Delayed infield fly rule call

[schwabach]

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

I would draw the line at polyester. Just seems so trashy.

 

[CoachJD]

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

This could get some of our 10U parents to actually listen to me when I tell them to not buy the cheapo $15 glove at WalMart.

 

[eddieq]

As for synthetic material - that was the Utrip rulebook. It says "Leather", doesn't specify "genuine leather from the skin of a cow" or something like that. Personally, I wouldn't even concern myself with it unless a huge deal was made over it by someone being petty. At that point, I'd have the TD or UIC make a ruling. If vegans want to play softball, let them use their synthetic leather gloves.

 

[The Man In Blue]

I don't know that an umpire would, but @ANNASDAD might.

I know umpires who would read that rule (" Gloves/mitts made of leather shall be worn by all fielders.") and say they could wear a synthetic glove as long as they also wore a leather glove.

What about a leather batting glove under a synthetic fielding glove?

How about these?

 

[EdLovrich]

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.

I am not saying catching the ball has anything to do with it. However, the routineness of the effort to make the catch DOES have everything to do with it. If there is a call that was questionable in an umpires mind, or even if they just failed to call it, and the ball is dropped and the DEFENSE comes out to ask for the cheap out, I am saying that the answer COULD be that the play was obviously nor routine nor ordinary since the coaches own player failed to make the catch. (In other words, sorry coach no IFF and easy out for you).

 

[Argus]

Our team is in the field, bases loaded with no outs. Batter hits a high fly ball, just behind the SS. Neither the field umpire nor the plate umpire say a word. SS misjudges the ball and runners all advance one base while the ball hits the ground. Play stops and defensive head coach calls time to ask plate umpire why the IF fly rule wasn't called. Plate umpire says it's the field umpire's call (not true), so coach goes to talk to the field umpire. Coach asks field umpire, "How was that NOT an infield fly rule?" Umpire responds, "It was." Coach says, "Oh, ok, did you call it? I didn't hear you call anything." Umpire responds, "I'm calling it now!"

LOL....uh, that's not how the infield fly rule is supposed to work.

For me being the umpire on what you have said here the infield fly rule is in effect but you also say the ball was hit behind the short stop... so without seeing this with my own two eyes I would not call the infield fly because the ball was behind the short stop... this description makes me believe that it is not a "normal player". From what I take for it to be a "normal player/effort" they have to be facing home plate (both shoulders squared up to home plate so to speak) now I realize that it could still land behind them from misjudging the ball. This makes it tough on an umpire to make this call because the rule books say that it is supposed to be called at the ball's highest point... sometimes the player is not a normal player till they are facing home plate. You can look up on YouTube the cardinals vs. Braves game where this happened and if you look for the umpire on left field line once the SS squared up to home is when he called the infield fly... most spectators and sports commentators call this a horrible call as a matter of fact just search worst umpire calls and it will be in almost every video but it boils down to "normal effort/player"... most people do not understand this rule for this very reason.

 

[CloudofDust]

Thanks for all the responses. I intentionally omitted the age and skill level from the original post. This was a 10U rec post-season tournament...most players/coaches were playing by "advanced" rules for the first time.

What's considered a routine fly ball requiring ordinary effort for an MLB player, or even a 14U player, is quite different from a 10U rec player. That said, this IF catches fly balls of this height/distance in practice all the time.

When the ball was hit, the coaches sent the runners, not expecting the ball to be caught or not recalling the IFF was in effect. By the very definition of the rule, it was an easy call to make. In fact, I immediately called IFF out loud to my coaches, but the umpire did not.
At that point in time, the game was starting to get away from us. When I went to question the call, my purpose was to understand why, in the umpire's judgement, that was not an IFF and to let my team regain some composure. Based on his response, he'd clearly had a memory lapse that the rule was in effect, and made the call after play had stopped. I left the field with a free out.

The intent of the rule is to protect the base runners, by eliminating the force play. That can only occur if the rule is called immediately, while the ball is in the air. In this particular instance, our team could have easily had a triple play, as all runners had advanced 3/4 or more to the next base, by the time the ball came down (and none were looking at the ball to ensure it dropped).

Had the ball been caught, there would have been an even bigger mess. I would have argued that, since the IFF wasn't immediately called, the double or triple play should stand.
Had I been the opposing coach, I would have also argued that the IFF rule MUST be called during the play, while the ball is in the air.

Point is, the umpire has about 1.5 seconds to make the call. In my opinion, he missed the IFF call, then followed that up with another mistake by calling it after play had stopped.

 

[Argus]

Thanks for all the responses. I intentionally omitted the age and skill level from the original post. This was a 10U rec post-season tournament...most players/coaches were playing by "advanced" rules for the first time.

What's considered a routine fly ball requiring ordinary effort for an MLB player, or even a 14U player, is quite different from a 10U rec player. That said, this IF catches fly balls of this height/distance in practice all the time.

When the ball was hit, the coaches sent the runners, not expecting the ball to be caught or not recalling the IFF was in effect. By the very definition of the rule, it was an easy call to make. In fact, I immediately called IFF out loud to my coaches, but the umpire did not.
At that point in time, the game was starting to get away from us. When I went to question the call, my purpose was to understand why, in the umpire's judgement, that was not an IFF and to let my team regain some composure. Based on his response, he'd clearly had a memory lapse that the rule was in effect, and made the call after play had stopped. I left the field with a free out.

The intent of the rule is to protect the base runners, by eliminating the force play. That can only occur if the rule is called immediately, while the ball is in the air. In this particular instance, our team could have easily had a triple play, as all runners had advanced 3/4 or more to the next base, by the time the ball came down (and none were looking at the ball to ensure it dropped).

Had the ball been caught, there would have been an even bigger mess. I would have argued that, since the IFF wasn't immediately called, the double or triple play should stand.
Had I been the opposing coach, I would have also argued that the IFF rule MUST be called during the play, while the ball is in the air.

Point is, the umpire has about 1.5 seconds to make the call. In my opinion, he missed the IFF call, then followed that up with another mistake by calling it after play had stopped.

I dont know what rules they are playing by and I'm not trying to beat a dead horse either but here is FP USSSA rule 8-17-H
The delayed call is in the note.

"When they hit a fair fly and the infield fly rule is declared.
EFFECT - The ball is live, the batter is out if the batted ball is fair.
If the ball is caught, each runner may tag up and advance with the liability
to be put out once the batted ball is touched the same as on any caught fly
ball. If a declared infield fly is not caught, the ball is live, the batter-runner
is out which removes all force plays, and each runner may advance with
liability to be put out without needing to retouch their base(s).
NOTE: When an infield fly is not initially called, the batter-runner may
be declared out if brought to the umpire’s attention before the next pitch."

Regardless I see that this could become a huge mess and would like to thank you for bringing this up... my brother always gives me a hard time while I'm umpiring and I more than adequately yell infield fly and here is the exact reason why... I always give the signal to my other umpires that it is in effect every new batter until it becomes not in effect and then give that signal immediately. Another one that has its same complication is the intentional dropped fly/catch.

 

[Crabby_Bob]

And, USSSA 14.12.R: Rectify any situation in which an Umpire’s decision that was delayed or
reversed has placed either team in jeopardy.

Similar for USA and NFHS, Rule 10. You may be nullifying outs and placing runners. In NCAA, it is an infield fly only if declared.

 

[CloudofDust]

Official rules were IFA/VTD rules, not sure if the same "note" is reflected there.

But, per the USSSA rules, you posted, the umpire made the correct call after the fact. Other than rectifying a situation where a runner was forced out, I don't understand the point of that.