Blown Infield Fly non-call

[HittingZone]

Sitch:
R1 & R2. No outs.

Batter pops up to F4, no infield fly is called, and F4 wisely allows the ball to drop untouched. He picks it up, fires to 3rd and F5 then fires back to 2nd with F6 covering as R1 & R2 are caught running off the bags in an apparent DP as they were confused by the non-call.

I know I have read on this forum that an umpire can fix this either by:

A) Retroactively calling the IFF, declaring the batter out, and returning both runners
-OR-
B) Calling the lead runner out only, but placing the batter at 1B and R1 at 2B to take away the cheap double play.

I find nothing about this specific sitch in the MLBUM, or the JEA. Does it appear in the PBUC or the J/R manual?

[dash_riprock]

Sitch:
R1 & R2. No outs.

Batter pops up to F4, no infield fly is called, and F4 wisely allows the ball to drop untouched. He picks it up, fires to 3rd and F5 then fires back to 2nd with F6 covering as R1 & R2 are caught running off the bags in an apparent DP as they were confused by the non-call.

I know I have read on this forum that an umpire can fix this either by:

A) Retroactively calling the IFF, declaring the batter out, and returning both runners
-OR-
B) Calling the lead runner out only, but placing the batter at 1B and R1 at 2B to take away the cheap double play.

I find nothing about this specific sitch in the MLBUM, or the JEA. Does it appear in the PBUC or the J/R manual?
The answer is C.
The batter is out on the infield fly. If the runners advanced and are standing on the next base, they are safe (there was no force at any base), unless they were tagged while off the base.

The situation determines if the infield fly rule is in effect, and the "non-call" by the umpires doesn't change this. The runners are expected to know the situation. They are not given any special protection as a result of the non-call.

Edited to add:

OBR it is not an infield fly. Resulting action is allowed, but the umps should undo a DP. So for OBR, your B is correct.

J/R has it in Chapter 6, page 52 of the latest edition, which I should have read before posting.

[Richard_Siegel]

Sitch:
R1 & R2. No outs.

Batter pops up to F4, no infield fly is called, and F4 wisely allows the ball to drop untouched. He picks it up, fires to 3rd and F5 then fires back to 2nd with F6 covering as R1 & R2 are caught running off the bags in an apparent DP as they were confused by the non-call.

I know I have read on this forum that an umpire can fix this either by:

A) Retroactively calling the IFF, declaring the batter out, and returning both runners
-OR-
B) Calling the lead runner out only, but placing the batter at 1B and R1 at 2B to take away the cheap double play.

I find nothing about this specific sitch in the MLBUM, or the JEA. Does it appear in the PBUC or the J/R manual?

It is impossible to find the right thing to do in an umpire's manual when you kick a call or make a mistake like this. In truth, when you mess up there is no "right" answer. By "right answer," I mean an action to resolve the error that is supported by the rulebook, or a casebook. There is none. When an umpire makes a mistake anything you do, or refuse to do, in such a case, you're on your own! You might decide on the "fairest" thing to do. You might go with what most likely would have happened had you done the right thing. But whatever you decide to do can be argued, and justifiably so, because the players reacted to what you did, or didn't do, and that changed the play.


Manuals, casebooks and rulebooks tell us how to enforce the rules properly. These books do not give us advice on how to resolve an error when we enforce the rules incorrectly. Umpire manuals and rulebooks only tell us how to do things right, and then expect that we will do it that way. None of our recognized manuals, i.e. Jim Evans, J/R, PBUC, etc. would bother (or would take the space) to include at anytime, "Oh, by the way, if you screw this call up, this is how you fix this…."

Of the choices given, once you admit the IFR should have been called, you should not chose to put B1 at first 1B because, by admitting the IFR should have been called, the batter then must be out.

[dash_riprock]

Of the choices given, once you admit the IFR should have been called, you should not chose to put B1 at first 1B because, by admitting the IFR should have been called, the batter then must be out.
Not true in OBR. If Infield Fly is not declared, it is not an infield fly and the batter is not out (yet).

[Dragon29]

dash - not saying you're wrong, but - where do you find that in OBR?

My understanding on this has always been that the IFR is enforced regardless of whether or not an umpire verbalizes it during play; BR is out.

