Infield fly, a Balk, and Obstruction - you make the call.

Should NFHS make changes to their balk and obstruction rules? Here are a few interesting clips from this past Saturday. Post a comment about your opinion.

[@stevebrink1837]

First of all, in the other rules sets, there is never a choice in balks....it is either enforced or ignored. Only catcher's obstruction (NFHS)/interference (all other sets). The criteria is the batter must reach first AND all other runners must reach at least one base for the balk to be ignored.

[@MJHBaseball]

Correct. I was wrong in how I worded that in the video.

[@standyer7482]

I get what you are trying to say, but your wording is weak.

[@davej3781]

The high wind is presumably why they didn't call IFF, and yes, we usually do discuss wind in pre-game and how it may affect infield fly judgments. However, not calling IFF here was an error in my view: with the ball coming down near the 2nd base, it made for an easy double-play which is precisely what the IFF rule is intended to prevent.

[@MJHBaseball]

The sun was the real issue. If they did call infield fly, the runner on 2nd ran off and was tagged for double play. If they didn't call infield fly, they tagged the runner that left 2nd and forced R1 at second base. Umps should have yelled "Infield Fly, Batter is out" very loud, but certainly failed to do that! I'm still not clear if they actually ruled the infield fly or not?

[@davej3781]

@@MJHBaseball they apparently did not call IFF, as they called a force out on R1 at 2B to end the inning and piss off OC.

[@eauhomme]

@@davej3781 Somebody yelled "Infield Fly" loudly. Who was it?

[@davej3781]

@@eauhomme one of the coaches most likely. There's certainly nothing to suggest either umpire called it, because the correct verbal here is 'infield fly, batter is out!', there was no signal, and U1 called a force out on R1 at 2B

[@MH-Tesla]

@@eauhomme The video shows a text saying that a spectator yelled it. 1:19

[@allacesbaseball]

1) that an easy infield fly call 2) the balk was the right call, but definitely ticky tack 3) I hate high school rules, and your correct, the result of the play is what would have happened in other rule set, but to clarify, THERE IS NEVER AN OPTION ON A BALK. It's either enforced or ignored, but coaches never have an option.

[@nathangarciamuro]

Good video I like it. High School should treat Obstruction and Balk the same way as OBR so they learn, they are grown ups. The infield fly is an Infield fly since the defender was under the ball, if he didn’t catch the ball could have been strategy or a bad player. But it remains a la infield fly, the runners decided to run and since they didn’t know the rule they were caught and ruled out correctly.

[@Libertarian_Neighbor]

I understand the runner on 2nd being tagged, but how is the runner on first out on a force out at second when the batter was automatically out due to the infield fly?

[@logandombroski1179]

@@Libertarian_Neighbor infield fly was not called by the umpires

[@MJHBaseball]

So, a lot of confusion as many people think the umpires called infield fly. It was a spectator. They didn't call it. However, IF they did, it's still 2 outs. The runner was tagged leaving 2nd. If they called IF, then that's the 3rd out of the inning. If they didn't call IF, then the runner at 1st is out on a force for the 3rd out.

[@nathangarciamuro]

Correct, looking at the video again, the IF was not called; I don’t know why since it is a clear IF. The umpire might have through it was a line hit and due to the wind it turned to be a IF. Anyway, it was not called therefore runners had to run since the fly was not caught and they are forced to. But to me it is a clear IF that should have been called.

[@austinbarnthouse630]

The runner reached out and grabbed the fielder in that obstruction clip.

[@coachburford3577]

still obstruction. That is how I teach my softball players to get the call---other coaches teach them to run over players---I teach them to take them with you.

[@spencerrogers8726]

The Infield Fly rule was created to eliminate that exact play/outcome from this video. I thought most divisions called and enforced balks as soon as they occurred? And at least in little league rules (which I know this isn’t), the obstructed runner gets awarded one base past the last safely obtained base, unless in the umpires judgment the obstruction caused the runner the miss out on additional bases further than the 1 base award.

