Any Umpires - how do YOU define 'ordinary effort' ?
- Thread starter EdFred
- Start date
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
While it is not part of the rule, it is an available indicator umpires have been taught for years. It is not absolute, but can give the umpire a sense of the ability of the player to field a particular fly ball.
Sully
Wanna buy jerseys/rings?
I understand the rule. Kozma did let that ball drop and both runners did advance by the time it was picked up. So in this case, there was clearly no chance for a double play. It makes for a good discussion, partly because it happens this way so rarely, and partly because it was a big play in a one game elimination playoff game.
EdFred
every day I'm shovelin'
The bold is the key thing here. I personally feel that if an umpire thinks "the player turned around to make a play it MUST be extraordinary effort" is laziness on the umpire's part. I always turn if I am going to cross the dirt grass transition, because I don't like backpedaling over that, and don't like backpedaling in general. But 95% of the catches I make are still ordinary effort, and I *could* have made without turning around.
Joker
Well-Known Member
it shouldn't be taught
-Six-
Weiner
just play in the grass so you dont have to worry about the transfer. just balls coming off it into your grill. nm **** that. let the umps make the call instead.
fitzpats
AKA - The Anti Ringer
One would think that this would be a simple matter. It was asked, of the umpires, how do they determine what ordinary effort is. Obviously teaching items are needing to be changed as I do not believe the fact that a player who turns their back to get to a spot to wait for the ball to come down means it is an extraordinary effort. Simple teachings like this are why there are still "deep" calls when there is no mat to throw to. Umpires are taught lazy mechanics on certain things, and those umpires that do well are those that read the rule book and interpret the rules themselves and have a justification to their ruling. UIC, I am NOT calling you out or calling you lazy, but you were probably taught that, and now it is being passed down. Much the same way the "deep" call is being passed down. Same as caught foul ball is determined by the catchers/batter's head.
I think NCASA and others have it right where they determine if the player is able to make a play routinely, regardless of turning the back to the diamond or not. Too many times, there are players that drift and continue to move to make a catch because it is easier for them to do so, rather than run to a point and sit and wait.
Case in point, I've seen pop-ups into shallow LF where the SS should easily make the play. One will turn their back, set, turn around, and easily make the catch. Based on the back turned, this is not ordinary effort and would not elicit an IFF call. However, I've seen the same ball go up but the SS doesn't turn. Instead, he backpedals the whole way. He will continue to backpedal and ultimately miss the ball because he misjudged the trajectory but still made it look like ordinary effort. Because he did not turn his back, this would elicit an IFF call even though it's a tougher play, with the way the mechanics are being taught, IMO. I understand judgement, but declaring that IFF is off the table because a player made a turn is removing the judgement for an absolute.
I think NCASA and others have it right where they determine if the player is able to make a play routinely, regardless of turning the back to the diamond or not. Too many times, there are players that drift and continue to move to make a catch because it is easier for them to do so, rather than run to a point and sit and wait.
Case in point, I've seen pop-ups into shallow LF where the SS should easily make the play. One will turn their back, set, turn around, and easily make the catch. Based on the back turned, this is not ordinary effort and would not elicit an IFF call. However, I've seen the same ball go up but the SS doesn't turn. Instead, he backpedals the whole way. He will continue to backpedal and ultimately miss the ball because he misjudged the trajectory but still made it look like ordinary effort. Because he did not turn his back, this would elicit an IFF call even though it's a tougher play, with the way the mechanics are being taught, IMO. I understand judgement, but declaring that IFF is off the table because a player made a turn is removing the judgement for an absolute.
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
This is why I have never had a problem with the BU helping with an IF (it is only two words, Infield Fly, not In Field Fly)
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
Joker
Well-Known Member
Do you have to run a school or clinic to have common sense?And how many schools and clinics have you run?
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
If rules were based on common sense, even fewer players would understand them.
But if you want to use common sense, you need to get rid of all your composite bats since their use jeopardizes the health and well-being of others
Joker
Well-Known Member
we're not talking about the rules though. we're talking about how an ump is taught to enforce the rules or make his/her judgement on calls
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
No, the umpire is being given an indicator, hint, clue or whatever you want to call it, to help him/her make a determination of what could be an IF
DeputyUICHousto
Addicted to Softballfans
I have a clinic coming up in a few weeks Joker, would you be so kind as to come teach the Infield Fly Rule?
