Lol at people thinking that was the correct call.

The ultimate mess is bases loaded and no out and a low liner goes directly toward the RF who is charging hard(really neat if it is the walk off winning run standing on 3rd). It is very close whether it is a catch or a trap, and the RF immediately whips it home. The catcher steps on home and starts running to 3rd. If the runner comes, he tags him and throws to 3rd. The 3rd baseman tags the bag and turns to see what the runner on 2nd is doing. He tags him if hes coming to 3rd and close. If not close, he starts running to 2B and does just what the catcher just did, and so on, and let the umps sort it out.

justincredible;1288134 wrote:Lol at people thinking that was the correct call.

It's subjective. By the way the rule reads in the MLB rule book, it could be justified.

Well protest was denied

Azubuike24;1288141 wrote:It's subjective. By the way the rule reads in the MLB rule book, it could be justified.

I've never seen anything like that called IF in MLB ever. He ran numerous strides back to cover significant ground and as he goes to get squared up he freezes as if call off by the LF. Not ordinary in any way...completely ridiculous...and completely typical.

Had he taken 1/2 as many strides like he initially did, squared while back pedaling a few steps....fine, but this was not even borderline. If he doesn't call that Matheny does nothing, and he let Gonzalez cuss him numerous times and didn't toss him.....they only allow that when they know they're wrong.


Didn't matter....Cardinals win anyways. Can't beat them.

Ironman92;1288163 wrote:I've never seen anything like that called IF in MLB ever. He ran numerous strides back to cover significant ground and as he goes to get squared up he freezes as if call off by the LF. Not ordinary in any way...completely ridiculous...and completely typical.

Had he taken 1/2 as many strides like he initially did, squared while back pedaling a few steps....fine, but this was not even borderline. If he doesn't call that Matheny does nothing, and he let Gonzalez cuss him numerous times and didn't toss him.....they only allow that when they know they're wrong.


Didn't matter....Cardinals win anyways. Can't beat them.

I think everyone agrees the call was BS, but the MLB rulebook words it in a vague way that essentially makes it impossible to overturn/appeal

http://m.deadspin.com/5949486/mlb-removed-the-phrase-we-dont-understand-the-infield-fly-rule-from-its-twitter-profile?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

ts1227;1288172 wrote:I think everyone agrees the call was BS, but the MLB rulebook words it in a vague way that essentially makes it impossible to overturn/appeal

Not everyone! I, the clown, sincerely think it was a correct and appropriate call, and I thought that immediately from the time it happened.

ts1227;1288172 wrote:I think everyone agrees the call was BS, but the MLB rulebook words it in a vague way that essentially makes it impossible to overturn/appeal

I don't want it overturned or appealed...just umpire with a smidge of common sense. Fredi Gonzalez gave at least 3 f bombs directly to the ump and screamed a very long time....that gets you tossed EVERY time....unless the ump knows he's wrong.

Putting 2 umps down the line is ridiculous....don't ump there all year and they likely feel like the lesser umps....gotta get their calls in.

Tiger2003;1288131 wrote:The Protest was denied.

Has a protest ever not been denied?

Cardinals were chanting "infield fly rule" in clubhouse celebrating. Probably because they thought it was the right call.

The same reason they were laughing about it during the bottle melee

Terrible call.

Braves fans looked like goats though.

karen lotz;1288251 wrote:Cardinals were chanting "infield fly rule" in clubhouse celebrating. Probably because they thought it was the right call.

They were just celebrating the annual holiday called "Braves don't win World Series." Can't blame them, its a fun time of year.

I hate the Cardinals so much. If they end up winning the WS ill go on a killing spree.

Rotinaj;1288352 wrote:I hate the Cardinals so much. If they end up winning the WS ill go on a killing spree.

Better words have never been spoken

The good thing about this is it was still a 3 run game. Yes I understand bases loaded 1 out. But this would be so much worse if it was a 1 run lead or tie game at the time it happened.

At first, I couldn't believe they made that call. But after I saw the wording on the rule, I decided my initial stance was wrong. I despise the Cardinals, but I thought it was the right call based on how the rule is written.

Let's face it, the point of the rule is to keep an infielder from dropping a fly ball and doubling up the runners who are forced to hang back to see what the outcome of the catch is. I think the reason why the umpire made the call so late was because it looked like Kozma was going to make the play. As soon as he bailed on it, the ump made the call. He probably bailed because Holliday called him off, but it's reasonable to think that the umpire saw Kozma bail and thought it was intentional in order to try to get the DP at third and second. Just my opinion.

The way I saw the replay was he called it an instant before he bailed, which was at the time he determined that it was ordinary effort due to Kozma being under it and waving his hands to signify that he would catch it.

It was a horrible, and incorrect call by a professional umpire who should be knowledgable of not only the wording, but the intent of the rule. The intent of the rule is clear and unmistakable even if the 'wording' is vague...that the defense should not gain advantage by deliberately misplaying a popup in/near the infield....such that they could get 2 or more outs on a play that they should only get one.
Viewing this....there is no way that the defense can turn a double play from that position in left field, and because of that, the rule should not have been invoked.
I would imagine that the call is protestable because one can argue that the rule was mis-applied, but in the end, it comes down to it being a judgement call, and the protest denied.
I would think however, that during the playoffs, MLB would have a protest committee on hand to resolve these disputes immediately. The logistics of having a game played under protest....the protest being upheld....and then having to bring everybody back a day later to continue the game where the protest occurred would be a nightmare.

mhs95_06;1288437 wrote:The way I saw the replay was he called it an instant before he bailed, which was at the time he determined that it was ordinary effort due to Kozma being under it and waving his hands to signify that he would catch it.

It's pretty close. The best view for the call starts at 1:41. In any case, I still think it's the right call.

[video=youtube_share;N4Z5MIaISrU][/video]

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2012/10/6/3464758/infield-fly-rule-controversy-braves-cardinals-wild-card-harold-reynolds

Listen to this breakdown of it by Harold Reynolds. Spot on, IMO.

The play he compared it to was almost identical. The umpire called it at the same time. The difference? That was a regular season game in May and not a playoff game in October. The call was made in nearly the same spot on the same hit and called at the SAME TIME. Where was the outcry about that May 16th play?

Azubuike24;1288456 wrote:http://mlb.sbnation.com/2012/10/6/3464758/infield-fly-rule-controversy-braves-cardinals-wild-card-harold-reynolds

Listen to this breakdown of it by Harold Reynolds. Spot on, IMO.

The play he compared it to was almost identical. The umpire called it at the same time. The difference? That was a regular season game in May and not a playoff game in October. The call was made in nearly the same spot on the same hit and called at the SAME TIME. Where was the outcry about that May 16th play?

Um because the game was on May 16th? Is this a serious question. Big difference between a game on May 16 and a one game playoff

The rules are the same. You don't call it differently because when the game is played. For this specific rule, the way it's written in the rule book, the result of the play (caught or not) does not matter.

Is your question serious? Are you advocating games be called differently in the playoffs?