[@davej3781]

no, little league uses the same obstruction rules as OBR, except under the old pre-2015 rule numbers; so OBR Type 1 and Type 2 obstruction are Type A and Type B obstruction in little league. There is no minimum base award for Type 2/B obstruction - you can very much call Type 2/B obstruction and make no base award or even let the runner be put out at the next base. as to balks, NFHS is the only ruleset where balks are dead-ball and enforced immediately; in all other rulesets a balk is delayed dead and enforced only if all runners including the batter-runner do not advance 1 base. some youth and travel leagues use NFHS rules, so that's where you may have gotten an impression that dead-ball balk is more than just high school

[@spencerrogers8726]

@@davej3781 would Type A obstruction be obstruction on a runner where a play is being made on the runner and Type B where no play is being made on the runner?

[@davej3781]

@@spencerrogers8726 yes. Type 1 is the new Type A, and Type 2 is the new Type B. I've wondered aloud if Little League has any plans to re-organize their rule book to match OBR, but those who would know say it hasn't been brought up at congress. So now I don't really know the LL rule numbers anymore... I can rattle off the basic runner interference rule is OBR 6.01(a)(10) and NCAA 8-5d and NFHS 8-4-2g and LL... whatever. except LL 7.13(c), no one can ever forget that one.

[@willowbrook2717]

Just for clarification after reading through some comments, even if an IF isn't called verbally it is still an IF. Yes, it can cause confusion if not called but that was clearly an IF. The coaches and runners are responsible to know the rule. Now as to WHY the base umpire called the runner out at second is a mystery unless he was making the call on appeal of R2 not tagging up.

[@willowbrook2717]

After watching a second time, it appears that R2 was tagged for the out and then R1 was called out on force at second. I think that the officials did not call IF (maybe because of the wind?) and let the play continue. Not properly adjudicated in my opinion.

[@robertdouth8979]

It was actually properly adjudicated. The spectators should not yell out during a game and confuse their team. The players have to be schooled to watch the umpires, not listen for them. They have the raised hand signal for IF and neither umpire did it. If they don't think it should be IF (and remember IF applies to a ball that the umpire thinks the player can catch with 'ordinary effort' which clearly wasn't the case here) then they say and do nothing. This was properly adjudicated, but an idiot fan confused everyone on the field.

[@coachburford3577]

I have an Infield Fly, which still results in DP....R2 was tagged on way to 3rd and batter out. Yes, those are balks and NFHS results in immediate dead ball--it is never ignored in NFHS (which I'm assuming this was HS). And yes, that was obstruction by the 2B.

[@MJHBaseball]

For the Infield Fly clip: It was a Spectator that yelled, "Infield Fly." Not the umpires. That is stated at the 1:19 mark in Text Form, but most people miss that. Sorry. It's my understanding that the umpires did not call infield fly. I'd like to hear if anyone can make an argument for NOT calling Infield Fly in this situation.

[@eauhomme]

Thanks for clarifying. It seems like an obvious call, and then to have a spectator call it adds to the confusion. As for the person who stated the correct "Infield Fly, Batter is Out" mechanic, yes, that is the correct mechanic but I have seen umpires fail to say it correctly for some reason or another, especially when calling it late and/or at lower levels.

[@iiiiJohnKing4iiii]

My guess is it didn't fulfill the infield fly requirement in the eyes of the ump of "An infielder must be able to catch the ball with ordinary effort." -- either due to the sun being directly above, the fielder's positioning and perceived struggle to field the ball after its apex by the ump, or a combination. Or the ump blew it.

[@michaelcaldwell8512]

The IF was correct when the SS tagged the runner. Throwing to second and calling that runner out was incorrect. The tagged runner and batter were out.

[@JPINFV]

Except it didn't seem like there was an IFR mechanic given. If the batter runner wasn't actually called out on IFR then there's a force play meaning that R2 has to run. If IFR was actually called, then it's possible that R2 would have stayed at 2nd.

[@johnleonard6878]

I didn't see the umpire point that they were calling the IF. What runner was out at second?

[@eauhomme]

@@johnleonard6878 I couldn't see it from the home plate view, but if you watch it from the outfield view, you can see when the runner leaves second, he is tagged by the shortstop and immediately called out by the umpire. Then when the ball is thrown to second, the base umpire calls the same runner out again. Very confusing, especially if you don't see the first out call. Before seeing the play from the outfield cam, I was trying to figure out how they could have called that runner out on appeal--if the ball was not caught, it doesn't matter that the runner left early. Only when I saw the runner get tagged and get called out immediately did it make any sense. Calling him out again only added to the confusion. It would have been more appropriate, I believe, for the umpire to say "he was already out on the tag."