There are a lof of 'if-then' sequences involving the runners' status and whether or not the ball was caught that could follow, but they all start with the enforcement of the IFR.

[mr umpire]

To me, this is a HTBT situation. Maybe the umpires judged the fly ball not to meet the IFR criteria. If they didn't judge it to meet the criteria, then it is not an IF and the DP stands. Depends on if the umpires judged it to meet the criteria even after the play happens. Maybe, it was a low fly which the umpires deemed an infielder could not get to with minimal effort. Was F4 running as hard as he can to get to it. Then, at the last possible second, he was able to get under it easily then let it drop. To me, it is not an IF because he had to run beyond minimal effort to even get to where the ball was.

If they get together and realize it should have been an IF, then I would go with not allowing the DP and just make the IFR call unless a runner was off base and got tagged. Then, that runner would not be protected because he was out on the tag not on a force call.

I doubt an infielder will pick up on the fact that IF was not called and let it drop. It may happen but more than likely it won't.

[MCLEOD36]

I go with Dragon on this one. Whether or not it is called ie IFR, it is an IF, runners advance at own peril and regardless of verbalization, they know what it is.

[Willy]

This is from the 2009 NCAA test:

R1, R2, R3, one out. The batter hits a towering fly ball to F4. F4 moves forward 1-2 steps before he camps under the ball. The umpires fail to call "infield fly." F4, realizing that "infield fly" has not been called, steps back and allows the ball to drop untouched. All three runners then attempt to advance. F4 picks up the ball and tags R1 and then throws to third for the tag play on R2 for the third out.

A. Let the play stand. Smart play by F4.
B. The umpires must protect the offensive team from an "undeserved" double play. That could require a belated "infield fly" ruling and revocation of subsequent action. Do not allow a double play that should not have occurred. The batter is out and play resumes with the bases loaded.
C. Explain to the offensive coach that the double play will stand.
D. Make sure you confer with your crew. Let the defense have one out but not the second out. At the end of the play, R2 should be at third, R1 is out on a force and the BR is at first. R3 scores.



The correct answer is B.

I believe OBR is simailar. Or it could be totally different. At least we know what NCAA wants. I want a chicken.

[dash_riprock]

From J/R p. 52:

"A fly ball that meets all the requirements for an infield fly, but is not declared as such, is not an infield fly. Resulting action is allowed; however, the umpires should not allow a double play that the infield fly rule was intended to prevent."

Unlike OBR, FED & NCAA both recognize an undeclared infield fly. The rule applies even if the umpires butcher the call.

[BrianC14]

From J/R p. 52:

"A fly ball that meets all the requirements for an infield fly, but is not declared as such, is not an infield fly. Resulting action is allowed; however, the umpires should not allow a double play that the infield fly rule was intended to prevent."

Unlike OBR, FED & NCAA both recognize an undeclared infield fly. The rule applies even if the umpires butcher the call.

From NCAA rule book (as referenced by J/R, in "Rule 2"

In the case of a declared or undeclared infield fly, the ball is live and runners may advance at their own risk. If a declared infield fly becomes a foul ball, it is treated the same as any foul.

Curiously, J/R reference NFHS Rule 10.2.3.g, which covers the responsibility of the UIC, and this subsection reads:

Make final decision on points not covered by the rules.

[dash_riprock]

I think the FED case book has (had) an example of an undeclared IF. IIRC, the ruling was it was an infield fly (the situation, not the umpires, determines whether it was an infield fly), and the runners were responsible for knowing the rule. Batter is out on the IF, runners advance at their own risk.

I guess the 10.2.3.g part is to give the umps some wiggle room in undoing an unfair advantage caused by the non-call.

The bottom line -- signal your partner every time an IF situation exists, and make the friggin' call.

[Willy]

When I looked for the interp for the NCAA ruling, it cited 3-6-b:

Each umpire is an approved official of the institution, league or conference and is authorized and required to enforce each section of these rules. Further, the individual is obliged to conduct the game under conditions conducive to the highest standards of good sportsmanship. Each umpire has the authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules.

