John Smith as a former pro umpire the IF Fly Rule does not apply at all on this play. For the IF fly rule the ball has to be hit much higher for that call. It's not cheating necessarily but its trying to gain a competitive advantage. The umpire's call was absolutely correct though. On that play if the umpire judges Lowell to be dropping the ball on purpose he can call what he did here. This was the right call 100%.
John Smith As matthew said, its not an infield fly, due to him dropping it for the double play, the infield fly has to be a high fly ball, that could intentionally letting it drop without contact of the fielder to make the DP. regardless, awesome call on the ump, and 3bag for trying it. Smart man. baseball is 90% mental and 10 % physical.
+Alex Twist The Marlins franchise doesn't deserve fans with all the terrible ownership decisions they've made, can you blame us South Floridians for giving up on them? There's been at least three occasions that they've had fire sales and trading half the team away, ridiculous.
It's not an infield fly. It's a line drive that was intentionally dropped which is a violation of the rules. The umpires are 100% correct. Lots of comments here by people who have no clue to the rule.
exactly like the announcer said, make it look like you weren’t trying to drop it on purpose. third baseman made it way too obvious it was intentionally dropped
I was first thinking that it may have been an accident. After seeing the replay, I saw that it was clearly a drop. Kudos to the ump for actually catching that live.
Everything that happens afterward is irrelevant. It is an immediate dead ball. The batter is out and no runners advance. The rule applies with at least first base is occupied. It is in place to prevent cheap double plays. It is a judgement call.
In response to a couple of questions on here. The ruling the umpire made is that the infielder intentionally dropped a line drive. The result of the ruling is as follows: (1) the ball is dead immediately (2) the batter is ruled automatically out and (3) all other runners on base have to return to the base they occupied at the time of the pitch. The rule for an intentional drop of a line drive applies anytime there is a possible double play from a force: runners on first only; first and second; bases loaded or runners on first and third. The infield fly rule DOES NOT apply to line drives, fly balls from bunts or fly balls that cannot be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort. Since this was a line drive, the infield fly rule DOES NOT apply. The rule for an intentional drop of a line drive is a separate rule from the infield fly rule. As you might have guessed, both the infield fly rule and the rule about intentionally dropping a line drive are designed to protect the base runners and prevent the defense from getting a cheap double play.
***** Nothing. But I DO know the rules of baseball. And I am not such a child that I think I am a better rules expert than the umpires. I am not special...but you are a fucking idiot.
the rule on the infield fly is that it has to be a fair, fly ball that can be caught with reasonable effort. It's the umpire's judgment entirely, but even "soft" line drives don't fall under the definition. I'm an umpire, by the way... just lending some perspective.
An infielder by rule cannot intentionally "drop" a fly ball in order to gain a defensive advantage and turn one out into two. What he CAN do is allow the ball to drop untouched to the ground, then pick it up and try to turn a double play; this is legal. But touching, or "dropping" a fly ball in order to turn a double play is illegal; it's unfair to the runners, who have to decide whether to advance or hold their bases based on the infielder's actions. Check out rule 6.05 (l) of the OB Rules!
Infield fly doesn't apply on bunts or line drives - only fair, fly balls that can be caught with reasonable effort. This play isn't the Infield Fly rule, it's a separate rule against an "intentionally dropped ball."
Actually, a line drive or a bunt CANNOT be ruled an infield fly. You'll notice the umpire in this video immediately called "time". On an infield fly, the ball remains live. This is an intentionally dropped ball under rule 6.05. The batter is properly called out, and other runners return to the base they occupied.
All these "must be infield fly out" answerers: where do you draw the line? If a 110 MPH line drive is 4.5 feet above an infielders head, that's within his leaping reach, so is that an automatic out? How about a shoestring/dive job - which by the way well could have yielded an all-safe infield hit.
It's nothing to do with an infield fly. Infield Fly rule doesn't apply on a line drive. By rule, the batter is out, the ball is dead and all runners return to last base held.
Your first sentence: it's not an infield fly - in fact, nothing to do with it. Your second sentence: it's not an infield fly - in fact, doesn't apply. Thus the third sentence pronounces ... um, that it is an infield fly?
MLB Rule 5.09 (a)(12) is about intentionally dropped balls, not the infield fly rule. It states that a batter is out if: "(12) An infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases; APPROVED RULING: In this situation, the batter is not out if the infielder permits the ball to drop untouched to the ground, except when the Infield Fly rule applies." So the situation that occurred here is covered, not by the Infield Fly Rule, but the rule cited above.
It doesn't matter whether it was a infield fly or not, the 3rd baseman clearly knocked the ball down so he can intentionally get a double play. The ump will not call that an out if he gets the player out at the base he would run to if it was a hit.
Huh???? Try knowing baseball and reading the rule book moron, it has EVERYTHING to do with this being an infield fly. Because this play does come under the infield fly rule its COMPLETELY the reason the 3rd baseman couldn't intentionally knock it down to get a double play. It is the WHOLE reason the rule was put in the book so infielders can't do this and trick the runners. My God how stupid are you people???
chitownref I don't follow baseball very carefully.. I was looking at football referee's getting hit by the players and ended up with this something about an intentionally dropped ball? what?? So the batter is safe and the guy at home plate is out. I have ;no idea what I'm looking at
@@chitownref No this is not an infield fly. The rule is clear a line drive can never be an infield fly. You are calling someone a moron and you don't even know the rule. How long have you been an idiot?
Infield Ground rule got him. In case you are wondering an infielder cannot intentionally drop the ball because it could lead to an 'unfair' double play whereas if they just caught it it would be one out.
It's not the infield fly rule. It is the intentionally dropped ball rule. The infield fly rule is a similar, but entirely different rule that applies in different situations and is applied differently.
the umps got this one exactly right. You can't intentionally drop a ball to give the defense an unfair advantage. And that's what it looks like he did.
I understand the call that the umpire made, obstructing a play on purpose to initiate a situation in which they could further benefit from. most would merely classify this as a very unsportsmanlike play, however I feel that if someone can think of that play (dropping the ball for a double play) they should be rewarded with the two outs (if executed properly of course) It's a brains over bronze situation. They actually had a plan rather than a mindless cookie cutter line drive out
yeah but the infield fly is a bit different, because that's called on a pop fly not a line drive, with a pop fly the runners have to wait (for the tag up) but with a line drive there's not waiting it all happens so fast that I feel the runners would already be on the move toward the next base, slightly different, but I do understand both sides of the situation
Infield fly only applies to fly balls (not line drives) and is an automatic out before the ball even comes down. Rule 6.05 (L) only applies if the ball is intentionally dropped but applies to line drives AND fly balls - it also applies in more situations (notice the rule can be applied with runners at 1st & 3rd which is NOT an infield fly situation.
Good call by ump, that rule was instituted back in the late 1800s after protests that opponents would intentionally drop the ball to attempt double/triple plays.
i agree, im saying an intentionally dropped ball on a fly!, warrants a infield fly, but it was a line drive.. catchers can drop a ball to try and move a runner for a throw out, why cant an infield-man, when it isnt a fly ball?
As someone who played baseball growing up, and is still a fan of the game, I wish that wasn't a rule. There are tons of things that are "unfair" in the game, like the infield dribbler that becomes a single and the ball hit on the screws lined straight to a waiting outfielder. I don't see why a fielder should be punished for thinking on his feet. Double play balls are often hard hit ground balls that become two outs. Meanwhile, you barely make contact and it will only result in one out, maybe none. Don't really see why the game should get taken out of the players' hands here.