[@johnleonard6878]

Some people say umpires did not call I.F. so the runner at first was the force at second

[@eauhomme]

@@johnleonard6878 Somebody called it. You can clearly hear it. Was it a coach? A fan? A player? I clearly heard "Infield Fly" before that ball landed, though nobody said, "Batter is Out".

[@nickbrown6916]

I don’t understand obstruction in NFHS or balk. No need for either rule to be different from OBR. I’ll go on to add, with the shortage of umps should would be easier to train guys and keep things on track without so many rule sets.

[@austinbarnthouse630]

Balk question. The pitcher is MOST DEFINITELY pushing the limit of a discernible pause. Again, can’t argue with the umps call. Could go either way. And that’s after watching it several times.

[@gregg.9420]

I agree that it’s an easy infield fly call. I just don’t understand the delayed out called at second. Infield fly… Batter is out… not a dead ball. Runners may choose to run at their own risk. Runner at first stayed. He didn’t run. The runner behind him (Batter-Runner) is out on the infield fly, thus removing the force. Just because the runner at 2B chose to run towards third, it doesn’t take away that there’s no force at second.

[@lanem4304]

1 - should have been Infield Fly - easy call, no matter what the wind situation is. 2 - spectators are funny sometimes 3 - now lets talk the Balk - I think the umpire got pressured into a balk call - and what is funnier, is it ended up hurting the team screaming for a balk. Now in all fairness, we only have the "suspicious" possible balk plays, so I don't have anything to compare it to (whether this pitcher was stopping far longer before on a majority of his pitches etc). If this was his normal "stop" every time he pitched, I have a stop by this pitcher all day long; the stop doesn't need to be a full second, it just needs to be a stop; which I have (I call HS ball too). How, if he was stopping far longer on most his other pitches, and then these were decidedly quicker and seemed to be no-stop, then I may have called it differently. As far as the difference between NFHS and OBR balk rules, I don't mind them; there are so many quirks between the two rule sets any ways, what is one more! 4 - very ticky-tack obstruction call; I think the runner was the one who caused it by sticking his arms outside his actual running patch to try to draw it. Either way, correct award for the call made. Love your videos, great work!

[@13USMCX3]

They just demonstrated why the IFF rule was created.

[@Libertarian_Neighbor]

I understand the runner on 2nd being tagged out, but how is the runner on first out on a force out at second when the batter was automatically out due to the infield fly?

[@johnleonard6878]

Umpires did not call the I.F. so the runner that was at first was out at second on force

[@Libertarian_Neighbor]

@@johnleonard6878 Got it! I heard someone yell, “Infield fly!” It must’ve been a coach or a fan, but I assumed it was the umpire.

[@robertdouth8979]

@@Libertarian_Neighbor Yeah the real tell is there is no raised hand to signal it, so the umpires can't do anything like yell out "no it's not" If some spectator shouts something it's not the umpires fault that a fan screwed his team likely.

[@ryansorensen4016]

Definite Infield Fly, doesn't matter the sun or the wind, any ball that can be easily caught by an infielder with ordinary effort. Balk, always call "Time" That's a balk, Obstruction, Nope, just because the runner reaches out to the fielder doesn't make it obstruction. In my opinion the runner created a very inadequate effort into the obstructing fielder.

[@cjgauss6079]

I completely agree, wind and sun are not part of the infield fly rule. If they were a smart fielder could then intentionally drop an infield fly on a windy day, to get a double play. As for the obstruction, the runner made an effort to get obstruction and started to cry to the ump immediately. Pretty cheap in my mind.

[@MH-Tesla]

Agree except with calling "Time" then balk. Better to just say, "That's a balk." I've umpired with guys that call time on balks only to realize the rules used are not nfhs and they messed up. If you're in nfhs, saying "balk" or "that's a balk" kills the play by definition of their rules. But if using real baseball rules, you're not killing the play when you shouldn't.

[@robertdouth8979]

Except the ball landed a good bit away from the fielder with even extraordinary effort. You said yourself that it is if it can be caught with an ordinary effort, but go back and watch the videos and the fielders look lost on that ball. It's a judgment call and the umpires correctly surmised that an ordinary effort would not get to the ball, and we have video evidence that they were right, and it wasn't even close.