This must have been an issue and probably is covered at the annual meeting. I will not attend this year, so I don't know. Wife had to have her 40th B-Day for some reason.

[Ozzy]

First of all, it is up to the players and coaches to know the game situation. If the IFF should have been in effect, then the batter is out. Any runners who chose to advance and did so successfully remain. It is when the defense registers outs is where the trouble begins. Umpires must make every effort to enforce the IFF so that the defense cannot gain a cheap double play.

[umpjmb]

It is impossible to find the right thing to do in an umpire's manual when you kick a call or make a mistake like this. In truth, when you mess up there is no "right" answer. By "right answer," I mean an action to resolve the error that is supported by the rulebook, or a casebook. There is none. When an umpire makes a mistake anything you do, or refuse to do, in such a case, you're on your own! You might decide on the "fairest" thing to do. You might go with what most likely would have happened had you done the right thing. But whatever you decide to do can be argued, and justifiably so, because the players reacted to what you did, or didn't do, and that changed the play.


Manuals, casebooks and rulebooks tell us how to enforce the rules properly. These books do not give us advice on how to resolve an error when we enforce the rules incorrectly. Umpire manuals and rulebooks only tell us how to do things right, and then expect that we will do it that way. None of our recognized manuals, i.e. Jim Evans, J/R, PBUC, etc. would bother (or would take the space) to include at anytime, "Oh, by the way, if you screw this call up, this is how you fix this…."

Richard-- Of all the many posts of ours I have read, this one may the most intuitive of all. Excellent observation and comments. JB

[lawump]

First of all, it is up to the players and coaches to know the game situation.


True...but how can they with an infield fly? The umpire has to use his JUDGMENT to determine that the ball can be caught with ordinary effort by an infielder. The players and the coaches can't read the umpire's mind.

I accept what you said (and I have quoted) for situations like when the umpire mistates the number of outs an inning. For instance he says "one" when it is "two". The players and coaches do need to know this situation, and this umpire's mistake does not relieve them of this burden.

However, in this situation, they don't know it is an infield fly...until the umpire adjudges it as such. Thus, they can't "know the game situation."

With that said, I was taught at B/F school...to go back and eliminate any cheap double play and enforce the IFF.

While not the same exact situation...didn't a AAA crew kick the crap out of an IFF situation last year?

[dash_riprock]

So, Dash, in OBR ... if this unlikely scenario happened with you and your partner, which of the two options I posed in the OP would you choose?

Without the benefit of the J/R I would have chosen A.
With the benefit of the J/R, I would choose B.

I believe the J/R would seem to approve either choice ... so long as the Double Play was not allowed.
Well, J/R says that an undeclared infield fly is not an infield fly, so option A is not an option. I would "fix" the double-play (the only thing J/R says you can fix) with option B.

[heyblue26]

I agree with Richard and J/R manual.

[CoachJM]

Oddly, I find myself in agreement both with Ozzy's post on the first page of this thread AND the question posed by both HittingZone and lawump, which, if I understand it correctly is, "HTF is the defense supposed to know if the umpire judges it an IFF if he doesn't tell them?" - paraphrased, of course.

I have always been slightly annoyed by umpires who dismiss this question with "...the players are responsible for knowing the situation..." - a sentiment I essentially agree with - because it ignores the lement of judgment in the call, as pointed out by HZ and lawump.

In the "inverse" situation, that is, the umpire calls an IFF when the conditions are NOT in place, I feel the "players should know" argument holds more weight.

There are certainly some "IFF situation" fly balls that might be called one way or the other - it's at the edge of "ordinary effort", is it a "line drive" or a "fly ball" - it is whatever the umpire judges. There is no way for the players to know until the umpire tells them.

Others are clearly IFFs. The fielder is camped under it, everyone sees it's an "easy catch". If they catch it (as they should), then it's just as if you had called the IFF. You "got away with one". If they drop one of these is when you get the "interesting situations", as Ozzy alludes to. Like him, I would be reluctant to allow the defense to get two outs.

If they don't, I'd be inclined to let the play stand. If they do, I'd be inclined to "fix it" in a way that resulted in one out. Exactly how would depend on the particulars of what happened.