I don't think I would call an infield dribbler or hard hit ball to a fielder unfair. Rather I'd call It unlucky (or lucky depending on which side you are on). As far as the rules, baseball is a game that developed in a time when trick plays and dishonest play were looked down on. It is a sport that has been stubborn to change too. Many fans and players are big on holding on to it's originality. Even replay was a struggle to get into the sport.
You can't really remove the infield fly rule because then infielders would drop pop ups in certain situations like it was their job and baserunning would be absolute chaos because there's no way of knowing whether it's better to stay on your base or take the next one during a pop up w/less than 2 out. Pop ups would become in essence double or triple play balls frequently depending on the decisions made by the infielder and baserunners. More interesting, maybe. But a pop up should really only be good for one out unless a baserunner does something stupid. This play, I didn't know there was an enforceable rule against. I thought the infield fly could only be invoked while it was in the air, before it was caught. So if this isn't the infield fly rule, then what is it? Or does the infield fly rule have a clause involving this situation that I didn't know about? I do think the spirit of the infield fly rule is captured by whatever rule the umps were invoking here, and that makes it seem kind of fair but I'm still not familiar with the rule that says low line drives can't be deliberately dropped/knocked down and then turned into outs on the basepaths besides first.
Infield fly rule doesn't have to be a popup. It can be a line drive. Line drives are hit so fast that umps have little time to call it. That is what happened here. The batter hits a line drive to Lowell. It is clearly a routine play. Lowell intentionally drops a routine line drive. Same as if he would have caught a popup. The infield fly rule makes it an automatic out to prevent players from missing it on purpose to get an easy double play.
Hidious Vanity Line drives have a different set of circumstances, as do bunts. On a line drive or bunt, the call is not made until after the play has developed.
Hidious Vanity The rule is 6.05 (l). It has nothing to do with an infield fly. Intentionally dropped ball has a similar outcome of the play as the infield fly
+ruffo coyote but it takes the smarts out of the game. Smart thinking and unorthodox plays are some of the best things in baseball, and what makes it (in my opinion) the best sport out there
+ruffo coyote I know it's against the rules. What I'm saying is that it shouldn't be. It was quick thinking on Lowell's part. I know the umpires were upholding the rules, but I'm saying that shouldn't be an illegal play. Same with the Kinsler play recently where he let the ball drop in the infield with a runner on first, in order to get him out, to get that specific runner off the base paths. Quick thinking
It doesn't take the smarts out of the game. It prevents every game from being a joke where fielders are constantly intentionally dropping liners and pop ups anytime there are men on base.
What rule is that? There is a rule which applies for a catchable (on the umpires judgement) infield FLY. On a possible forced out and; of obviously, 0 or 1 outs, not 2, the umpire yells ('calls') 'infield fly' an the batter is out regardless (wether the infielder wants to catch it or not). This was a line drive, for which there is no rule for it to be dropped on purpose...
No, he could not. Any umpire worth his or her salt would never NOT invoke the rule after watching an infielder "make it look like the ball slipped out of his glove," then proceed to pick it up and try to turn a double play. That's what the rule is there for, to basically impose a penalty that rectifies the injustice of the defense gaining an unfair advantage. That's why the batter is called out in this situation, because the ball should have been caught and the runners not forced to advance.
This is called an intentional drop. The batter is out and the ball is dead. It is totally dependent upon umpire judgement. Unlike an infield fly it can be called if there is only one base runner, but like an infield fly it is in effect to prevent the defense from getting a cheap double play. Yes--had he guided the ball down with his closed glove, or just let it fall in front of him, he could have gone home for the double play. BTW--the infield fly rule can never be called on a line drive or on a bunt.
Matthew temkin, You wrote "had he guided the ball down with his closed glove, or just let it fall in front of him, he could have gone home for the double play." Not true. You are correct that if the ball had hit the ground first the rule would not be in effect. Guiding the ball to the ground is also considered an intentionally dropped ball.
It might be a silly rule, but it's done to not give too much of a big advantage to the fielders. As a runner if you run and he catches it and throws to the base you were on your screwed, if you stay and wait for him to drop the ball, he throws to the base you are running to and your screwed. The fielder knows what he is going to do as a runner you have to wait and see.
First of all, that wad not infield fly rule. I don't remember exactly which rule it is, but if, in the umpire's judgment, a fielder intentionally slows a ball to drop, the ball is declared caught and it is a dead ball. Umpire got it right, but this is not infield fly because infield states that a line drive is not an infield fly.
Guys, the comments here are getting silly. Textbook rule here: 6.05 - A batter is out when: (l) An infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases;
It's not an 'inflied fly' rule. It is a DIFFERENT rule. It's an 'intentional drop' rule. Although both rules are there for basically the same purpose. To keep the defense from getting cheap double plays. It is a legitimate rule, and it was called correctly.
how is baseball a sport if the ref decides if you caught a ball or not. thats like a basketball ref saying you can't miss the hoop and pass a basketball off the backboard for your teammate to dunk it.
Mikey114411 Rule 2.00 INFIELD FLY is a fair fly ball (not including a line drive nor an attempted bunt) which can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, when first and second, or first, second and third bases are occupied, before two are out. this is a line drive. so it should not be a infield fly rules
That's correct, Tropicoco123. But in situations where the infield fly rule does NOT apply - as when a force is in effect but there is no runner on second base, e.g., runners on first and third or a runner on first only - the "intentionally dropped ball" rule applies, and in that instance an infielder CAN take the risk of allowing the ball to drop UNTOUCHED to the ground, then pick it up and turn a double play. In that instance the batter would NOT automatically be out, and the play would stand.
I've never understood this rule. I know the purpose of the league wanting to prevent doubles and triples, but isn't it just the fault of the hitter for not getting a good hit? It seems like the infielders are just using good strategy....
Trent csqw I think you mean double plays; not doubles. The rule is there for the runners on base more than anything else. If this rule did not exist, the runners would be put into impossible situations. What are they to do? If they run, then the defense will just catch it and double them up; if not, they will drop it and still double them up. It's a good rule. The rule is there to level the playing field. The defense did nothing to cause the batter to hit the ball right to them. The rule negates an advantage that arises out of the normal course of a baseball game; not necessarily a situation the defense caused. It would be unfair to award the defense the ability to exploit an inherent advantage they did not induce or cause. Yes, it's the fault of the hitter for "not getting a good hit"'; that's why HE IS OUT - by rule.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg Yes, I did mean double plays and triple plays....You know what, you have actually used great logic and didn't even insult me when you explained. I have to agree with your argument. This is such a weird UA-cam comment, because it was actually civil and made me change my mind completely! You are absolutely right.
does this follow along with the infield fly or is that the same, not entirely sure i am a baseball player tho have been all my life and been a starter all four year of highschool
This rule is not clear. How could they correctly tell an intentional drop vs. unintentional? It is a stupid rule because if a fielder is good enough to control the ball this way, then that team deserves a chance at a double play. I wonder what would have been different if the 3rd basemen threw the ball away while throwing home. That is a risk but I wonder if the play would have stopped with the same result which is batter is out. An interesting variation of this would be if the runner on 3rd waited until the ball was "caught" and then ran home pretending he was being forced out at home and then argued he was tagging up and the run should count. Anyone know the rule on that? Is it a dead ball after this intentional drop? If so, that is not the same outcome as a caught line drive because the runner could tag up on that.