[@MH-Tesla]

@@robertdouth8979 This is a high school varsity game. That's an infield fly no matter what. It's a routine play and if the player doesn't catch it, it's an error as well. The umpire might have thought since it was lost in the sun he didn't need to call it, but then what's the result? A double play. And what's the IFR meant to protect against? A double play. Therefore even if they think he's not going to catch it, they still need to call it so the runners are protected.

[@ryansorensen4016]

@@robertdouth8979 Just because they can't communicate on WHO catches the ball both the SS and 2B were capable of catching with ordinary effort, don't judge the outcome, judge the progression to the play, IF they are camped under the ball, don't have to dive to get to the ball, then it is an Infield Fly

[@Tippy7228]

Still figuring out balks, is this one from not coming set and pausing or something else?

[@tylerm7408]

I think they are calling it because he doesn't fully come set before he throws.

[@davej3781]

no discernable stop

[@youbluethatone1017]

Not having Type A & Type B Obstruction is a BIG OOF!!!

[@kellycejmer2024]

I'm not seeing the balk. Pitcher appears to come 'set' and no motion of the core towards first base.

[@robertdouth8979]

Also, there was no clear intent to deceive a runner or batter. That seemed ticky-tack.

[@1rkmagee1]

In my opinion, high school should change several rules. 1- The dead ball balk 2- The legal feint to third 3- The obstruction rule, where they automatically get the next base. 4- The jewelry rule.

[@ryanceason4658]

Agreed. In this instance, the runner made no intention of attempting for 3rd base. There is no logical reason to award a base to the runner when the obstruction had no bearing on the play. That's why I prefer OBR and NCAA.

[@Quidproxo]

The jewelry rule is essentially gone for 2023.

[@67L48]

First play. It's hard to know what was called. On the replay with the footage looking in from CF, the second out was a force at 2B. So, I am inferring that the audio I heard of "Infield Fly" was not from an Umpire and was from a fan, coach, or player. So, IFF was not called. The reason, I would guess, is due to the judgement of "ordinary effort." Wind or other conditions made catching a popup not ordinary ... a judgement that seemed to be validated by the uncaught ball. Without being there, it's tough to say. "Ordinary effort" depends on everything out there: weather, sun, field conditions, and skill level of players, to name a few. I can't really know those things just from video. Second play. Yes, I think NFHS should adopt a delayed balk call. About 5 years ago, my son was playing varsity (NFHS) and cracked a double into the gap. One of his best hits of the season. Umps called a balk on the pitch and I was really bummed out ... until they ruled that the double stood. Most of those umps also did a lot of tournament games and, for reasons known only to God, most tournaments use modified OBR where we lived. I have no idea why tournaments featuring 12 - 18 year olds wouldn't just use NFHS, but they don't. They use OBR and that causes nearly all of the rules confusion that coaches, parents, and umpires have. Last play. No. I think other rules should conform to NFHS. I think the same burden should be on both sides of the ball. If the offensive team even bats an eyelash at the defense, that's interference. We don't sit there and decide whether he would have field the ball and made a play. Similarly, the defense should have the same burden -- get out of the way. Here, the SS (or was it 2B?) was just not paying attention and backed into the path of the runner. I've seen this 20 times when a batter accidentally backed into a fielder and that's an immediate interference. I think it's fair and equitable to expect both teams on the field to be aware of the other. I prefer the NFHS rule that penalizes what is essentially illegal contact.

[@michaelmack9376]

The video says it was a spectator that shouted IFF so assuming that's correct then it appears that no IFF was called by the umpires. Still, the CORRECT call would have been IFF and the tag would have still been a valid out; so the final results were correct, just hard to tell if it was executed properly by the umpires. Appears it wasn't (which I guess the offense could use to argue they shouldn't get charged with the double play but they'll probably lose the argument). The balk calls its hard to tell. In one there was definitely no stop by the pitcher, definitely a balk; and not being overly picky. Pitcher should learn to stop and not blow through his set like he did. NFHS rules are odd on balks, but since they didn't ask me my opinion I guess we have to agree to play by the rules they created.

[@Quidproxo]

There are a few rules that NFHS needs to fix and you’ve hit upon two of them here (balks and obstruction). Both NFHS rules create potential situations where the defense can benefit from their bad acts.