JM

[Matt13]

True...but how can they with an infield fly? The umpire has to use his JUDGMENT to determine that the ball can be caught with ordinary effort by an infielder. The players and the coaches can't read the umpire's mind.

I accept what you said (and I have quoted) for situations like when the umpire mistates the number of outs an inning. For instance he says "one" when it is "two". The players and coaches do need to know this situation, and this umpire's mistake does not relieve them of this burden.

However, in this situation, they don't know it is an infield fly...until the umpire adjudges it as such. Thus, they can't "know the game situation."

With that said, I was taught at B/F school...to go back and eliminate any cheap double play and enforce the IFF.

While not the same exact situation...didn't a AAA crew kick the crap out of an IFF situation last year?

If by "kick the crap out of" you mean "somehow blow the same one twice," then yep.

[CoachJM]

Apropos of nothing in particular...

Were the umpires in this MiLB game who were wearing jackets wearing them "tucked" or "untucked"?

Sorry.

JM

[dash_riprock]

I don't know how U2 could have called the force out at 2B when the ball went straight up over the mound ... even if he didn't call the IFF, you would think by the time the runner lolligagged into 2B he would realize he needs to stick with the play.
Unbelievable. He took his head off a live ball (and a play) 5 feet away from him. I'm guessing he was distracted by the argument taking place at 3B, but still...

Every time I hear the word lolligag I am reminded of a big mistake I once made at a JEA clinic - closing the hotel bar, and sitting front row center for Sarge's 8am lecture the next morning. Never again. It's one or the other, but not both.

[ExCop]

The major IFF issue that I see is one or more base runners thinking that the ball is dead when the IFF is called, and get tagged off their bases. I did, however, see an IFF non-call fixed by the PU saying "Oh, you didn't hear me call that? Sorry."

Question for you guys: Where/how could I get a copy of this J/R manual? Is it available electronically? I'd like to use the winter to take some of my rules knowledge to the next level. Also, is the PBUC manual worth buying?

Thanks,

[Richard_Siegel]

The major IFF issue that I see is one or more base runners thinking that the ball is dead when the IFF is called, and get tagged off their bases. I did, however, see an IFF non-call fixed by the PU saying "Oh, you didn't hear me call that? Sorry."

Question for you guys: Where/how could I get a copy of this J/R manual? Is it available electronically? I'd like to use the winter to take some of my rules knowledge to the next level. Also, is the PBUC manual worth buying?

Thanks,

Purcahse the Jaska-Roder Manuals from their website:

http://www.rulesofbaseball.com/

Purcahse either of the 2 PBUC Manuals from this website:

Manual for the Two-Umpire System

PBUC Umpire Manual (2-man mechanics)

both manual sells for $14.95 each. At that price you can't go wrong.

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/info/umpires.jsp?mc=_ump_manuals

[ExCop]

Purcahse the Jaska-Roder Manuals from their website:

http://www.rulesofbaseball.com/

Purcahse either of the 2 PBUC Manuals from this website:

Manual for the Two-Umpire System

PBUC Umpire Manual (2-man mechanics)

both manual sells for $14.95 each. At that price you can't go wrong.

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/info/umpires.jsp?mc=_ump_manuals


Richard - thanks! I have just ordered the J/R + 100 Problems package deal, and will get the PBUC Manual off another site to save on shipping charges when I buy other stuff.

[widac]

Just got mine here:
http://www.rulesofbaseball.com/preface.html

[buckeyetc71]

Anyone notice the positions of the guys in the video. U1-B and U3-D??? I thought with R1 R2, U1 would be at first and U3 in the middle???

[Steve G]

With less than two out U1 in A and U3 in C. With two out U1 in B and U3 in D.

[SocalBlue1]

With less than two out U1 in A and U3 in C. With two out U1 in B and U3 in D.

Using which mechanics? With R1, U1 is always in short A. Why would we want to place U1 in the position to have to cover the two likely plays on a ground ball when coverage is better the other way?

[Steve G]

Using which mechanics? With R1, U1 is always in short A. Why would we want to place U1 in the position to have to cover the two likely plays on a ground ball when coverage is better the other way?

PBUC 8.3 & 8.4

[SocalBlue1]

PBUC 8.3 & 8.4

Those are/were options & to my knowledge not used for some time.