+David James It is very easy for a PROFESSIONAL umpire to tell when a PROFESSIONAL baseball player intentionally drops the ball. This isn't little league. When a line drive is hit DIRECTLY to a player that puts his glove DIRECTLY on the ball and doesn't catch it, it was intentional. ALL fielders at this level are good enough to control the ball "this way". It's a very easy thing to do. What the 3rd baseman does AFTER the fact is irrelevant because the ball is dead immediately after the umpire determines that the drop was intentional. By rule, nothing happens. The ball is dead. The batter is out, and runners return to their bases.
"PROFESSIONAL" umpires make a lot of mistakes so your method doesn't seem like it will work. Also why should it be a dead ball? A tag can occur after a caught line drive so why not after an intentionally dropped line drive too?
David James They actually do not make a lot of mistakes. They are the best officials in sports as far as getting it right. I challenge you to find a clip anywhere on the internet of a play where you can't tell whether the drop was intentional or not. Just one. Now, if YOU can tell, then a professional umpire would have no problem. If there was a potential for a double play by doubling up a runner, then there would be no REASON to intentionally drop the ball, so ruling the ball dead does not take anything away.
If by dropping a catchable ball allows a double play instead of just 1 out, then the fielder HAS reason to try to drop it in a controlled way. That is what the rule is for to help prevent that.
+Jon Matthews There is no umpire in the entire league who would not have called this. If this is not a blatant and obvious intentional drop to you, then you should NOT be an umpire. I don't buy for a second that you are one anyway - at least not above little league level. I challenge you to provide a link to any video of any MLB game where a ball is dropped "like this" and the call is not made. You have the entire internet at your disposal. Go.
If it worked would he have been charged with an error or the batter a hit? Is Lowell sacrificing fielding percentage for outs? Something you'll never see in the box score.
if it worked it would go as a fielder's choice (he gets the out at home), so no impact to the fielder or batter's stats. however it's not the sort of thing that would ever work at any level where the umpires know the rules.
It's a rule similar to the infield fly rule. It's to prevent b.s. double or triple plays. In the opinion of the umpire, the line drive was a routine catch so the batter in automatically out.
Jeff Hart ...too subjective on the umpires part.....how can they "know" or "suspect" it was dropped on purpose.....looked pretty convincing to me.... Routine or not....even routine balls can be misplayed....I hate the rule
Dennis Mackey ..im mean look at the umpires....not exactly " poster atheletes".....how can they rule on what "should be caught or not".....90 % of them dont look atheletic enuff to catch a cold....let alone a "routine" fly ball......
They need the rule because players could make a mockery of the game. Of course it's a subjective call. But then again, subjective calls are part of the game.
Kind of amazing that he's able to field the ball yet stay confident to intentionally drop it to then go on from there. When I played baseball I'd love to make a grab like that, period.
Okay, lots of arguing here. All I want to know is what was the result? Was the pitch and play after it erased and done over? Was it called a catch and therefore an out?
Sure. The fielder (Lowell) was ruled by the umpire as intentionally dropping the ball, to where the umpire felt that Lowell would have tried to start a double play (2 outs on one play). Can't do that! The ump ruled only the batter out, as if Lowell caught it in the air----it would have been an easy catch to make; but only 1 out can be called here. Correct call by the umpire. There are similar rules in baseball to prevent "unfair" double plays by the defense (infield fly, for one).
i tried this when i played ball, the umpire knows its an infield fly rule. If the runners on base advance at their own risk then the defense can make a play on them only by tagging them. so the play should have continued to see if any runner was not on base to then attempt to tag them inbetween bases. its a trick play for the runners, as they freeze on a line-drive then see it hit the ground the idea is to then move towards the next base because of a force, so then being off the bag and running at your own risk puts you in a pickle to be tagged. in which then would be a double play. the batter is automatically called out cause of infield fly rule then the defense can make a play on anyone off a base. the umpire should have not stopped the play and ran onto the playing field like he did. just cause an infield fly rule is called doesnt mean the play is over.
You're right about the infield fly rule. You're wrong about what happened in the video. A line drive is not an infield fly. The batter is not automatically out. Now in this circumstance, the fielder purposely dropped the ball in hopes of forcing a double or triple play. The umpire recognized that and made the correct call.
I remember reading the case play on this a few months ago. Ron Kupla made a hell of a call here. If I remember correctly the rule that was enforced was infield fly however it was indirectly enforced. 9.01c allows any umpire on the field to make a judgment on any play not specifically mentioned in the rules. In Kupla's judgment Lull did not field the ball to the best of his ability and therefore by way of 9.01c called infield fly. I could be wrong on that but I'm pretty sure that was ruling used.
I understand the rule, but the only thing I don't like is the automatic assumption of an out. I feel like a better implementation might be to cap the maximum number of force outs obtainable on such a play at one. If the fielder wants to drop the ball and force a faster runner at a different base, fine. But a second runner cannot be forced. And if the fielder then airmails the throw, everyone can be safe.
I understand what you are saying - and it's probably the best argument against the rule I've ever heard. I also like what you'd replace it with. It's a really good thought, but it still does not eliminate what the rule is intending to eliminate. It's not necessarily trying to eliminate double plays - obviously it does do that and that's part of it, but the real purpose of the rule is to prevent the defense from putting runners on base into impossible situations - through no fault of their own. Without this rule, the runners would almost automatically be put into lose-lose situations. Run, and the defense can catch the ball and double them up. Don't run, and the defense can intentionally drop the ball and force them out. Under your rule, the runner would almost always be put out with the force. I do like the idea of allowing the play to play out on the off chance that the fielder throws the ball away. This is a tough one actually. Though, more would need to be laid out in the rule - otherwise, you could run into this situation : Bases loaded, one out. Sharp liner hit to the shortstop who intentionally drops the ball and forces the runner from first out at second. Outs capped at one, so at that point, you can't get out the runner from third at home, so does that run count? If you ruled it a dead ball after that first force out, would there be timing issues as to whether or not the run would count? If it is a live ball, is the runner out if the second baseman then throws home and tags out the runner even though the rule caps outs at 1? If it is a live ball, and the runner from second rounds third and attempts home, what do you do? I think while you have an interesting idea, the rule you replace it with would end up being an unnecessarily complex and cumbersome rule to address all the different scenarios that could play out - when in practice, all you're doing is putting different runners in the exact same base-out situation. In other words, under your rule, which would necessarily be overly complex, all you're doing is allowing the defense to switch out a faster runner for a slower one, so I don't think the complexity would be worth it.
I realized after I posted this that there might be a hangup with the idea that runners can only be "forced" at one base. I'd make the situation akin to a walk: after any force out is registered, the other runners are awarded a free pass to the next base (including the batter). They can attempt to take more bases at their own risk - they can be tagged out once they pass the next base. So in your examples: If the runner is forced at 2nd, the runner who started at third scores. If the runner from 2nd attempts to score, then it's a tag play. In reality, your example should never happen. If the defender drops the ball (intentionally or not), the only valid strategic choice is to force the lead runner.
Exactly. Infield fly rule. It's there to prevent infielders from intentionally dropping the ball and creating force outs for an easy double (even triple) play. Almost always, it has to do with a pop out and not a line drive. The ump will normally hold his fist up while the ball is in the air to signify the rule is being enforced. It's almost always an automatic out, but it has to be caught anyway.
2013 Edition of MLB Rules 6.05(L): The batter is out when an infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases;
It's not like you're going to be able to use this bit of strategy much anyway, why not let it happen? Especially if they mess up the throw home so that their intentional drop turns into an advantage for the offense?
not exactly. Infield Fly rule is when less than 2 out and runners on 1st and 2nd or 1st, 2nd and 3rd. The ball has to be caught with reasonable effort (a fair, fly ball, by the definition in the rulebook). This is similar to the IF rule to keep the defense from gaining an unfair advantage. Similar concept though.
