Delayed infield fly rule call

[Orange Socks]

I posted this 2 years ago when it happened. Bases loaded, one out. Ball is hit, blooper between P and SS. Ball lands in front of the SS, bobbles and throws out the runner going to 3rd with a force play. You can see the FU put up his arm, but then pulls it back after he realizes it was not an IFF. Def coach calls Time and talks with the umpire and he then calls it an IFF, calls the Batter OUT AND the runner advancing to 3rd is still out! If they called IFF the force is OFF, right? Based on the video evidence, not that it matters, this is clearly not an IFF. They got that call wrong and they made it worse by calling the runner out as well. And that made it 3 outs, so the runner scoring at home does not count. Unfortunately, the team had an inexperience HS coach that had no idea what just happened and the other coach is....well I'm not gonna name call. This video was sent to Texas UIL. I doubt they even looked at. I might have missed something here, but that's all I got. Talk amongst yourselves.

 

[EdLovrich]

I posted this 2 years ago when it happened. Bases loaded, one out. Ball is hit, blooper between P and SS. Ball lands in front of the SS, bobbles and throws out the runner going to 3rd with a force play. You can see the FU put up his arm, but then pulls it back after he realizes it was not an IFF. Def coach calls Time and talks with the umpire and he then calls it an IFF, calls the Batter OUT AND the runner advancing to 3rd is still out! If they called IFF the force is OFF, right? Based on the video evidence, not that it matters, this is clearly not an IFF. They got that call wrong and they made it worse by calling the runner out as well. And that made it 3 outs, so the runner scoring at home does not count. Unfortunately, the team had an inexperience HS coach that had no idea what just happened and the other coach is....well I'm not gonna name call. This video was sent to Texas UIL. I doubt they even looked at. I might have missed something here, but that's all I got. Talk amongst yourselves.

. If the SS did not catch the ball, and the IFF was not called, the umpires simply say, "In my judgment, the SS was not able to catch the ball with ordinary effort." This is obviously true, because she DID NOT catch the ball with ANY amount of effort. Comes down to the DEFENSE has no standing in coming out and questioning why IFF was NOT called.

 

[Orange Socks]

The opposing coach is a bully and I am pretty sure she persuaded the umpire back into the call.

 

[The Man In Blue]

I posted this 2 years ago when it happened. Bases loaded, one out. Ball is hit, blooper between P and SS. Ball lands in front of the SS, bobbles and throws out the runner going to 3rd with a force play. You can see the FU put up his arm, but then pulls it back after he realizes it was not an IFF. Def coach calls Time and talks with the umpire and he then calls it an IFF, calls the Batter OUT AND the runner advancing to 3rd is still out! If they called IFF the force is OFF, right? Based on the video evidence, not that it matters, this is clearly not an IFF. They got that call wrong and they made it worse by calling the runner out as well. And that made it 3 outs, so the runner scoring at home does not count. Unfortunately, the team had an inexperience HS coach that had no idea what just happened and the other coach is....well I'm not gonna name call. This video was sent to Texas UIL. I doubt they even looked at. I might have missed something here, but that's all I got. Talk amongst yourselves.

There is a case where I can see letting the out at third base stand -- had they TAGGED the runner. From what I can see, it should not have stood IF they enforced an infield fly call as it looks like they only tagged the base.

Yeah, I can definitely see the temptation and room for error on that hit. I won't fault them for that.

 

[The Man In Blue]

And yet how often does it happen? I am not saying it changes the call, but the argument is there, never-the-less.

Still nope. There is not one speck of an argument to be made there. Catching the ball has nothing to do with an infield fly call.

 

[CoachJD]

Not sure what an illegal glove is though, anyone have any insight on that?

Something like this:

 

[eddieq]

Not sure what an illegal glove is though, anyone have any insight on that?

You got an excellent photographic example above, but the rules are in the "equipment" section of the rule books. For USA it's 3.4. For USSSA, it's 2.9 (pasted here). Basically any glove that doesn't comply with those parameters is an illegal glove.