[@robertdouth8979]

I understand why the umpire gave obstruction but I think we can all agree that was planned by the runner. He wasn't going to go to third, but saw the fielder made a mistake staying that close, so he gamed the rule by flailing an arm out to catch the fielder and sell the contact. I know the umpire probably can't risk the no call and explain that the runner reached out and grabbed the fielder far more than the fielder obstructed the runner, but when you don't have that type B in HS it's an all or nothing rule and since there was contact, the safe call is obstruction there.

[@misterholttv]

If a player goes out of their way to make contact with a fielder then yes it should be obstruction. I don't think the runner would have had a hard time avoiding the fielder given he seems to be on the backside of the bag. If anything, it would have made the run to 3rd straighter i.e. faster.

[@brokl26]

I have never liked the umpire yelling “balk” as I think the offensive team should get the best possible option on the play. Also, once the pitchers pitching coach or manager noticed his pitcher was not coming to a set position, that coach/manager should have called time and told his pitcher to come to a set position prior to starting his motion home. After all, not coming to a set position could allow the base runners to steal the next base simply off timing. I know the set position is so the pitcher can’t deceive the runner, but this pitchers motion is too easily timed.

[@davej3781]

NFHS obstruction rules suck too. The solution I use is to simply no-call obstruction when a base award is not warranted, when the runner was not going to advance and was not put out as a result of the obstruction. consider the language of the Obstruction definition (2-22-1) in NFHS: _"Obstruction is an act that... hinders a runner or changes the pattern of play"_ If the runner was never going to advance to 3B on this play, and had no problem returning to 2B as he intended, then in what way was he hindered? how was the pattern of play changed? I don't have to award a base per 8-3-2 if I judge that the apparent contact/conflict between runner and fielder was not obstruction per 2-22-1. Contact does not prove obstruction any more than lack of contact disproves obstruction. With a runner rounding 2B like this, also watch for him altering his path just a little and initiating contact with F4/F6 near the base in order to draw the call; don't reward that with a free base he was never going to take.

[@Quidproxo]

Enforce the rule as written. The best way to get rid of a bad rule is to enforce it consistently.

[@ronaldmead7643]

1st i would not call IFF. The shortstop just misjudge the ball. Never did see a balk. No obstruction. The baseman moved out of the way and the runner reached out and grabbed him then started crying.

[@garygemmell3488]

Based on the outfield view of the first play I would not have called an IF fly. However, the BR stepped off of 1B and onto the grass going towards the dugout. The question is could he be considered as having abandoned his base under NFHS rules? If he can be, there is no force out at 2B. The balk rule in NFHS is sheer stupidity. I coached HS baseball while umpiring Pony league baseball for my association during the HS season. During the summer the HS kids would play in the Colt division of PONY baseball. PONY baseball uses OBR rules and balks are live balls. In one particular Colt game the pitcher balked with the bases loaded, delivered the pitch, and the batter crushed a line drive into the left-center gap. The players, all HS players, just stopped dead in their tracks when I called the balk. I had 4 base runners stopped dead, 9 defensive players standing still, two coaching staffs who were clueless, and a live ball rolling to the outfield fence. I yelled out "Gentlemen, this is not high school baseball. This is Colt baseball and we play using Major League rules!". A light went on in their brains at the same time and everyone started running the bases or chasing the ball down. After retiring from coaching baseball I started to umpire HS softball. The softball equivalent to a balk is an illegal pitch across all rule book. In all levels of competitive fastpitch softball an illegal pitch is a live ball (even in LL softball). It is beyond belief that the Federation treats a balk differently than an illegal pitch. The HS obstruction rule is just as stupid as the balk rule. The simplest way I've seen it implemented is in ASA softball. An obstructed runner cannot be put out between the bases they were obstructed. After play ends they are awarded the base they would have gained if not for the obstruction. If they attempted to advance beyond the base they would have gained, they can be put out. Smart players will always attempt to gain the next protected base knowing that if they are put out they will simply either be awarded that base or returned to the previous base.

[@MJHBaseball]

Thanks for the comment. The umpires didn't call the infield fly. Why would you also not call it here? If you call the batter runner out for abandonment, then that's the 2nd out anyway. Basically they get 2 outs here no matter what. If they call the Infield Fly, the batter/runner is out and then the runner on 2nd would be out on the tag. If you don't call infield fly, the runner on 2nd is still out on the tag, and the runner on 1st is out on a force. So we basically get the same thing unless you assume the runner on 2nd wouldn't have left the base if the umpire called it.