If you're wondering, this is an automatic out under rule 6.05 L of the Official Baseball Rules: "A batter is out when an infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases."
What Aaron & Willy said ;) Basically in a force play (a ground ball or bouncing ball), the batter and runners MUST attempt to advance to the next base (the announcer said the bases were loaded, meaning all 3 runners had to move, as the batter did). Lowell knew that, and even started the "phantom" double play by throwing it to the catcher. If the umpire let the play go on, the catcher would have forced the runner (no tag necessary here), and thrown to 1st base, "forcing" the batter out too.
what you mean to say is, it wasn’t a “pop-up”. But it WAS an ‘infield fly, being as how it was a fly ball (not a ground ball) and it was in the infield, after all. Regardless, a line drive is specifically mentioned, to wit: 605 (l) "An infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall returnto their original base or bases"
Yes. It is very similar to the infield fly rule. It is called the "intentionally dropped ball" rule. It applies if there is a force at second or third with less than two outs. The situation inherently gives an advantage to the fielder, so the rule is in place to eliminate that advantage - same principle as the infield fly rule.
I understand the rule Perry and the scenarios, I just don't think such a hard line drive should be treated as a fly ball. And while it's true that a caught line drive = a caught fly ball, from a reaction time perspective this line drives behaved more like a ground ball.Do you think a well hit ground ball by Mike Lowell's would have resulted in a double play?I think the answer is yes, therefore I would not have invoked the fly ball rule. But leave it to the umps judgment.
BULL. ____. 1. That was a line drive. No time to assess and do a fake job. 2. If that was intentional (it was not), he would have run an absolutely huge risk that the ball rolled away. Then not even a single out, and 2 or 3 or 4 runs score. Remember, that ball's coming at 100 MPH.
+Bill Woo The ball went in his glove and he didn't even try to close it. He just used the webbing to catch the ball and let it drop. It was intentional. No doubt about it. Yes you have time to think about this (you think you only think about what you'll do if the ball is hit to you once it is hit to you?) No it wasn't a huge risk. If you can't pick up a ball and throw it to home before a base runner standing on base still runs to the next base you wouldn't be in the MLB.
"If you can't pick up a ball and throw it to home before a base runner standing on base still runs to the next base you wouldn't be in the MLB." Wow, then by that logic, since this is the MLB, it sounds like every (forced) 3rd base runner should be immediately ruled out on any ground ball. By that logic they should declare a new rule, the "infield ground rule out" - because if you can't throw out every runner when a ball can be picked up, you wouldn't be in MLB.
No, it's a dead ball, the batter is out, and runners have to return to their original bases. It's to protect the batting team from having a double/triple play turned on them since the runners will freeze or go back to the bag. Just like the infield fly rule, except this rule applies if there is any forced runner on base (infield fly rule only applies to fly balls in the infield and there has to be at least 2 forced runners on base with less than 2 outs).
To just explain: it's not a matter of cheating but startegy. The "getting 2 outs and not just 1 is not the reasoning but that certainly could happen. The reason is to get the lead runner out at 3rd base. On a dropped ball the runners must advance. On a catch, they stay where they are. After dropping the ball and getting the force at home, runners are on second and first (throw out at home and then get the tag at third) the hitter must advance to first. Also you could get the force at home And go to first. Getting 2 outs but moving runners to second and third
![UCF Professor Richard Quinn accuses class of cheating [Original]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rbzJTTDO9f4/mqdefault.jpg)
Solid call by the ump, and a solid play on third base. Baseball is a game of strategy.. can't knock him for trying.
Can't knock him for trying to cheat? Ok...
Carson Meyer It is cheating. That's why they have rules. The infield fly rule applies on this play.
John Smith as a former pro umpire the IF Fly Rule does not apply at all on this play. For the IF fly rule the ball has to be hit much higher for that call. It's not cheating necessarily but its trying to gain a competitive advantage. The umpire's call was absolutely correct though. On that play if the umpire judges Lowell to be dropping the ball on purpose he can call what he did here. This was the right call 100%.
John Smith As matthew said, its not an infield fly, due to him dropping it for the double play, the infield fly has to be a high fly ball, that could intentionally letting it drop without contact of the fielder to make the DP. regardless, awesome call on the ump, and 3bag for trying it. Smart man. baseball is 90% mental and 10 % physical.
Matthew N Former pro ump? funny I couldn't find your name on any umpire list present or past.
And all 30 people in the stadium sounded mad.
joshjhutton This comment made my day!
joshjhutton you're being generous with 30 haha
+joshjhutton how original
+Alex Twist The Marlins franchise doesn't deserve fans with all the terrible ownership decisions they've made, can you blame us South Floridians for giving up on them? There's been at least three occasions that they've had fire sales and trading half the team away, ridiculous.
***** They have a gifted roster, not a shitty baseball team this year hopefully.
My childhood was spent watching this Marlins team. So many good memories, love Jack McKeon
I'm sorry
It's not an infield fly. It's a line drive that was intentionally dropped which is a violation of the rules. The umpires are 100% correct.
Lots of comments here by people who have no clue to the rule.
Roberto Alomar tried that back in the early 90's with the Jays. Same call was made and it's the right call
exactly like the announcer said, make it look like you weren’t trying to drop it on purpose. third baseman made it way too obvious it was intentionally dropped
I was first thinking that it may have been an accident. After seeing the replay, I saw that it was clearly a drop. Kudos to the ump for actually catching that live.
Good call....the smirk on lowes face was priceless.....he was like, "dammit, almost got away with it!"...lol!!
Lowell didn't even argue. definitely an intentional dropped ball. good call blue !
Everything that happens afterward is irrelevant. It is an immediate dead ball. The batter is out and no runners advance. The rule applies with at least first base is occupied. It is in place to prevent cheap double plays. It is a judgement call.
Great Ump, no hesitation and firm.
In response to a couple of questions on here. The ruling the umpire made is that the infielder intentionally dropped a line drive. The result of the ruling is as follows: (1) the ball is dead immediately (2) the batter is ruled automatically out and (3) all other runners on base have to return to the base they occupied at the time of the pitch. The rule for an intentional drop of a line drive applies anytime there is a possible double play from a force: runners on first only; first and second; bases loaded or runners on first and third.
The infield fly rule DOES NOT apply to line drives, fly balls from bunts or fly balls that cannot be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort. Since this was a line drive, the infield fly rule DOES NOT apply. The rule for an intentional drop of a line drive is a separate rule from the infield fly rule.
As you might have guessed, both the infield fly rule and the rule about intentionally dropping a line drive are designed to protect the base runners and prevent the defense from getting a cheap double play.
Good call.
bad call. get over it.
*****
Being right is a good start.
*****
Nothing. But I DO know the rules of baseball. And I am not such a child that I think I am a better rules expert than the umpires. I am not special...but you are a fucking idiot.
FuckYouGooglePlus No dog, you are special =).
the rule on the infield fly is that it has to be a fair, fly ball that can be caught with reasonable effort. It's the umpire's judgment entirely, but even "soft" line drives don't fall under the definition. I'm an umpire, by the way... just lending some perspective.
Bring back the Florida marlins....not the melted box of crayons looking Miami marlins
Marc Edwards I was a marlin in little league
An infielder by rule cannot intentionally "drop" a fly ball in order to gain a defensive advantage and turn one out into two. What he CAN do is allow the ball to drop untouched to the ground, then pick it up and try to turn a double play; this is legal. But touching, or "dropping" a fly ball in order to turn a double play is illegal; it's unfair to the runners, who have to decide whether to advance or hold their bases based on the infielder's actions. Check out rule 6.05 (l) of the OB Rules!
