Infield Fly Rule Called in Outfield... AFTER the ball falls in. Postseason. For real.

[yankeesrule]

What if an empty bottle were to hit one of the players/umpires on the field and causes an injury? In this state, using an instrument such as a bottle, to cause an injury is a felony. I agree that the call was terrible but I don't think that gives the fans the right to throw a temper tantrum like 2 year olds just because they did not get their way. And as someone else pointed out earlier, what if it had happened to the Yankees, I would like to think that the fan base would have reacted without throwing items and disrupting the game. A horrible call and an equally horrible outburst by the Atlanta fans.

Worse... what would of happened if a bottle from the upper deck didn't make it to the field and hit a fan in the lower stands? I was at the playoff game in I think 2004 when people in the upper deck were throwing stuff on the field and I remember having to duck and cover from getting hit by crap, and I almost was.

[roblyo33]

Aren't all of the containers plastic or paper??

[yankeesrule]

Aren't all of the containers plastic or paper??

Getting hit with an empty beer bottle, plastic or not, would still hurt. Worse if it's full.. and even if it's a paper soda cup, I wouldn't be happy to be hit by one.

[roblyo33]

Getting hit with an empty beer bottle, plastic or not, would still hurt. Worse if it's full.. and even if it's a paper soda cup, I wouldn't be happy to be hit by one.

Me either but, I don't think they are lethal. I'm not condoning what they did but, I don't think anyone was in harm's way.

[jlw1980]

Pretty bad call, but I think this was worse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armando...r-perfect_game

Then again, that really only affected one player, not a team's whole season. Really, though, the Braves lost it for themselves. Three errors? Come on. Still, it sucks when an umpire helps to decide the outcome of a game.

[kan_t]

Pretty bad call, but I think this was worse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armando...r-perfect_game

Then again, that really only affected one player, not a team's whole season. Really, though, the Braves lost it for themselves. Three errors? Come on. Still, it sucks when an umpire helps to decide the outcome of a game.

Jim Joyce, one of the most respectful umpires in the game, had the gut to admit that the call was wrong. On the other hand, Sam Holbrook thought his call was absolutely correct.

[jlw1980]

Jim Joyce, one of the most respectful umpires in the game, had the gut to admit that the call was wrong. On the other hand, Sam Holbrook thought his call was absolutely correct.

I know. I didn't say otherwise. Whether or not Joyce admitted it, the call was still awful.

[NelsonMuntz]

1 game playoff, the loser's season ends. Terrible call in a huge situation. Fans act irrationally out of disgust in a highly emotional state. This is shocking?

It kind of reminds me of the classic Chris Rock bit about OJ Simpson:
"So you gotta think about OJ's situation: $25,000 a month, another man drivin' his car, f'ing his wife, in a house he's still payin' a mortgage on. Now, I'm not sayin' he should have killed her...but I understand."

[2JAY]

who got injured? And no they don't have the right, but the punishment has to fit the crime. I'm sorry but felony for throwing a plastic bottle that hits the field doesn't come anywhere near to that level

I am not advocating that a felony should be charged. I am just saying that throwing any kind of debris onto a field, with players present and the possibilty exits that someone could be injured, should not be treated lightly. Again, just because an umpire screwed up does not justify "mob mentality" enforcing its style of justice at that point.
Also as a side note having had to work several UK basketball "celebrations" during my career, I have had the pleasure of taking many different kinds of debris and I was in full riot gear. One of the hardest hits that I took, was a full can of beer to the head but lucky I was wearing a helmet. It gashed my nylon cover and put a gouge into the metal.

[Jersey Yankee]

terrible call

I don't blame the fans for throwing crap on the field, imagine that call being made against the Yankees?

A few times, it seemed like the umps were begging for the O's to beat the Yankees. I wouldn't be surprised if they invented ways for things to go Baltimore's way tonight.

[Pasco08]

A few times, it seemed like the umps were begging for the O's to beat the Yankees. I wouldn't be surprised if they invented ways for things to go Baltimore's way tonight.

