IFF if far from fair territory?

[chalen]

Bases loaded, no outs. Batter pops up high, 30 feet in foul territory, close to the third-base fence. F2 camps under it for what appears will be an easy catch. F5 calls him off and in the confusion, the ball drops in foul territory, hits a rock and deflects sharply toward fair territory, untouched, and comes to rest in fair territory, before passing 3B. Runners hold. F6 picks up the ball, tags R3, steps on 3B, and throws to F4 to force out R1 at 2B. Was this an infield fly or a triple play?

OBR identifies an infield fly "a fair fly ball." This is ultimately a fair ball and was once a fly ball, but is it "a fair fly"? Also, the OBR definition of Infield Fly says this scenario is an infield fly if it was a "declared" infield fly, but the umpires would not have declared IFF on a ball that was so far within foul territory.

If this is an infield fly, when would you declare it as such?

 

 

[catsbackr]

Read this, OBR identifies an infield fly "a fair fly ball."

[chalen]

Yes, catsbackr, so what? Same situation one foot in foul territory, ball drops foul but then rolls fair, that is unquestionably an IFF, though arguably it was not "a fair fly ball".

[catsbackr]

chalen,

 

So what?

 

Just umpire.  If it's close to being fair, call it "if fair."  If obviously foul, don't say anything.  If it's close to the line, you've still gotta judge fair/foul on the catch possibility. 

 

Just umpire.

[Mizzou2016]

It is an IFF - You could declare it immediately "IFF if Fair!" - however the situation is so rare that you'd be better off saying nothing 99.9% of the time to avoid confusion.

 

The best course of action is to wait for it to go fair, then declare the batter out on the IFF. In HS and below, if runners start walking off bases because they think they are out, kill it and leave them where they are.

 

[noumpere]

 

If this is an infield fly, when would you declare it as such?

 

 

Declare it as soon as the ball rolls back fair, to (try to) avoid any further confusion.

[NorthTexasUmp]

In HS and below, if runners start walking off bases because they think they are out, kill it and leave them where they are.

 

Why would you do this? Would you do this on a "routine" IFF if the fielder drops it? Not our job to protect the runners from themselves. You will have a very irate, and justifiably so, DC if you do this.

[Mizzou2016]

Why would you do this? Would you do this on a "routine" IFF if the fielder drops it? Not our job to protect the runners from themselves. You will have a very irate, and justifiably so, DC if you do this.

HS rules allow for you to correct a situation in which an umpire failing to call infield fly puts runners at a disadvantage.

[noumpere]

HS rules allow for you to correct a situation in which an umpire failing to call infield fly puts runners at a disadvantage.

I'm not sure about that.  Isn't there a case where an infield fly is not declared and outs stand, with words to the effect of "the players are expected to know the situation" or "it's the situation that determines the call, not the umpire's declaration".

 

In OBR, there was an interp that if you don't declare it and the defense gets one or zero outs, the play stands; if the defense gets two or three outs, enforce the infield fly (batter out, runners return).  I don't know if that interp still stands.

[maven]

 

If this is an infield fly, when would you declare it as such?

 

For a fly ball over fair and not near the line, announce the IFF as the ball begins to descend.

For a fly ball near the line, either fair or foul, announce "IFF if fair!" as the ball begins to descend.

For a fly ball so far from fair as in the OP ("30 feet from the line"), I'd say nothing, as we're more likely to win the lottery than have that become an infield fly. But if it bounced into fair without hitting a fence, I'd announce the IFF as it approached the line: waiting till then is unlikely to put anyone at a disadvantage, because they're all thinking the same as us, that this is going to end up an uncaught foul fly ball.

[MadMax]

... and in the confusion...

 

 

This entire situation is rife with confusion.

30 feet to the fence, you say? And it hits a rock? That's gotta be some rock. Why wasn't that rock in the ground rules? In any case, with other obtrusive surfaces (tarps, fencing, bat left strewn about, a catatonic 3BC) as soon as the ball hits a surface or object like that, in foul territory, it is ruled Foul. Again, that's gotta be The Rock of Ages to affect a ball like that, deflecting it so as to travel 30 feet to rest inside the chalkline. Well, for the sake of argument, I'll bite on this Ridiculous Radish...

