed with post #28 opinion. Those who still agree or disagree, I commend you for your call, but make sure if you disagree with the umpires, you also disagree with Reynold's. I was just "hoping" Reynold's opinion did not sway anyone to change their opinion, but if it did, that is just fine. No problem's from me whether one agrees or disagrees with the umpires. I welcome all opinions and reason's why someone does not agree with a call. I come here to learn and I learn from the explanations, both backing and not backing the calls that are made on the field.

I've never been a Harold Reynolds fan and I've seen and heard him make some real bonehead comments. Regardless of all the whiz bang bells and whistles and arrows and circles and cutesy graphics the fact is that the ball was deep and the call was late. In fact the ball was so deep that Sam Holbrook now has the distinction of calling the longest infield fly in the history of modern baseball. Good thing to have on your resume dontcha think?

Depth has nothing to do with it. Absolutely nothing so why bring it up. The call was correct and that is the bottom line. The mechanics were correct so why bring that up. 14 years experience or 1 year experience 14 times? Sounds like the latter.

[BillB1960]

I'm not going to sit here and start name calling or trading insults with people. Sometimes these forums bring out the worst in people. I'm standing by my opinion which isn't unique in the umpire community BTW and my 14 years of experience umpiring at all levels of baseball up to college level. I wouldn't have called that play an IFF and I don't think most of you would have either. People want to congratulate Holbrook for being a stud and making a gutsy call, that's fine, more power to them. I've explained my reasoning and I'm sticking to it.

Yes, I will. And, I think if this same play developed and the umpire saw "ordinary effort", most, especially the ones saying the call was correct, WILL call IFR.

Ah yes...20/20 hindsight, always valuable.

[BillB1960]

Just for the record, I was not trying to insult anyone or name call just in case (not saying anyone did) someone took it personally. I just wanted the ones who did not believe the call was correct, to make sure they disagreed with Reynold's (a former player) opinion, just like they disagreed with post #28 opinion. Those who still agree or disagree, I commend you for your call, but make sure if you disagree with the umpires, you also disagree with Reynold's. I was just "hoping" Reynold's opinion did not sway anyone to change their opinion, but if it did, that is just fine. No problem's from me whether one agrees or disagrees with the umpires. I welcome all opinions and reason's why someone does not agree with a call. I come here to learn and I learn from the explanations, both backing and not backing the calls that are made on the field.

I've never been a Harold Reynolds fan and I've seen and heard him make some real bonehead comments. Regardless of all the whiz bang bells and whistles and arrows and circles and cutesy graphics the fact is that the ball was deep and the call was late. In fact the ball was so deep that Sam Holbrook now has the distinction of calling the longest infield fly in the history of modern baseball. Good thing to have on your resume dontcha think?

Depth has nothing to do with it. Absolutely nothing so why bring it up. The call was correct and that is the bottom line. The mechanics were correct so why bring that up. 14 years experience or 1 year experience 14 times? Sounds like the latter.

Really? That old saw? You don't know me, you've never worked a game with me. You're just going to sit at your PC and take pot shots at me? So mature.

[Mr Umpire]

Just for the record, I was not trying to insult anyone or name call just in case (not saying anyone did) someone took it personally. I just wanted the ones who did not believe the call was correct, to make sure they disagreed with Reynold's (a former player) opinion, just like they disagreed with post #28 opinion. Those who still agree or disagree, I commend you for your call, but make sure if you disagree with the umpires, you also disagree with Reynold's. I was just "hoping" Reynold's opinion did not sway anyone to change their opinion, but if it did, that is just fine. No problem's from me whether one agrees or disagrees with the umpires. I welcome all opinions and reason's why someone does not agree with a call. I come here to learn and I learn from the explanations, both backing and not backing the calls that are made on the field.

I've never been a Harold Reynolds fan and I've seen and heard him make some real bonehead comments. Regardless of all the whiz bang bells and whistles and arrows and circles and cutesy graphics the fact is that the ball was deep and the call was late. In fact the ball was so deep that Sam Holbrook now has the distinction of calling the longest infield fly in the history of modern baseball. Good thing to have on your resume dontcha think?