And we shall see how the fans react if anything bad or as bad like this is called.

[Jersey Yankee]

Getting hit with an empty beer bottle, plastic or not, would still hurt. Worse if it's full.. and even if it's a paper soda cup, I wouldn't be happy to be hit by one.

Unless it's got a top, a paper soda cup wouldn't make it to the field. Plus it would be empty by then, even if it did make it.

[Jersey Yankee]

And we shall see how the fans react if anything bad or as bad like this is called.

In Baltimore or in the Bronx? If it's against the Yanks tonight, they may not even blink or move a muscle.

[Jersey Yankee]

Jim Joyce, one of the most respectful umpires in the game, had the gut to admit that the call was wrong. On the other hand, Sam Holbrook thought his call was absolutely correct.

So why are they not allowed to review and reverse these kinds of calls?

[Pasco08]

In Baltimore or in the Bronx? If it's against the Yanks tonight, they may not even blink or move a muscle.

Both but mostly when the series heads back to the bronx.

[Black Sabbathia]

Presumably the umpire was watching the play rather than measuring the distance covered. Honestly, is there anything about the infielder's pursuit of that ball that appeared beyond "ordinary effort"? He was slowing down, settling under the ball, and did not have his back to the plate. I really think it's silly to say there was anything about that play that involved extraordinary effort.

I think when a SS has to backpeddle 15 feet or so into the outfield grass there it's probably not "ordinary effort"

the IF fly rule is for legit infield popups, like where the defender barely has to move to get under it.......that play wasn't that. I don't care about the grey areas of the wording of the rule.....it was a terrible call.

[NelsonMuntz]

I think when a SS has to backpeddle 15 feet or so into the outfield grass there it's probably not "ordinary effort"

the IF fly rule is for legit infield popups, like where the defender barely has to move to get under it.......that play wasn't that. I don't care about the grey areas of the wording of the rule.....it was a terrible call.

Right. I know that technically the distance the ball travels has no impact on the rule, but IMO, the fact that the SS peeled off at the last minute because he was deep enough into the outfield that he thought the LF'er was calling him off tells me that this was not "ordinary effort". The LF'er is not calling you off on an ordinary pop up to the infield. And therein lies the problem with this rule -- you ask 10 people to define "ordinary effort" and you are going to get 10 different answers. Bottom line is that the umpire should have exercised common sense in that situation, and if he was that certain that it was "ordinary effort" he should have made the call immediately instead of waiting until the ball hit the ground.

[Yankee Tripper]

Right. I know that technically the distance the ball travels has no impact on the rule, but IMO, the fact that the SS peeled off at the last minute because he was deep enough into the outfield that he thought the LF'er was calling him off tells me that this was not "ordinary effort". The LF'er is not calling you off on an ordinary pop up to the infield. And therein lies the problem with this rule -- you ask 10 people to define "ordinary effort" and you are going to get 10 different answers. Bottom line is that the umpire should have exercised common sense in that situation, and if he was that certain that it was "ordinary effort" he should have made the call immediately instead of waiting until the ball hit the ground.

Have you even watched the replay? He made the correct call when the ball was at it's peak and the IF demonstarted he was in control to make the play. The ball had not hit the ground when he made the call. The SS bolted AFTER he made the call.

Bad result for the Braves who were down because they played defense like the Bad News Bears but people bitching about the umpires applying a rule correctly is bit nutty.

[Yankee Tripper]

I think when a SS has to backpeddle 15 feet or so into the outfield grass there it's probably not "ordinary effort"

the IF fly rule is for legit infield popups, like where the defender barely has to move to get under it.......that play wasn't that. I don't care about the grey areas of the wording of the rule.....it was a terrible call.

Unless they add a clause to the rule that in the umpires opinion a DP can still be turned with reasonable effort if the ball is in the OF grass (which they probably should add), then they made the correct call according to the letter of the rule.