[chuck1]

We all agree the original play should never/ever happen, and that is why, just like when we played ball, an umpire has to know and anticipate all the situations (but never anticipate the call), that could arise and be in position (if at all humanly possible) to make that call. We must train (good luck Tom with your new umpire class) for these situations but even with all the training in the world we will continue to see things that we have never seen happen before. We all need to concentrate and be aware of the infield fly rule at the start of the play and signal our partners of its possibility.

However, concerning the original play, wasn't there a catch/no catch (trap) reversal this past year in MLB. Instead of a catch and triple play (doubling up the runners on 3rd and 2nd, the call turned into a no catch, and the umpires awarded the runner from 3rd, home, the runner on 2nd, 3rd and the BR, 1st? In other words after getting the play right, the umpires used 901C to then determine the placement of runners.

Could the above situation not be used for this infield fly situation? They missed the original call (must have totally forgot the infield fly situation), but get together and decided it was an infield fly and then place all the runners using 901C. You "might" could even say this was the use of 901C for everything involved on this play, just like you could say 901C was invoked for everything involved on the MLB play.

[BT_Blue]

The NCAA test has basicly this exact same sitch. In it the correct answer is the retroactively call the IFF. Call the batter out and place the runners back at the bases at TOP.

[chuck1]

Thanks. I was also assuming from the OP that it was not what we call a "humpback liner" situation in which the umpire does have to make a judgment on whether it really is an infield fly or not. I took the OP as it was definitely an IFF.

[Pete_Booth]

Sitch:
R1 & R2. No outs.

Batter pops up to F4, no infield fly is called, and F4 wisely allows the ball to drop untouched. He picks it up, fires to 3rd and F5 then fires back to 2nd with F6 covering as R1 & R2 are caught running off the bags in an apparent DP as they were confused by the non-call.

I know I have read on this forum that an umpire can fix this either by:

A) Retroactively calling the IFF, declaring the batter out, and returning both runners
-OR-
B) Calling the lead runner out only, but placing the batter at 1B and R1 at 2B to take away the cheap double play.

I find nothing about this specific sitch in the MLBUM, or the JEA. Does it appear in the PBUC or the J/R manual?

IMO, in understanding rules one needs to look at both the history and meaning of why a certain rule exists.

In the case of the IFR, it is to prevent the defense from getting a "cheap" DP.

In this particualr case I do not subscribe to the theory that the participants should KNOW the situation

Why!

The Infiled fly is a JUDGEMENT call so how do the particpants actually KNOW that things will be "worked out" after the play. All the particpants KNOW is that there is a pop fly in the infield that could be or could not be an IF so they act accordingly.

Now after the dust settles IMO, it's simple.

Did the defense get a DP for the umpire failure to call the IF?

If the answer is NO, then the play stands because the purpose of the rule was to not allow the defense to get a cheap DP and since they only recorded one out play stands as called.

If the defense did record a DP, then you fix. Declare the batter out and put runners back at TOP bases.

OBR does not have a written rule per say so you use 9.01(c)

FED has a case play but they also have a rule that says if an umpire decision is reveresed and placed either team at a disadvantage they can fix.

In summary: if the defense did not get 2 allow play to stand
if they did get 2 then fix

NOTE: By the defense getting 2 outs I mean the normal way I do not mean something like this.

R1/R2 1 out: F4 allows fly ball to drop, however his throw to F5 is off line and gets away from F5. R2 now heads for home where he is thrown out by a good throw. In that case even though the defense recorded 2 outs it had nothing to do with the failure of the umpires to invoke the IFR.

Pete Booth

[dash_riprock]

If the defense did record a DP, then you fix. Declare the batter out and put runners back at TOP bases.

OBR does not have a written rule per say so you use 9.01(c)
In OBR, an undeclared infield fly is not an infield fly. Fix the cheap DP, but leave the batter at 1st.


R1/R2 1 out: F4 allows fly ball to drop, however his throw to F5 is off line and gets away from F5. R2 now heads for home where he is thrown out by a good throw. In that case even though the defense recorded 2 outs it had nothing to do with the failure of the umpires to invoke the IFR.

