Atlanta/St. Louis blown call - Fantasy Sports Forums

hockeyrobot · #1 10-05-2012, 08:16 PM

WTF happened?!?! I was monitoring the game while at work and just saw that twitter exploded and they delayed for a longgggggggggggg time.

Call of Doughty · #2 10-05-2012, 08:29 PM

In field fly rule????? watching and equally confused. googled it and still confused ....isin't the rule suppose to protect the hitting team and not the fielding team....the Braves were hitting at the time..

oh those hillbillies and their beer bottles....what a gong show ....hope the Cards win this one..

bluejays · #3 10-05-2012, 08:35 PM

Watching in the 9th right now and Chipper should of easily been called out with 2 out and now a double. 2 on, 2 out and 3 down. It all works out in the end.......Gotta love playoff ball.

bluejays · #4 10-05-2012, 08:37 PM

Done.....Motte clutch.
Huge win by a huge underdog (at least Vegas odds)!

dmvincent · #5 10-05-2012, 08:48 PM

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...inals/1616389/

They didn't lose because of that call, they lost because they got outplayed.

hockeyrobot · #6 10-05-2012, 09:15 PM

Well doesn't that sound exciting. Can't wait to see the replays.

notoriousjim · #7 10-05-2012, 11:00 PM

Ok, the infield fly rule is one of the oddest rules in baseball. It applies when there is a force out at 3rd (so runners on first and 2nd or bases loaded). When there is a pop up to the infield that would be an ordinary play for the infeilder, it can automatically be called an out.

It makes sense in action. A pop up would cause the fielder to be looking up and drifting in the direction of the ball. With runners in the same path, and a fielder that is going to be moving to get under the ball (just watch any player get under a pop up, they are really moving around randomly till the catch), there is a high chance of the runner and the fielder to run into each other.

The other reason is that it stops teams from deliberatly missing the pop up and then get a double play throwing to third and then second.

i feel like I should make the legislative intent arguement for this rule. The intent of this rule appears to be to stop advanceing baserunners from colliding with infields attempting to track a pop up. This is a potentialy dangerous situation since the runner is advancing as fast as possible, and the fielder is likely looking up at the ball (not the runner), and drifting in the direction that the ball is drifting. That drift makes it hard for the runner to know if the fielder will drift into their natural line. this is not an issue with a grounder since the fielder will make a clear line for the play on the ball (no time for slight adjustments like on a popup) and his eyes are going to be on the same plane as the runner. It is likely the intent of the rule to only be applied in situations where the collision could possibly occur.
In this case the infeilder makes an immediate sprint into the outfield. He is roughly 25-30 feet from the potential path of a baserunner. A reasonable person would infer that the likelyhood of a baserunner and fielder to collide is virtually nonexsistent.. This case should not have been called for the infield fly rule.

The infield fly rule also only applies when there is a force out possible at third. The other possible inent of this rule is to stop teams from deliberatly dropping a ball in an attempt to create a double play. Since the class of person this is trying to protect is the baserunner (and team hitting), the rule should not have applied in this case. The rule actually harmed a potential runner at 2nd from attempting to advance on a shallow pop up to the outfield.

chuckcouples · #8 10-06-2012, 12:34 AM

The infield rule is in place to aid the batting team avoid double plays. The reason it is only in place when there are runners on at least 1st and 2nd (or bases loaded) and less than 2 out is because this is the only time where the defensive team would benefit from letting the ball drop. The ruling on the field was 100% correct in this situation as the ball was hit in such a fashion that an infielder (ithe shortstop) could make the play with normal effort. The Left Field umpire made the correct call once he realized that the short stop was able to get to where the ball was going to land quite easily.

For the Braves fans out there who did not agree with the call, imagine this scenario. The SS realizing that the umpires were not going to call an infield fly backed up an extra step then quickly picked up the ball after it landed. He then threw to 3rd to get the runner from 2nd out and the 3rd baseman threw to 2nd to get the runner from 1st out since both runners would have been taking up. This is exactly the situation that the infield fly rule is designed to prevent.

As much as I normally dislike sporting officials, they made the right call at the right time in this situation.

Axeman33 · #9 10-06-2012, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmvincent

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...inals/1616389/

They didn't lose because of that call, they lost because they got outplayed.

I agree here. Granted the call was wrong, the reason they lost is because the Braves handed the game to them. Too many errors.

MolsonX · #10 10-06-2012, 12:01 PM

As a Cards fan, I'm glad they won, but this was a borderline/judgement call that could have went either way. I took this off wikipedia:

"Ordinary effort"

Any fair fly ball that could have been caught by an infielder with ordinary effort is covered by the rule, regardless of where the ball is caught. The ball need not be caught by an infielder, nor must it be caught in the infield. For example, if an infielder retreats to the outfield in an effort to catch a fly ball with ordinary effort, the infield fly rule is invoked, even if an outfielder ultimately caught the ball, and even if no infielder attempted to make a play on the ball. Similarly, a fly ball within the infield that could have been caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, but is caught by an outfielder, would also be covered by the rule.

Ordinary effort given all circumstances must exist for the infield fly rule to be invoked. Thus, weather, wind, lighting, positioning of the defense, and the abilities of the players involved in the play must be taken into account. An infield fly in a major league game, thus, might not be so in a junior high school game due to the ability of the players involved.

An infield fly is a judgment call and may be declared by any umpire on the field. It may not be appealed or overturned by any other umpire.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think the umpire was wrong, as the rule clearly states that it could be an infielder playing a fly ball in the outfield, but there is one piece the MLB is missing in this rule. Could the runners make a play to either get back on their original base or advance to another. In this case, there is no way that more than one out would have been made even if the Cards allowed the ball to drop on purpose. By the time the fielder lets the ball drop, picks it up, and makes a play to one of the base runners 'at pitch' bases for a force out, any other runner would have made it back.

In that situation no more than one out would have been made regardless, due to how far the ball went into the outfield.

The umpire wasn't wrong, they just called a seldomly seen 'out' at a critical moment in a game that had everything on the line.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Fantasy Ranking

Login Form