Sec 9. gLOvES/mITTS
Gloves/mitts made of leather shall be worn by all fielders.
A. The glove/mitt worn by the catcher may be any size.
B. The glove/mitt may be any combination of colors except the color of the
game ball or optic. Glove lacing may be any color other than that of the
ball. The manufacturer’s logos are not considered a glove color. A gray,
white or optic colored circle on the outside or inside of the glove/mitt that
gives the appearance of a ball is illegal. A glove/mitt that is judged to be
distracting by the Umpire is illegal.
C. The glove/mitt worn by all fielders except the catcher shall conform to the
following maximum specifications:
1. Height measured from the bottom edge or heel straight up across the
center of the palm to a line even with the highest point of the
glove/mitt: 14 inches
2. Width of palm measured from the bottom edge of the webbing
farthest from the thumb in a horizontal line to the outside of the little
finger edge of the glove/mitt: 8 inches
3. Webbing measured across the top end or along any line parallel to the
top: 5 3/4 inches.

 

[SoftballDadnWV]

SS being comfortable under the ball has no bearing the IFF rule

The only reason I said that is because the NFHS rule in baseball mentions "can be caught with ordinary effort", I would assume the rule would read the same in softball - but I have been wrong two or three times already today

 

[bmakj]

You got an excellent photographic example above, but the rules are in the "equipment" section of the rule books. For USA it's 3.4. For USSSA, it's 2.9 (pasted here). Basically any glove that doesn't comply with those parameters is an illegal glove.

Sec 9. gLOvES/mITTS
Gloves/mitts made of leather shall be worn by all fielders.
A. The glove/mitt worn by the catcher may be any size.
B. The glove/mitt may be any combination of colors except the color of the
game ball or optic. Glove lacing may be any color other than that of the
ball. The manufacturer’s logos are not considered a glove color. A gray,
white or optic colored circle on the outside or inside of the glove/mitt that
gives the appearance of a ball is illegal. A glove/mitt that is judged to be
distracting by the Umpire is illegal.
C. The glove/mitt worn by all fielders except the catcher shall conform to the
following maximum specifications:
1. Height measured from the bottom edge or heel straight up across the
center of the palm to a line even with the highest point of the
glove/mitt: 14 inches
2. Width of palm measured from the bottom edge of the webbing
farthest from the thumb in a horizontal line to the outside of the little
finger edge of the glove/mitt: 8 inches
3. Webbing measured across the top end or along any line parallel to the
top: 5 3/4 inches.

so would an umpire toss a player wearing a glove of synthetic material?

 

[radness]

You got an excellent photographic example above, but the rules are in the "equipment" section of the rule books. For USA it's 3.4. For USSSA, it's 2.9 (pasted here). Basically any glove that doesn't comply with those parameters is an illegal glove.

Sec 9. gLOvES/mITTS
Gloves/mitts made of leather shall be worn by all fielders.
A. The glove/mitt worn by the catcher may be any size.
B. The glove/mitt may be any combination of colors except the color of the
game ball or optic. Glove lacing may be any color other than that of the
ball. The manufacturer’s logos are not considered a glove color. A gray,
white or optic colored circle on the outside or inside of the glove/mitt that
gives the appearance of a ball is illegal. A glove/mitt that is judged to be
distracting by the Umpire is illegal.
C. The glove/mitt worn by all fielders except the catcher shall conform to the
following maximum specifications:
1. Height measured from the bottom edge or heel straight up across the
center of the palm to a line even with the highest point of the
glove/mitt: 14 inches
2. Width of palm measured from the bottom edge of the webbing
farthest from the thumb in a horizontal line to the outside of the little
finger edge of the glove/mitt: 8 inches
3. Webbing measured across the top end or along any line parallel to the
top: 5 3/4 inches.

Thanks for posting this ☝

little story
One of my catching students
went to tryout for one of the local organizations.
While she and a pitcher were on the field throwing some warm up pitches...
(pitcher and catcher wonderfully prepairing )
Catcher wearing a fielders glove framing...
Mr.Coach walks up to the catcher and says
"You know you cant wear that glove in games?"
She replied
"Oh really? Its was fine at pgf nationals."
Mr.Coach said nothing.

And its a coach who's been around a while...actually still.
Difficult for everyone to know every detail right?!!

( just a notation. Catchers chose their own gloves. As an instructor i do not make any catcher use a specific glove.
Lots of individual preference in that decision)