[@garygemmell3488]

@@MJHBaseball I would not call it here because the 2B basemen was nowhere near the ball and the SS had not settled under the ball. It seemed to me the wind I heard thru the camera played a factor but you say the sun was more of a factor. The IFR is supposed to be called at the apex of the ball's flight. If an infielder is still trying to get under the ball at that point I can't consider it ordinary effort. The fact that the ball appears to have landed at least four feet from the SS and he is covering his head to not be beaned by the ball tells me he had no clue where the ball was. The book does not say ordinary effort under ideal conditions. Based on conditions, ordinary effort can change from inning to inning, or even batter to batter. I worked my games in SoCal and would, on occasion, travel to desert cities to work ASA tournaments. The wind would sometimes play havoc with fly balls and ordinary effort could change from pitch to pitch, literally. Trying to settle under a pop up with a 35mph wind is an adventure. I am not sure what NFHS baseball rules consider abandonment as I never worked HS baseball, just HS softball. I brought up abandonment only because I was thinking out loud with my keyboard. OBR rule 5.09(b)(2) allows the umpire to call the BR out for abandonment. The problem with having been an umpire is that I sometimes see too much. Even after my knees forced me to quit almost 20 years ago I still find my self seeing things the average fan is clueless about. The entire play appeared to be an anomaly from what I could see and hear.

[@billyray994]

There is no abandonment here. NFHS says the runner must enter dead ball area (both feet) to be considered abandonment. FWIW: The balk call looks correct. The obstruction call is a lil ticky tack as runner appeared to be only rounding the base. If the crew would have took the time they used to not call IF they would have made the correct no call. Also, I keep hearing people use wind and sun as reasons to modify the judgement on IF “with reasonable effort” part. I’ve been trained well by high level NFHS officials and I do some myself and we’ve been trained to NEVER use those to keep the call from being enforced. I can see where wind could be a factor as to how deep or foul a ball could get blown but that’s iffy at best. The sun is NOT a factor. It’s gonna be there or if not it’s lights. Can’t use that one. Also, cannot be a bunt attempt either. Id like to see the video view from behind the plate before the first pitch when the IF was in effect. Just to see if the crew signaled each other that it was in effect (and the double tag rotation).

[@timpimental751]

The coach never gets a choice of the play on a balk if the batter and all others runners advance 1 base the balk is ignored.

[@ScottWalker-js8bi]

I don't have problem w/ all 3 calls. My biggest problem is neither umpire gave a the infield fly rule signal, should make a loud and clear call on the infield fly. What is more concerning is the plate umpire in the infield fly rule video is set up directly behind the catcher and not in the slot. Wondering how he can see the corners, and how many fall balls he takes in the face.

[@MJHBaseball]

Neither umpire gave the signal because neither umpire called the Infield Fly on this. That's why it's posted. (A spectator called the Infield Fly out loud, but the umpires did not.)

[@67L48]

The problem is how do you "make a loud and clear call on the infield fly" when there is no call on the infield fly? That is, the umps did not invoke IFF. I think players expected it to be IFF. There's no way and no mechanic for an umpire to inform the players that the IFF is NOT in play and they should play the hit ball without the IFF protection ... and to ignore the spectator. In short, you can't make a loud and clear no-call. Not in baseball, anyway.

[@rosslehr7287]

I'm only similar with Little League rules, but, it's my understanding that the umpire does not HAVE to call "infield fly" for the rule to be enforced. If that's the case here too, then that looked like the correct call to me.

[@MH-Tesla]

In little league, you should call it early, but if you miss it you can rewind and call it after the fact...return runners and call batter/runner out. Not sure in nfhs. I THINK they can, but don't know for sure.

[@billyray994]

@@MH-Tesla they can. But then again, the key is coaches keeping their runner to stay put. After all, the rule is for them.

[@gregbutler5521]

Mario bro working the bases lmao

[@austinbarnthouse630]

Infield fly is hard to tell. Watching the video it doesn’t look like ordinary effort. Wonder if the wind was a factor. From the video, I can’t fault the umps decision.