Depth has nothing to do with it. Absolutely nothing so why bring it up. The call was correct and that is the bottom line. The mechanics were correct so why bring that up. 14 years experience or 1 year experience 14 times? Sounds like the latter.

Really? That old saw? You don't know me, you've never worked a game with me. You're just going to sit at your PC and take pot shots at me? So mature.

If you're not calling this very easy one, then I have to wonder.

[Mr Umpire]

I'm not going to sit here and start name calling or trading insults with people. Sometimes these forums bring out the worst in people. I'm standing by my opinion which isn't unique in the umpire community BTW and my 14 years of experience umpiring at all levels of baseball up to college level. I wouldn't have called that play an IFF and I don't think most of you would have either. People want to congratulate Holbrook for being a stud and making a gutsy call, that's fine, more power to them. I've explained my reasoning and I'm sticking to it.

Yes, I will. And, I think if this same play developed and the umpire saw "ordinary effort", most, especially the ones saying the call was correct, WILL call IFR.

Ah yes...20/20 hindsight, always valuable.

It's not 20/20 hindsight. It's actually predicting the future.

[UMP45]

BillB1960 I would try but it would be futile.There are people on here, who have more dirt on their shoes then I do, Have tried to educate you. Some on here was in the game before. Someone from the umpire school even tried to tell you yet you still won't learn. Until I read anything different I have to say you are "uncoachable". I envision you going to a camp and arguing with the pro's there. I have used enough brain cells trying. I concede.

[BillB1960]

BillB1960 I would try but it would be futile.There are people on here, who have more dirt on their shoes then I do, Have tried to educate you. Some on here was in the game before. Someone from the umpire school even tried to tell you yet you still won't learn. Until I read anything different I have to say you are "uncoachable". I envision you going to a camp and arguing with the pro's there. I have used enough brain cells trying. I concede.

That's funny because I've been to school and multiple pro taught clinics most by Jim Evans. I go pretty much every year and the association I belong to has minimum mandatory training requirements. I always learn something.

What I've learned here so far is there are quite a few Monday mornings quarterbacks who like to pile on the "new guy" or maybe it's just anyone who dares to stand up for their position.

I've been on enough Internet forums to know that post count doesn't mean jack but I also understand that one has to pay ones dues in order to gain credibility. So fine, that's how you boys want to play it so be it. Im still sticking with my judgement.

[johnnyg08]

One thing to add here:

The IFF is designed to prevent the defence from gaining an advantage. This advantage is commonly believed to only be the cheap double play, since 99% of the time that would result from not calling an IFF. However, has the thought occurred to anyone that if the IFF isn't called and you can't, for whatever reason, get the cheap DP, you can at least manipulate the base runners to your advantage?

Example:

R2 is the fastest runner in the league. R1 is the slowest runner in the league. The batter is the 2nd slowest. For the point of my example, Holbrook does not call IFF and the infielder immediately recovers the ball and throws out R2 at 3B. You have now allowed a more advantagous out and eliminated a base running threat from scoring position.

Another reason why none of the external factors matter and Sam got this one right. Sometimes, you gotta have the balls to make the tough calls.

I like this post a lot!

[kylejt]

.

Your opinion $3.59 will get you a gallon of gas. Facts are facts.

I wish.

The intent of the rule is to protect the offense against a cheap double play. Is that possible from that position on the field? I know that may not be a factor, per any interpretation, but maybe it should be. i.e. F6 was way the hell out there.

Oh, and this is a really interesting play, and call. Lots to learn from, and I'm sure all you, like myself, were fielding questions from all your non-umpire friends and relatives. Why some folks have to get all worked up, and start name calling is beyond me. Geesh, you'd think you were talking to coaches here. It's a game, fellas. A game.

[UmpTTS43]

That's funny because I've been to school and multiple pro taught clinics most by Jim Evans. I go pretty much every year and the association I belong to has minimum mandatory training requirements. I always learn something.

I guess it will have to take Jim telling you that it was the correct call.