Im a ump and the rule says if a player intentionally drops a line drive the ball is dead and the batter is out. Correct call
Infield fly doesn't apply on bunts or line drives - only fair, fly balls that can be caught with reasonable effort. This play isn't the Infield Fly rule, it's a separate rule against an "intentionally dropped ball."
At first I didn't understand this rule, but after watching this, it makes total sense.
Darkkefka "Since".
WeFreestyleForever A period goes before the quotation mark.
Nice try, my brother.
:-)
No. A period ends a sentence.
Joseph Miller It doesn't matter, he was still too ignorant to fix it.
Michael Cadenhead Am I the only one who actually noticed that it was supposed to be "sense" and not "since"?
Actually, a line drive or a bunt CANNOT be ruled an infield fly. You'll notice the umpire in this video immediately called "time". On an infield fly, the ball remains live. This is an intentionally dropped ball under rule 6.05. The batter is properly called out, and other runners return to the base they occupied.
All these "must be infield fly out" answerers: where do you draw the line? If a 110 MPH line drive is 4.5 feet above an infielders head, that's within his leaping reach, so is that an automatic out? How about a shoestring/dive job - which by the way well could have yielded an all-safe infield hit.
WTF you're so stupid. Its the umpires decision. So no, that is not an infield fly rule dumbass.
Thank you for straightening that out for everyone Jack!
It's nothing to do with an infield fly. Infield Fly rule doesn't apply on a line drive. By rule, the batter is out, the ball is dead and all runners return to last base held.
Your first sentence: it's not an infield fly - in fact, nothing to do with it. Your second sentence: it's not an infield fly - in fact, doesn't apply. Thus the third sentence pronounces ... um, that it is an infield fly?
MLB Rule 5.09 (a)(12) is about intentionally dropped balls, not the infield fly rule.
It states that a batter is out if: "(12) An infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases;
APPROVED RULING: In this situation, the batter is not out if the infielder permits the ball to drop untouched to
the ground, except when the Infield Fly rule applies."
So the situation that occurred here is covered, not by the Infield Fly Rule, but the rule cited above.
Because a hard hit grounder the baserunner runs straight away, pop fly and they tag up. Also, soft line drives can NOT be a infield fly.
It doesn't matter whether it was a infield fly or not, the 3rd baseman clearly knocked the ball down so he can intentionally get a double play. The ump will not call that an out if he gets the player out at the base he would run to if it was a hit.
What?????
Huh???? Try knowing baseball and reading the rule book moron, it has EVERYTHING to do with this being an infield fly. Because this play does come under the infield fly rule its COMPLETELY the reason the 3rd baseman couldn't intentionally knock it down to get a double play. It is the WHOLE reason the rule was put in the book so infielders can't do this and trick the runners. My God how stupid are you people???
chitownref
I don't follow baseball very carefully.. I was looking at football referee's getting hit by the players and ended up with this something about an intentionally dropped ball? what?? So the batter is safe and the guy at home plate is out. I have ;no idea what I'm looking at
line drives are not under INFIELD FLY RULES dumbass.
@@chitownref No this is not an infield fly. The rule is clear a line drive can never be an infield fly. You are calling someone a moron and you don't even know the rule. How long have you been an idiot?
the rule does not reference a fly ball, just a fair batted ball in flight.
Infield Ground rule got him. In case you are wondering an infielder cannot intentionally drop the ball because it could lead to an 'unfair' double play whereas if they just caught it it would be one out.
I believe you mean the infield fly rule.
Yes you are right, thank you for correcting me I was thinking of the outfield ground rule thing.
It's not the infield fly rule. It is the intentionally dropped ball rule. The infield fly rule is a similar, but entirely different rule that applies in different situations and is applied differently.
@@anthonyjackson4801 WTF is the outfield ground rule thing?
the umps got this one exactly right. You can't intentionally drop a ball to give the defense an unfair advantage. And that's what it looks like he did.
I understand the call that the umpire made, obstructing a play on purpose to initiate a situation in which they could further benefit from. most would merely classify this as a very unsportsmanlike play, however I feel that if someone can think of that play (dropping the ball for a double play) they should be rewarded with the two outs (if executed properly of course) It's a brains over bronze situation. They actually had a plan rather than a mindless cookie cutter line drive out
It's not exactly rocket science, it's a pretty obvious move. It's something that was done a lot before the infield fly rule (before 1901).
yeah but the infield fly is a bit different, because that's called on a pop fly not a line drive, with a pop fly the runners have to wait (for the tag up) but with a line drive there's not waiting it all happens so fast that I feel the runners would already be on the move toward the next base, slightly different, but I do understand both sides of the situation
Tom Griffiths brawns - bronze, sounds alike. hahaha
Baseball players have been clever enough to try to pull this kind of thing before, and that's why the infield fly rule was invented.
viperasp Yes, yes they do, which explains why I used the wrong one while typing my long comment
Infield fly only applies to fly balls (not line drives) and is an automatic out before the ball even comes down.
Rule 6.05 (L) only applies if the ball is intentionally dropped but applies to line drives AND fly balls - it also applies in more situations (notice the rule can be applied with runners at 1st & 3rd which is NOT an infield fly situation.
Good call by ump, that rule was instituted back in the late 1800s after protests that opponents would intentionally drop the ball to attempt double/triple plays.
thats called an infield fly, he was trying for the double on a line drive.. 2 different things there buddy.. that was a shit call by the ump
n3r0wolfe
The infield fly rule is completely different from an intentionally dropped ball.
i agree, im saying an intentionally dropped ball on a fly!, warrants a infield fly, but it was a line drive.. catchers can drop a ball to try and move a runner for a throw out, why cant an infield-man, when it isnt a fly ball?
n3r0wolfe
because it's a palpably unfair act.
They didn't call an infield fly rule. They called an 'intentional drop' rule. They are two different rules.
As someone who played baseball growing up, and is still a fan of the game, I wish that wasn't a rule. There are tons of things that are "unfair" in the game, like the infield dribbler that becomes a single and the ball hit on the screws lined straight to a waiting outfielder. I don't see why a fielder should be punished for thinking on his feet. Double play balls are often hard hit ground balls that become two outs. Meanwhile, you barely make contact and it will only result in one out, maybe none. Don't really see why the game should get taken out of the players' hands here.
That's a fair argument, Justin. Ever considered writing to the rules committee? (Seriously.)
It is basically the infield fly rule only the umpires don't have time to alert anyone. So if this goes, so does the IFR.
Joe Deer Right. That's totally fine with me.
I don't think I would call an infield dribbler or hard hit ball to a fielder unfair. Rather I'd call It unlucky (or lucky depending on which side you are on).
As far as the rules, baseball is a game that developed in a time when trick plays and dishonest play were looked down on. It is a sport that has been stubborn to change too. Many fans and players are big on holding on to it's originality. Even replay was a struggle to get into the sport.
You can't really remove the infield fly rule because then infielders would drop pop ups in certain situations like it was their job and baserunning would be absolute chaos because there's no way of knowing whether it's better to stay on your base or take the next one during a pop up w/less than 2 out. Pop ups would become in essence double or triple play balls frequently depending on the decisions made by the infielder and baserunners. More interesting, maybe. But a pop up should really only be good for one out unless a baserunner does something stupid.
