2017 MLB Season Thread

Discussion in 'Entertainment, Culture, and Sports' started by edinatlanta, Feb 3, 2011.

  1. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    501
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    

    Is this in response to my comment about the one game wild card winner being able to play a team in the same division in the first round? Neither option is going to be "right" in every case; I just hate it when a team has the best record in the league and has to play a better opponent because the wild card happens to come from their division.


    Smartassery aside, I do think that (by the book), the call was correct. Certainly it came later than I'd have liked, but there's not much to be done about that. The fact that SportsCenter keeps repeating about it being some 50' further into the outfield than any other dropped infield fly is interesting, but not particularly relevant - that it has not happened does not change the wording of the rule.
     
  2. L'Incandescent

    L'Incandescent Senior member

    Messages:
    15,842
    Likes Received:
    7,005
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis
    

    As I mentioned upthread a bit, I think the call was correct, just based on the wording of the rule. I do think one could make a reasonable argument about the purpose of the rule not applying to a pop-up that deep, but that's a judgment call.
     
  3. Douglas

    Douglas Stupid ass member

    Messages:
    14,658
    Likes Received:
    2,290
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Purseforum
    There is also reason to believe that the ball was not caught because the call was made. Something made the SS flinch, and looking at the video, I think it's plausible that hearing the call made him flinch a little. He could have caught that ball.
     
  4. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    501
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    

    One could absolutely make that argument, but the ump's job is to enforce the rule book, not to act based upon his interpretation of the original intent of the rules.

    I agree that the rule needs changing, but this is a failing of baseball's definition of the rules, not of the ump in question.
     
  5. L'Incandescent

    L'Incandescent Senior member

    Messages:
    15,842
    Likes Received:
    7,005
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis
    I agree with both Douglas and dcg above. My first thought when the SS pulled away from the ball was that he'd heard something--not just crowd noise, but someone near him calling out loudly.
     
  6. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    501
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    Conceivably, given a short enough left field, a low enough wall, and a high enough fly ball, it would be possible for a home run to be determined an infield fly based on the current rule.
     
  7. L'Incandescent

    L'Incandescent Senior member

    Messages:
    15,842
    Likes Received:
    7,005
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis
    

    The picture I have of that in my head is quite funny. To me at least.
     
  8. zalb916

    zalb916 Senior member

    Messages:
    4,623
    Likes Received:
    524
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    

    I think it's very difficult to reach this conclusion, if you watch the video.

    [​IMG]

    The shortstop moves away BEFORE the call is made. He's looking at Holliday. He never looks towards the umpire. It's pretty clear.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  9. L'Incandescent

    L'Incandescent Senior member

    Messages:
    15,842
    Likes Received:
    7,005
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis
    One more point about this, which sort of cuts against my original argument. One of the most important features of any system of rules, whether it be laws or rules for games, is predictability, so that the people governed by those rules know with a high degree of certainty what's permitted and what's not, etc. If an infield fly rule is never invoked for balls that far beyond the infield, then it seems like there's something like a baseball common law that should be respected.
     
  10. zalb916

    zalb916 Senior member

    Messages:
    4,623
    Likes Received:
    524
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    Kozma has actually said that he didn't hear anything, so that takes care of the "he backed away after the ump's call" theory.
     
  11. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    501
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    source: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/definition_terms_2.jsp
    Bolded portions mine

    A theory of why the ball was not caught is not necessary. If this were an infield fly where the SS didn't have to move at all, and he just happened to drop the ball, everyone would say "wow, that sucks...but that's the rule." The reason this is an issue is because of the location where the drop occurred, which is outside of where most (all?) of us think when we think "infield fly". However, based on the rule, IMO there's no doubt the play is technically an infield fly.

    I don't know if the "comment" section above is an official part of the rules, but since I pulled this from the MLB website, I assume so. The fact that it mentions that an outfielder can handle the ball suggests that a fairly deep ball can still be an infield fly. Further, it is stated that the umpire's judgement governs the call. Arguments about "ordinary" effort seem silly to me; any MLB SS should make that play with relative ease.

    If you want to consider it one of those rules that's never called, I suppose you can make that argument. But can any of us ever remember a situation where we said "well, that ball was technically an infield fly, but that call is never made..."? I can't. Baseball is inconsistent with that sort of thing, anyway - for example, it's ok for a 2B to make a phantom tag of the bag during a double play, but it's not ever ok for a runner to miss touching a bag.
     
  12. Rambo

    Rambo Senior member

    Messages:
    27,312
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Location:
    I'M IN MIAMI, BITCH
  13. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    501
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    Yeah, but according to the rules, that doesn't matter.

    Rule needs to be rewritten.
     
  14. Rambo

    Rambo Senior member

    Messages:
    27,312
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Location:
    I'M IN MIAMI, BITCH
    ordinary effort shouldn't be considered backpedaling 50 feet into left field. the intent of the rule is to prevent infielders from just letting the ball drop in front of them and then turning a double play, or something of the sort. CLEARLY, that was not an option here, so it was a blown call.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  15. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    501
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    To only consider distance traveled is insufficient; the amount of time available to travel that distance has to be considered as well.

    Intent of the rule doesn't come into play - ump's job is not to interpret intent, it is to enforce the rules. Call was correct; rule is shitty.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by