BretMan
Addicted to Softballfans
Just to be clear...
I said earlier that I've heard some umpires say something like "if you see the fielder's back it's not an infield fly".
I have NEVER had that absolute expressed to me in a training class or clinic, or read anything like it in a rule book, case book, or umpire manual. So I would say, no, it's not being used as a teaching point.
I said earlier that I've heard some umpires say something like "if you see the fielder's back it's not an infield fly".
I have NEVER had that absolute expressed to me in a training class or clinic, or read anything like it in a rule book, case book, or umpire manual. So I would say, no, it's not being used as a teaching point.
irishmafia
Addicted to Softballfans
How would you know that? In 20+ years as an instructor I've never, nor have heard anyone else, make such a claim.
Joker
Well-Known Member
Joker
Well-Known Member
this is an absolute, not judgement
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
Irish flat out said it's not an absolute, only that it can give an umpire the sense that it might not be ordinary effort.
It is an absolute, and I don't agree with it. However, as with many things, it boils down to judgment.
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're asking. Which absolute are you asking about? Are you asking whether it's absolutely an infield fly if the fielder has to turn his back to the infield, or are you asking whether it's absolutely not taught this way at any clinics and schools?
Joker
Well-Known Member
i'm say there are no absolutes in making a judgement call. the ordinary effort part of the infield fly is a judgement call. saying "if an infielder has to turn his back to go get the ball then I deem it to be extraordinary effort" is an absolute. it is wrong and shouldn't be taught
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
I agree. And I think Irish was agreeing with you as well, which is why his very next sentence said that it's not an absolute. That's how I read his posts, anyway.
Iceman6409
Active Member
Every umpire is completely different than every other umpire. Judgement is that one persons perception and his/hers only. Here is a play that happened in my game last night. You tell me if this is infield fly or not. Bases loaded, no one out. Batter crushes a monster pop fly to shortstop. Shortstop initially turns and sprints about 5-7 steps, which takes him that many steps onto the outfield grass. He stops and plants his feet and the ball is still way up there but now coming down. He is camped out. There is a real good breeze at his back and it pushed the ball forward a little. He slowly adjusts and takes another 3-4 walking steps forward and easily makes the catch, while still standing on the outfield grass.
Now. Here is the ordinary effort part. He took, in the end, about 10 total steps. Half of them he had his back to me while sprinting out. Yet once he got there he waited and waited for that monster pop fly to come down into his glove. Just for the sake of this discussion, he took 10ish total steps. Ordinary effort play? Some could argue he turned his back while sprinting. Therefore infield fly should not be called. Others would say he got out there so quick and had to wait for the ball to come down that it ended up being a VERY routine catch, even while a few steps on the grass. Therefore infield fly should be called.
My overall point is there is no true "data points" when using the term perception or judgement. Those terms leave room for a lot of things. Every single player will tell you he was on the grass therefore it is not infield fly. That is now wrong in todays game.
So in the end what is your call? It is your "judgement". What will happen is some people will say infield fly and some will say not. In the end it is the judgement of the person making the call.
Now. Here is the ordinary effort part. He took, in the end, about 10 total steps. Half of them he had his back to me while sprinting out. Yet once he got there he waited and waited for that monster pop fly to come down into his glove. Just for the sake of this discussion, he took 10ish total steps. Ordinary effort play? Some could argue he turned his back while sprinting. Therefore infield fly should not be called. Others would say he got out there so quick and had to wait for the ball to come down that it ended up being a VERY routine catch, even while a few steps on the grass. Therefore infield fly should be called.
My overall point is there is no true "data points" when using the term perception or judgement. Those terms leave room for a lot of things. Every single player will tell you he was on the grass therefore it is not infield fly. That is now wrong in todays game.
So in the end what is your call? It is your "judgement". What will happen is some people will say infield fly and some will say not. In the end it is the judgement of the person making the call.