This play, I didn't know there was an enforceable rule against. I thought the infield fly could only be invoked while it was in the air, before it was caught. So if this isn't the infield fly rule, then what is it? Or does the infield fly rule have a clause involving this situation that I didn't know about? I do think the spirit of the infield fly rule is captured by whatever rule the umps were invoking here, and that makes it seem kind of fair but I'm still not familiar with the rule that says low line drives can't be deliberately dropped/knocked down and then turned into outs on the basepaths besides first.
Excellent call. Excellent mechanic by the plate ump. Great job.
Infield fly rule doesn't have to be a popup. It can be a line drive. Line drives are hit so fast that umps have little time to call it. That is what happened here. The batter hits a line drive to Lowell. It is clearly a routine play. Lowell intentionally drops a routine line drive. Same as if he would have caught a popup. The infield fly rule makes it an automatic out to prevent players from missing it on purpose to get an easy double play.
Hidious Vanity Line drives have a different set of circumstances, as do bunts. On a line drive or bunt, the call is not made until after the play has developed.
Adam Moreira There is no call to be made on bunts.
Hidious Vanity The rule is 6.05 (l). It has nothing to do with an infield fly. Intentionally dropped ball has a similar outcome of the play as the infield fly
Sean Cochrane And as opposed to an infield fly where the ball remains live, with an intentional drop is the ball dead immediately?
Jake Stanz If the infield fly rule is in place then yes the batter is out and all runners return to their last legally occupied base.
The ump did not disallow it...the rules disallowed it!
The umpire just enforced what was already there.
Great play and smart thinking by Lowell. Too bad it wasn't allowed. That just takes the smarts out of the game
+ruffo coyote but it takes the smarts out of the game. Smart thinking and unorthodox plays are some of the best things in baseball, and what makes it (in my opinion) the best sport out there
+ruffo coyote I know it's against the rules. What I'm saying is that it shouldn't be. It was quick thinking on Lowell's part. I know the umpires were upholding the rules, but I'm saying that shouldn't be an illegal play. Same with the Kinsler play recently where he let the ball drop in the infield with a runner on first, in order to get him out, to get that specific runner off the base paths. Quick thinking
It doesn't take the smarts out of the game. It prevents every game from being a joke where fielders are constantly intentionally dropping liners and pop ups anytime there are men on base.
What rule is that? There is a rule which applies for a catchable (on the umpires judgement) infield FLY. On a possible forced out and; of obviously, 0 or 1 outs, not 2, the umpire yells ('calls') 'infield fly' an the batter is out regardless (wether the infielder wants to catch it or not). This was a line drive, for which there is no rule for it to be dropped on purpose...
Non Plus Ultra
Yes there is. The intentionally dropped ball rule predates the infield fly rule.
No, he could not. Any umpire worth his or her salt would never NOT invoke the rule after watching an infielder "make it look like the ball slipped out of his glove," then proceed to pick it up and try to turn a double play. That's what the rule is there for, to basically impose a penalty that rectifies the injustice of the defense gaining an unfair advantage. That's why the batter is called out in this situation, because the ball should have been caught and the runners not forced to advance.
I do this in kickball all the time
This is called an intentional drop. The batter is out and the ball is dead.
It is totally dependent upon umpire judgement.
Unlike an infield fly it can be called if there is only one base runner, but like an infield fly it is in effect to prevent the defense from getting a cheap double play.
Yes--had he guided the ball down with his closed glove, or just let it fall in front of him, he could have gone home for the double play.
BTW--the infield fly rule can never be called on a line drive or on a bunt.
Matthew temkin, You wrote "had he guided the ball down with his closed glove, or just let it fall in front of him, he could have gone home for the double play."
Not true. You are correct that if the ball had hit the ground first the rule would not be in effect. Guiding the ball to the ground is also considered an intentionally dropped ball.
The great Jack McKeon.
Genius doesn't count if it's explicitly against the rules. The rulesmakers decided thins kind of thing is shenanigans, not baseball.
Well, that's a silly rule.
It might be a silly rule, but it's done to not give too much of a big advantage to the fielders. As a runner if you run and he catches it and throws to the base you were on your screwed, if you stay and wait for him to drop the ball, he throws to the base you are running to and your screwed. The fielder knows what he is going to do as a runner you have to wait and see.
rjh00 it makes full bases less of a threat..
If they had to change that rule, they also have to let players in bases to not have to run to the next base on a hit.
First of all, that wad not infield fly rule. I don't remember exactly which rule it is, but if, in the umpire's judgment, a fielder intentionally slows a ball to drop, the ball is declared caught and it is a dead ball. Umpire got it right, but this is not infield fly because infield states that a line drive is not an infield fly.
But what if he missed the throw? Is the runner still out? Seems like a fair play to me.
still out, it's almost the same as infield flyball rule
ohh I see now, thank you.
It's still an out, its up to the Ump to declare it's a live ball on the throw.
It also gives him the chance to force the runners to advance causing a double play no matter how well the runners play
Jon Sands It's a dead ball.
Guys, the comments here are getting silly. Textbook rule here:
6.05 - A batter is out when:
(l) An infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases;
i tried this in my beer league and it didn't work there either :(
nope, the ump caught on pretty quick
It's not an 'inflied fly' rule. It is a DIFFERENT rule. It's an 'intentional drop' rule. Although both rules are there for basically the same purpose. To keep the defense from getting cheap double plays. It is a legitimate rule, and it was called correctly.
how is baseball a sport if the ref decides if you caught a ball or not. thats like a basketball ref saying you can't miss the hoop and pass a basketball off the backboard for your teammate to dunk it.
Rob ert Its the infield fly rule. Youre analogy makes no sense
Mikey114411
Rule 2.00 INFIELD FLY is a fair fly ball (not including a line drive nor an attempted
bunt) which can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, when first and second, or
first, second and third bases are occupied, before two are out.
this is a line drive. so it should not be a infield fly rules
Wei Sheng as I stated in another comment I was wrong. This falls under rule I believe they said 6.05
Mikey114411 that's right. Rule 6.05(L)
Rob ert you obviously dont know and dont get the game
or any sport for that matter
That's correct, Tropicoco123. But in situations where the infield fly rule does NOT apply - as when a force is in effect but there is no runner on second base, e.g., runners on first and third or a runner on first only - the "intentionally dropped ball" rule applies, and in that instance an infielder CAN take the risk of allowing the ball to drop UNTOUCHED to the ground, then pick it up and turn a double play. In that instance the batter would NOT automatically be out, and the play would stand.
I've never understood this rule. I know the purpose of the league wanting to prevent doubles and triples, but isn't it just the fault of the hitter for not getting a good hit? It seems like the infielders are just using good strategy....
Trent csqw I think you mean double plays; not doubles. The rule is there for the runners on base more than anything else. If this rule did not exist, the runners would be put into impossible situations. What are they to do? If they run, then the defense will just catch it and double them up; if not, they will drop it and still double them up. It's a good rule. The rule is there to level the playing field. The defense did nothing to cause the batter to hit the ball right to them. The rule negates an advantage that arises out of the normal course of a baseball game; not necessarily a situation the defense caused. It would be unfair to award the defense the ability to exploit an inherent advantage they did not induce or cause. Yes, it's the fault of the hitter for "not getting a good hit"'; that's why HE IS OUT - by rule.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg Yes, I did mean double plays and triple plays....You know what, you have
actually used great logic and didn't even insult me when you explained.
I have to agree with your argument. This is such a weird UA-cam
comment, because it was actually civil and made me change my mind
completely! You are absolutely right.