If it travels, laterally, to rest in fair territory, and it's been determined to not have made contact with any other object or surface that would make it foul, then you no longer have a fly ball, do you? You've got a ground ball. Can't have Infield Fly (if Fair) on a ground ball, because the other qualifier for an Infield Fly being ruled as such is opportunity (to catch the fly). Obviously, there is no opportunity to catch the fly, because it was a fair ball only after becoming a ground ball.

Wow, that was easy.

[Mizzou2016]

I'm not sure about that.  Isn't there a case where an infield fly is not declared and outs stand, with words to the effect of "the players are expected to know the situation" or "it's the situation that determines the call, not the umpire's declaration".

This is the case in NCAA and OBR, but FED the umpire is expected to make the declaration. An IFF situation is still an IFF whether the umpire declares it or not, but if the umpire doesn't declare it and runners are put at a disadvantage because of the umpire failing to declare IFF, we can rectify the situation.

This entire situation is rife with confusion.

30 feet to the fence, you say? And it hits a rock? That's gotta be some rock. Why wasn't that rock in the ground rules? In any case, with other obtrusive surfaces (tarps, fencing, bat left strewn about, a catatonic 3BC) as soon as the ball hits a surface or object like that, in foul territory, it is ruled Foul. Again, that's gotta be The Rock of Ages to affect a ball like that, deflecting it so as to travel 30 feet to rest inside the chalkline. Well, for the sake of argument, I'll bite on this Ridiculous Radish...

If it travels, laterally, to rest in fair territory, and it's been determined to not have made contact with any other object or surface that would make it foul, then you no longer have a fly ball, do you? You've got a ground ball. Can't have Infield Fly (if Fair) on a ground ball, because the other qualifier for an Infield Fly being ruled as such is opportunity (to catch the fly). Obviously, there is no opportunity to catch the fly, because it was a fair ball only after becoming a ground ball.

Wow, that was easy.

This situation would be an IFF though because it is a (eventual) fair fly ball that can be caught be an infielder with ordinary effort.

[basejester]

 

If it travels, laterally, to rest in fair territory, and it's been determined to not have made contact with any other object or surface that would make it foul, then you no longer have a fly ball, do you? You've got a ground ball. Can't have Infield Fly (if Fair) on a ground ball, because the other qualifier for an Infield Fly being ruled as such is opportunity (to catch the fly). Obviously, there is no opportunity to catch the fly, because it was a fair ball only after becoming a ground ball.

Wow, that was easy.

Sorry, this is completely wrong.  It's an infield fly at the apex. 

[Rich Ives]

This entire situation is rife with confusion.

30 feet to the fence, you say? And it hits a rock? That's gotta be some rock. Why wasn't that rock in the ground rules? In any case, with other obtrusive surfaces (tarps, fencing, bat left strewn about, a catatonic 3BC) as soon as the ball hits a surface or object like that, in foul territory, it is ruled Foul. Again, that's gotta be The Rock of Ages to affect a ball like that, deflecting it so as to travel 30 feet to rest inside the chalkline. Well, for the sake of argument, I'll bite on this Ridiculous Radish...

If it travels, laterally, to rest in fair territory, and it's been determined to not have made contact with any other object or surface that would make it foul, then you no longer have a fly ball, do you? You've got a ground ball. Can't have Infield Fly (if Fair) on a ground ball, because the other qualifier for an Infield Fly being ruled as such is opportunity (to catch the fly). Obviously, there is no opportunity to catch the fly, because it was a fair ball only after becoming a ground ball.

Wow, that was easy.

Material to use when cleansing a large domestic swine.

.

.

.

aka Hogwash

[noumpere]

This is the case in NCAA and OBR, but FED the umpire is expected to make the declaration. An IFF situation is still an IFF whether the umpire declares it or not, but if the umpire doesn't declare it and runners are put at a disadvantage because of the umpire failing to declare IFF, we can rectify the situation.

 

A couple of cases from the 2014 FED case book:

 

1)  Three cases showing it's the situation, not the declaration (whether it's declared when it shouldn't be, or not declared when it should be):

7.4.1 SITUATION G: With R1 on second and R2 on first and one out, B4 hits a high fly to second base which could have been caught by F4. Neither umpire declares "infield fly." F4 unintentionally drops the ball but picks it up and tags R2 who is off the base. RULING: The half-inning is over as R2's out is the third out. The infield fly out for the second out holds even though it was not declared. The situation determines the out, not the declaration. The umpires should always declare "Infield Fly, If Fair" to lessen any confusion.