[Texsahara]

http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=321005115

To put Friday's controversial play into context, in the past three seasons, there were six infield flies that were not caught in the majors, according to Baseball Info Solutions, the longest measured at 178 feet. Friday's infield fly was measured at 225 feet from home plate, according to Baseball Info Solutions.

[Snatch Catch]

Have you even watched the replay? He made the correct call when the ball was at it's peak and the IF demonstarted he was in control to make the play. The ball had not hit the ground when he made the call. The SS bolted AFTER he made the call.

This is just demonstrably false. Like, not even a little bit correct. The ball is about 20-25 ft from the ground when the umpire signals the Infield Fly Rule. It was an atrocious job by the umpire, and going back to the earlier point of whom it "benefited", that doesn't matter - the rule was applied terribly regardless of the results.

[Yankee Tripper]

This is just demonstrably false. Like, not even a little bit correct. The ball is about 20-25 ft from the ground when the umpire signals the Infield Fly Rule.

Nice of you to highlight one condition of the ball being at it's peak (I should have said reached its peak, it can be called after that) and ignoring the second condition of the SS demontsrating he had an easy play which was when the ball is about 20 to 25 feet from the ground.

Heck this wasn't even the worst call in the game. That was whne time was called for Ross after he struck out and then went on to hit a home run.

[Snatch Catch]

My point is the rule was grossly misapplied, and the lateness of the call is everything in that case. The entire point of the rule is to provide the baserunners with the time to retreat to their previously occupied bases without fear of having to advance, rendering the decision of whether or not to run at THEIR discretion. The way that play was called by the umpire took away the utility of that rule in it's entirety. On every infield fly rule I can ever remember seeing, the runners are standing on their previously occupied bases leisurely because the play was called properly. In this game, the baserunners had still gone halfway when the call was made, and were still able to advance after changing direction - it was ridiculous.

The argument that the call's timing was apprpriate, because of where the ball was, actually works somewhat against the very idea that the appropriate call was made. If the call could only be made in a fashion that disallowed the baserunners, whom are the sole, intended beneficiaries of this rule in the first place, any protection, then it strikes me as very reasonable that the call was incorrect.

Basically, if the baserunners gain no theoretical advantage from the application of the rule in real time, then I think logic dictates a high probability that the wrong call was made.

Again though, my overall point is that the rule was misapplied here because of timing - of that I have no doubt. Whether or not that proves that the wrong call was made is up for debate.

[Yankee Tripper]

I'm not saying I would have called it IFR, my point was this was far from a the worst call of all time which I've heard many people claim. I actually think it was a poor call but I think the ump was well with in his rights to both make the call and make it when he did. I would compare it to some bad ball/strike calls. And if you read the letter of the rule, the ump is totally with in the gudielines of the rule.

Now if you want to say he violated the SPIRT of the rule, sure I'll agree with that since there was no chance in hell Kozma or Holiday is turning a 6(or7)-5-4 DP on that ball.

But I will point out this thread title is patently false as teh ball is clearly still in the air when the call is made, even if it is later than it probably should be for IFR.

[jcarey]

Doesn't matter. You do not make a judgment call like that in that situation. It's a poorly written rule and the umpire exercised poor judgment in enforcing the rule.

This is laughable. By not going by the book, the ump is making more of a judgment call.

In the past 3 seasons, there have been 6 infield fly rules where the ball was not caught. Prior to last night, the longest distance traveled for one was 178ft. The ball hit last night was 225 feet from home plate. I know that distance has nothing to do with the infield fly rule, but I also know that the SS plays roughly 130 ft from the plate. So it is now considered "ordinary effort" for a player to run 100ft from his starting position, with his back to the plate, to make a catch? That is a huge assumption for an umpire to make at that point in the game with a team's season on the line.

Why do people keep bringing this up like it's relevant? What does the drop have to do with whether the rule should be applied? Nothing at all.

Someone go find out the distance of ALL THE INFIELD FLY CALLS in the past three years. If there aren't a few right around 225 feet from the plate, I'll be awfully surprised. But no, let's cut that sample to an arbitrary six because it serves to stir the pot.