Trent csqw Hey! Well it happens every now and then!
***** I know very well what you mean. Your comment is appreciated.
Trent csqw He knocked the crap out of that ball, it was too bad it was right at someone.
you're right, except he's not calling the infield fly rule. This is rule 6.05 (l) - intentionally dropped ball.
how the fuck is there a rule you can't drop the ball?
it's cheating. it was obviously deliberate.
how is it cheating? if anything it's smart.
any unsportsmanlike conduct is cheating IMO. there us even a rule against it as others have pointed out.
unsportsmanlike maybe...to play badly on purpose...it just seems so silly, i guess, the way the game is constructed they had to make this rule.
+ryan phillips there is no rational reason to remove this rule. absolutely unfair on the batting team if they do.
does this follow along with the infield fly or is that the same, not entirely sure i am a baseball player tho have been all my life and been a starter all four year of highschool
This rule is meant to protect the baserunners. It's similar to an infield fly in a sense.
This rule is not clear. How could they correctly tell an intentional drop vs. unintentional? It is a stupid rule because if a fielder is good enough to control the ball this way, then that team deserves a chance at a double play. I wonder what would have been different if the 3rd basemen threw the ball away while throwing home. That is a risk but I wonder if the play would have stopped with the same result which is batter is out. An interesting variation of this would be if the runner on 3rd waited until the ball was "caught" and then ran home pretending he was being forced out at home and then argued he was tagging up and the run should count. Anyone know the rule on that? Is it a dead ball after this intentional drop? If so, that is not the same outcome as a caught line drive because the runner could tag up on that.
+David James It is very easy for a PROFESSIONAL umpire to tell when a PROFESSIONAL baseball player intentionally drops the ball. This isn't little league. When a line drive is hit DIRECTLY to a player that puts his glove DIRECTLY on the ball and doesn't catch it, it was intentional. ALL fielders at this level are good enough to control the ball "this way". It's a very easy thing to do.
What the 3rd baseman does AFTER the fact is irrelevant because the ball is dead immediately after the umpire determines that the drop was intentional. By rule, nothing happens. The ball is dead. The batter is out, and runners return to their bases.
"PROFESSIONAL" umpires make a lot of mistakes so your method doesn't seem like it will work. Also why should it be a dead ball? A tag can occur after a caught line drive so why not after an intentionally dropped line drive too?
David James
They actually do not make a lot of mistakes. They are the best officials in sports as far as getting it right. I challenge you to find a clip anywhere on the internet of a play where you can't tell whether the drop was intentional or not. Just one. Now, if YOU can tell, then a professional umpire would have no problem.
If there was a potential for a double play by doubling up a runner, then there would be no REASON to intentionally drop the ball, so ruling the ball dead does not take anything away.
If by dropping a catchable ball allows a double play instead of just 1 out, then the fielder HAS reason to try to drop it in a controlled way. That is what the rule is for to help prevent that.
+David James I think every single rule, not just this one, that involves intentionality, should be abolished.
Excellent call umpire.
As an umpire I wouldn't have called this. It was a firmly hit ball and I've seen plenty dropped like this, even at the major league level.
+Jon Matthews There is no umpire in the entire league who would not have called this. If this is not a blatant and obvious intentional drop to you, then you should NOT be an umpire. I don't buy for a second that you are one anyway - at least not above little league level.
I challenge you to provide a link to any video of any MLB game where a ball is dropped "like this" and the call is not made. You have the entire internet at your disposal. Go.
If it worked would he have been charged with an error or the batter a hit? Is Lowell sacrificing fielding percentage for outs? Something you'll never see in the box score.
if it worked it would go as a fielder's choice (he gets the out at home), so no impact to the fielder or batter's stats. however it's not the sort of thing that would ever work at any level where the umpires know the rules.
It's a rule similar to the infield fly rule. It's to prevent b.s. double or triple plays. In the opinion of the umpire, the line drive was a routine catch so the batter in automatically out.
Jeff Hart ...too subjective on the umpires part.....how can they "know" or "suspect" it was dropped on purpose.....looked pretty convincing to me.... Routine or not....even routine balls can be misplayed....I hate the rule
Dennis Mackey ..im mean look at the umpires....not exactly " poster atheletes".....how can they rule on what "should be caught or not".....90 % of them dont look atheletic enuff to catch a cold....let alone a "routine" fly ball......
They need the rule because players could make a mockery of the game. Of course it's a subjective call. But then again, subjective calls are part of the game.
i see your point...
Dennis Mackey regardless, an error should not benefit the defense. Baseball is that way, it doesn't allow players to manipulate the rules like that.
The only problem is that the umpire has to judge whether or not the dropped ball was truly intentional.
Kind of amazing that he's able to field the ball yet stay confident to intentionally drop it to then go on from there. When I played baseball I'd love to make a grab like that, period.
Okay, lots of arguing here. All I want to know is what was the result? Was the pitch and play after it erased and done over? Was it called a catch and therefore an out?
back when the marlins had cool uniforms
Sure. The fielder (Lowell) was ruled by the umpire as intentionally dropping the ball, to where the umpire felt that Lowell would have tried to start a double play (2 outs on one play). Can't do that! The ump ruled only the batter out, as if Lowell caught it in the air----it would have been an easy catch to make; but only 1 out can be called here. Correct call by the umpire. There are similar rules in baseball to prevent "unfair" double plays by the defense (infield fly, for one).
i tried this when i played ball, the umpire knows its an infield fly rule. If the runners on base advance at their own risk then the defense can make a play on them only by tagging them. so the play should have continued to see if any runner was not on base to then attempt to tag them inbetween bases. its a trick play for the runners, as they freeze on a line-drive then see it hit the ground the idea is to then move towards the next base because of a force, so then being off the bag and running at your own risk puts you in a pickle to be tagged. in which then would be a double play. the batter is automatically called out cause of infield fly rule then the defense can make a play on anyone off a base. the umpire should have not stopped the play and ran onto the playing field like he did. just cause an infield fly rule is called doesnt mean the play is over.
It´s different when it´s a line drive and an pop-up.
You're right about the infield fly rule. You're wrong about what happened in the video. A line drive is not an infield fly. The batter is not automatically out. Now in this circumstance, the fielder purposely dropped the ball in hopes of forcing a double or triple play. The umpire recognized that and made the correct call.
Yea, looked like he meant to drop it for sure. Didn't look like he even started to wrap his glove around it.
infield fly rule? because if he missed that's still in out and what happened at home? or did he is to throw out runner at home?
Rare to have an ump that knows the rules that well at that level. I had varsity umpires that wouldn't even know this rule. Good on him.
Great call by the umpire.
Basically, if there are any runners period with less than 2 outs, this rule is in effect. Infield fly rule has to have a force at 3rd to qualify.
I remember reading the case play on this a few months ago. Ron Kupla made a hell of a call here. If I remember correctly the rule that was enforced was infield fly however it was indirectly enforced. 9.01c allows any umpire on the field to make a judgment on any play not specifically mentioned in the rules. In Kupla's judgment Lull did not field the ball to the best of his ability and therefore by way of 9.01c called infield fly. I could be wrong on that but I'm pretty sure that was ruling used.
you are totally wrong.
I think you want to call this video "Ump makes good call and still gets shit from manager, crowd and announcer"
Greg Gibson, the home plate umpire, motioning to both infielders
Mike Lowell, such a legend here in Boston.
That was the perfect play for bases loaded
Cool. Just wondering why McKeon was arguing is all, unless he wanted certain slower runners on the base paths or whatever.