 

10.2.3 SITUATION F: With R1 on third and no outs, B2 hits a high fly in the infield above the second baseman's head. The base umpire erroneously calls "Infield fly. The batter is out." F4 subsequently drops the ball. R1 scores from third and B2 ends up on second base. Does the play stand or is B2 out but the run allowed to score? RULING: The play would stand. Both teams have the responsibility to know when conditions exist for an infield fly. The batter-runner should attempt to reach base safely and then inform the umpire that his call was in error. (7-4-1f)

 

10.2.3 SITUATION G: With R1 on second and R2 on first and no outs, B3 hits an infield fly, but the umpire fails to call "infield fly." is the infield fly in effect or not? RULING: Even though the infield fly rule was not announced by the umpire, it is still in effect. Both teams have the responsibility to know when conditions exist for an infield fly.

 

2) A play much like the OP:

7.4.1 SITUATION F: With less than two outs and R1 on second and R2 on first, B3 hits a pop-up that comes down over foul territory. Is this an infield fly if (a) it touches the ground out of reach of all infielders and then takes a long hop into fair territory between home and first or (b) it is within reach of a fielder who does not touch it and ball bounces to fair territory? RULING: Not an infield fly in (a) if umpire thinks it is not within reach of any fielder, but it is a fair ball. In (b), it is an infield fly (2-19-1, 8-4-1j)

Edited July 30, 2015 by noumpere

[grayhawk]

This is the case in NCAA and OBR, but FED the umpire is expected to make the declaration. An IFF situation is still an IFF whether the umpire declares it or not, but if the umpire doesn't declare it and runners are put at a disadvantage because of the umpire failing to declare IFF, we can rectify the situation.

Quite the opposite, actually, as @noumpere has demonstrated above.  In Fed, the situation dictates the IFF, not the call.  And the UIC can only rectify a situation where a call was reversed that put one team at a disadvantage.  Retroactively calling IFF is not "reversing" the call because everyone is supposed to know it's an IFF.

It's strange that Fed expects more from the players than MLB does on an IFF.

[Mizzou2016]

I stand corrected - just checked the BRD, I had the OBR and FED interp switched. It is counterintuitive that FED expects more from players than OBR, which is probably why I mixed them up. I still think for game management, if a situation like in the op where the defense making a play on a runner not forced to advance 'fools' the runner into attempting to advance, I'd still kill it and leave the runner at their TOP base. Goes technically against the FED ruling but it stays in the spirit of baseball. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

[Mike Walsh]

I stand corrected - just checked the BRD, I had the OBR and FED interp switched. It is counterintuitive that FED expects more from players than OBR, which is probably why I mixed them up. I still think for game management, if a situation like in the op where the defense making a play on a runner not forced to advance 'fools' the runner into attempting to advance, I'd still kill it and leave the runner at their TOP base. Goes technically against the FED ruling but it stays in the spirit of baseball. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

In the OP the runners did not advance, so they were still on base when their advance bases were tagged. The IFF would be the only out.

But why would you return runners to the TOP base if they were tagged off base? The 7.4.1 Situation G is clear. F4 unintentionally drops the ball but picks it up and tags R2 who is off the base. RULING: The half-inning is over as R2's out is the third out. Your ruling doesn't technically go against the FED ruling, it is diametrically opposed to it. We cannot make up rules, or worse, change rules we do not like.

Mike

[Mizzou2016]

In the OP the runners did not advance, so they were still on base when their advance bases were tagged. The IFF would be the only out.

But why would you return runners to the TOP base if they were tagged off base? The 7.4.1 Situation G is clear. F4 unintentionally drops the ball but picks it up and tags R2 who is off the base. RULING: The half-inning is over as R2's out is the third out. Your ruling doesn't technically go against the FED ruling, it is diametrically opposed to it. We cannot make up rules, or worse, change rules we do not like.

Mike

I am saying that if the Defenses actions (making a play at an advance base, when there was no force play in effect) causes the offense to leave their bases to try advancing, I would kill the play, call the batter out on the IFF and return runners to their TOP base. This is how it is done in NCAA and OBR.

Sit. 7.4.1 is not relevant to this play. 

[JaxRolo]

Haven't read all responses but yes it's an iff.

but the other runners are not forced when the ball hits the ground.

[johnnyg08]

Runners need to be coached better.  Once the batter/runner is retired, all forces are off.  That's the point of the infield fly rule.  Batter is out, all forces removed.