I only count 1 out here, unless you are retroactively invoking the IFR (FED & NCAA).

[Richard_Siegel]

IMO, in understanding rules one needs to look at both the history and meaning of why a certain rule exists.

In the case of the IFR, it is to prevent the defense from getting a "cheap" DP.

In this particualr case I do not subscribe to the theory that the participants should KNOW the situation

Why!

The Infiled fly is a JUDGEMENT call so how do the particpants actually KNOW that things will be "worked out" after the play. All the particpants KNOW is that there is a pop fly in the infield that could be or could not be an IF so they act accordingly.

Now after the dust settles IMO, it's simple.

Did the defense get a DP for the umpire failure to call the IF?

If the answer is NO, then the play stands because the purpose of the rule was to not allow the defense to get a cheap DP and since they only recorded one out play stands as called.

If the defense did record a DP, then you fix. Declare the batter out and put runners back at TOP bases.

OBR does not have a written rule per say so you use 9.01(c)

FED has a case play but they also have a rule that says if an umpire decision is reveresed and placed either team at a disadvantage they can fix.

In summary: if the defense did not get 2 allow play to stand
if they did get 2 then fix

NOTE: By the defense getting 2 outs I mean the normal way I do not mean something like this.

R1/R2 1 out: F4 allows fly ball to drop, however his throw to F5 is off line and gets away from F5. R2 now heads for home where he is thrown out by a good throw. In that case even though the defense recorded 2 outs it had nothing to do with the failure of the umpires to invoke the IFR.

Pete Booth

I agree with averything Pete wrote. It is the right common sense approach to basically making things right. Just because you might have had a brain fart and didn't get the "Infield Fly" call out of your mouth in time there is no reason why the rule should be ignored and the defense should get an undeserved advantage.

I agree with Pete it is not right to hide behide the excuse that "the players should know."

However, fixing a blown infield rule can be supported by the rules. There is no need to invoke rule 9.01c. The "rule" you need can be found in Rule 2.00 in the definition of INFIELD FLY. The words "the umpire shall immediately declare 'Infield Fly' for the benefit of the runners," does the trick. If you need to fix a blown infield fly call, why would you do it? You do it for "the benefit of the runners." That is all you need to justify it.

Just say to the DHC who complains, "Jerry, you guys got a DP because I didn't call the "Infield Fly Rule" when I should have. Since the rules require us to declare 'Infield Fly' for the benefit of the runners, I have to fix it. That sounds better than saying, "Jerry, you guys got a DP because I didn't call the "Infield Fly Rule" when I should have. So I am going to make up a rule with 9.01c to let me fix it.

To be honest in 19 years of umpiring I have yet to see or hear about a situation where 9.01c needed to used. When you know the rules well you can always find another rule that can cover your situation.

[ExCop]

To be honest in 19 years of umpiring I have yet to see or hear about a situation where 9.01c needed to used. When you know the rules well you can always find another rule that can cover your situation.

Just about every cop up here gets an informal schooling is something called the Ways and Means Act. It's not a real law, of course, but it stands for the proposition that you should just do what you need to, and somewhere, somehow, there'll be a law that can be stretched to fit the situation. Example: You're walking a beat when all of a sudden some guy walks out of a nearby store, takes one look at you and runs like h*ll! You chase him, massive radio coordinated foot chase, etc., and finally there's a pile on and schmuckface gets busted. Why? Well, running from the police is not a crime but you know damn well he's done something and you'll need to figure it out before the paperwork. For the time being though, the arrest has been made pursuant to the Ways and Means Act (wink, wink, etc.). I remember a case where a white PVC pipe was seized from a drug dealer, even though he denied it was for use against another person (he said it was a "cane", depriving a right to seize it as a weapon under our Criminal Code). He actually complained, and sure enough after some digging it turned out that it is illegal for anyone other than a blind person to use a white cane! So, it turns out the weapon had been seized as an "illegal" cane!

OK, I digress. Sorry.

Umpires, especially newer umpires, often know what the right thing to do is, but not the actual rule. Go with your gut and do the right thing, then look it up later if you have to. Of course, Plan A should always be to know your rules.

But sometimes, we all need a Plan B. Or a Ways and Means Act.