I understand the rule, but the only thing I don't like is the automatic assumption of an out. I feel like a better implementation might be to cap the maximum number of force outs obtainable on such a play at one. If the fielder wants to drop the ball and force a faster runner at a different base, fine. But a second runner cannot be forced. And if the fielder then airmails the throw, everyone can be safe.
I understand what you are saying - and it's probably the best argument against the rule I've ever heard. I also like what you'd replace it with. It's a really good thought, but it still does not eliminate what the rule is intending to eliminate. It's not necessarily trying to eliminate double plays - obviously it does do that and that's part of it, but the real purpose of the rule is to prevent the defense from putting runners on base into impossible situations - through no fault of their own. Without this rule, the runners would almost automatically be put into lose-lose situations. Run, and the defense can catch the ball and double them up. Don't run, and the defense can intentionally drop the ball and force them out. Under your rule, the runner would almost always be put out with the force. I do like the idea of allowing the play to play out on the off chance that the fielder throws the ball away. This is a tough one actually.
Though, more would need to be laid out in the rule - otherwise, you could run into this situation :
Bases loaded, one out. Sharp liner hit to the shortstop who intentionally drops the ball and forces the runner from first out at second. Outs capped at one, so at that point, you can't get out the runner from third at home, so does that run count? If you ruled it a dead ball after that first force out, would there be timing issues as to whether or not the run would count? If it is a live ball, is the runner out if the second baseman then throws home and tags out the runner even though the rule caps outs at 1? If it is a live ball, and the runner from second rounds third and attempts home, what do you do? I think while you have an interesting idea, the rule you replace it with would end up being an unnecessarily complex and cumbersome rule to address all the different scenarios that could play out - when in practice, all you're doing is putting different runners in the exact same base-out situation. In other words, under your rule, which would necessarily be overly complex, all you're doing is allowing the defense to switch out a faster runner for a slower one, so I don't think the complexity would be worth it.
I realized after I posted this that there might be a hangup with the idea that runners can only be "forced" at one base. I'd make the situation akin to a walk: after any force out is registered, the other runners are awarded a free pass to the next base (including the batter). They can attempt to take more bases at their own risk - they can be tagged out once they pass the next base.
So in your examples: If the runner is forced at 2nd, the runner who started at third scores. If the runner from 2nd attempts to score, then it's a tag play.
In reality, your example should never happen. If the defender drops the ball (intentionally or not), the only valid strategic choice is to force the lead runner.
chinareds54 Actually, my play would never happen because the smartest valid strategic play would be to catch the ball.
Exactly. Infield fly rule. It's there to prevent infielders from intentionally dropping the ball and creating force outs for an easy double (even triple) play.
Almost always, it has to do with a pop out and not a line drive. The ump will normally hold his fist up while the ball is in the air to signify the rule is being enforced. It's almost always an automatic out, but it has to be caught anyway.
Totally wrong
Good call by the blue. I have umpired for years and I would have ruled the play the exact same way.
2013 Edition of MLB Rules 6.05(L): The batter is out when an infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second,
first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases;
It's not like you're going to be able to use this bit of strategy much anyway, why not let it happen? Especially if they mess up the throw home so that their intentional drop turns into an advantage for the offense?
not exactly. Infield Fly rule is when less than 2 out and runners on 1st and 2nd or 1st, 2nd and 3rd. The ball has to be caught with reasonable effort (a fair, fly ball, by the definition in the rulebook). This is similar to the IF rule to keep the defense from gaining an unfair advantage. Similar concept though.
That's a bizarre rule.Takes some of the strategy possibilities out of the game.
If you're wondering, this is an automatic out under rule 6.05 L of the Official Baseball Rules:
"A batter is out when an infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases."
What Aaron & Willy said ;) Basically in a force play (a ground ball or bouncing ball), the batter and runners MUST attempt to advance to the next base (the announcer said the bases were loaded, meaning all 3 runners had to move, as the batter did). Lowell knew that, and even started the "phantom" double play by throwing it to the catcher. If the umpire let the play go on, the catcher would have forced the runner (no tag necessary here), and thrown to 1st base, "forcing" the batter out too.
The catcher wasn't even on home plate anyways!
yes he was
What if it was hit towards his left and he dove for it and really missed it, would the batter still be called out?
no
Mr. Misty May catching for the Marlins in this one.
what you mean to say is, it wasn’t a “pop-up”. But it WAS an ‘infield fly, being as how it was a fly ball (not a ground ball) and it was in the infield, after all. Regardless, a line drive is specifically mentioned, to wit:
605 (l) "An infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall returnto their original base or bases"
Is there a rule against that kind of play (I mean when it's a line drive and not an infield fly)?
Yes. It is very similar to the infield fly rule. It is called the "intentionally dropped ball" rule. It applies if there is a force at second or third with less than two outs. The situation inherently gives an advantage to the fielder, so the rule is in place to eliminate that advantage - same principle as the infield fly rule.
I like the call. This is why infield fly rule exists. Good Call
Outstanding call.
I understand the rule Perry and the scenarios, I just don't think such a hard line drive should be treated as a fly ball. And while it's true that a caught line drive = a caught fly ball, from a reaction time perspective this line drives behaved more like a ground ball.Do you think a well hit ground ball by Mike Lowell's would have resulted in a double play?I think the answer is yes, therefore I would not have invoked the fly ball rule. But leave it to the umps judgment.
BULL. ____.
1. That was a line drive. No time to assess and do a fake job.
2. If that was intentional (it was not), he would have run an absolutely huge risk that the ball rolled away. Then not even a single out, and 2 or 3 or 4 runs score. Remember, that ball's coming at 100 MPH.
+Bill Woo The ball went in his glove and he didn't even try to close it. He just used the webbing to catch the ball and let it drop. It was intentional. No doubt about it.
Yes you have time to think about this (you think you only think about what you'll do if the ball is hit to you once it is hit to you?) No it wasn't a huge risk. If you can't pick up a ball and throw it to home before a base runner standing on base still runs to the next base you wouldn't be in the MLB.
"If you can't pick up a ball and throw it to home before a base runner
standing on base still runs to the next base you wouldn't be in the
MLB." Wow, then by that logic, since this is the MLB, it sounds like every (forced) 3rd base runner should be immediately ruled out on any ground ball. By that logic they should declare a new rule, the "infield ground rule out" - because if you can't throw out every runner when a ball can be picked up, you wouldn't be in MLB.
***** What? Are you purposely being obtuse? That's the stupid comparison I've ever seen in UA-cam comments.
I'm sorry I'm not a baseball expert... can anyone please explain clearly what happened?
No, it's a dead ball, the batter is out, and runners have to return to their original bases. It's to protect the batting team from having a double/triple play turned on them since the runners will freeze or go back to the bag. Just like the infield fly rule, except this rule applies if there is any forced runner on base (infield fly rule only applies to fly balls in the infield and there has to be at least 2 forced runners on base with less than 2 outs).
Mike Lowell is the man.
I used to pull this move in Baseball Stars (NES) with great success lol
That's some fast thinking.
It would be an error if no outs were recorded and runners advance. Since no one advanced and there was an out recorded, there is no error.
To just explain: it's not a matter of cheating but startegy. The "getting 2 outs and not just 1 is not the reasoning but that certainly could happen. The reason is to get the lead runner out at 3rd base. On a dropped ball the runners must advance. On a catch, they stay where they are. After dropping the ball and getting the force at home, runners are on second and first (throw out at home and then get the tag at third) the hitter must advance to first. Also you could get the force at home
And go to first. Getting 2 outs but moving runners to second and third