[@MJHBaseball]

I believe it was more the sun that gave him trouble. I'd agree at 10U, maybe even 12U on using the wind or sun as a determination on ordinary effort, but in High School, if that pop fly is right in the actual infield, you got to call it every time. Remember, we are not protecting the defensive team, we are protecting the runners. By not calling Infield Fly here, the defensive team got two outs instead of one.

[@ryanceason4658]

I think the NFHS should treat balks and obstruction the same as OBR and NCAA. There is no logical reason for a runner, who made no attempt and would've likely been tagged out if obstruction had not occurred, to be awarded 3rd base. If this happened during an MN Town Ball game, I would've ruled obstruction with no penalties imposed. If the runner did attempt and got tagged out, my final ruling would be OUT since the obstruction had no impact on the play as he would've likely been tagged out anyways. As for the balk rule, I had to overturn a homerun because of this. What would've been a walk-off 2 HR ended up being a runner placed at 2nd and the batter striking out. This rule inadvertently hurt the team it was designed to help.

[@67L48]

There is logic to awarding 3B, it just may not be convincing to you. There are at least 2 reasons that are, in my opinion, logical and warranted: 1) Punitive. You award the base a means to punish the illegal contact made by the fielder. This makes is similar to many interference calls. Batter didn't earn the extra base, but the fielder earned the infraction and penalty. 2) Eliminate the judgement, Maximize consistency. Would a player make it? Would he have come up short? Did he really attempt to advance, anyway? Did he abandon his attempt because he wasn't going to make it or because he was obstructed? And, on and on. Making it an automatic call, same as with interference, makes it an easier and more consistent call. We don't have to play out an entire series of what-ifs. We only know that a fielder made illegal contact with a batter-runner and we no longer have to hash out the degree of significance it might have had. Not trying to sway your opinion on the rule. I was just answering the claim that there's no logic to awarding a base to a runner who would "likely" have been tagged out without the obstruction.

[@emich28]

In 10u parents want balks and walks.

[@Libertarian_Neighbor]

HS should change their balk and obstruction rules to match the rest of baseball. Unless someone can explain why they should be different?

[@danielcastiglione5328]

Umpires did a great job and I agree with every call made.

[@danieldennison3267]

That last call wasn’t a good call. As an umpire I’m not granting him 3rd base. The runner initiated the contact while the 2nd basemen made an attempt to move.

[@ronpeacock9939]

Yeah, the big differences cause us much consternation. I know I've chewed out more than one partner who killed a play in LLSenior division for a balk.... it's not HS ball.. delayed dead ball here.

[@allacesbaseball]

No idea how anyone would not call that am IFF. A balk is NEVER an option even in OBR.

[@MH-Tesla]

In OBR the offensive coach can take the result of the play rather than the balk. In OBR, balks are delayed dead ball.

[@allacesbaseball]

@@MH-Tesla No, he cannot "take" the result. If all runners, including the batter, reach the next base, the balk is ignored, but it is NEVER an option.

[@MH-Tesla]

@@allacesbaseball runner on 2nd score8 but the batter thrown out. Take the play? Or the balk? Up to the coach.

[@davej3781]

@@MH-Tesla no, that is not correct. there is no option after a balk. if all runners INCLUDING the batter-runner advance at least 1 base, the balk is ignored. otherwise the balk is enforced. there is no option.

[@MH-Tesla]

@@davej3781 So, tie game. 1 out Runner on 2nd. Bunt/ steal. Throw batter/ runner out at first but runner from 2nd scores for walk off sacrifice. But balk because stealing runner messed up pitcher. You're saying the balk is enforced. No run scores. Batter back to plate. Play on?

[@kpg-uo1tm]

clearly balked. Still watching the rest

[@wesleygordon6941]

Should have been called IFR. However, as a judgment call, it was poorly judged. No umpire raised there hand or called it in air. They should have, it was an unjust outcome, and the reason the rule was invented in the first place.

[@MJHBaseball]

Had they called IFR, the fielder would still miss it and the runner on 2nd still try to advance and get tagged out. The only difference would be which runners were out. That is likely why the offensive team didn't bitch about it too much. That being said, this SHOULD have been called 100%. And it is meant to protect baserunners smart enough to know the rule.

[@austinbarnthouse630]

I wouldn’t have called the obstruction at 2nd base. Super, super, super, weak.

[@a_doggo]

It's a balk, and yes they should change a lot of the rules, including the balk rules. Outdated ruleset for MS/HS (NFHS) ball. The umpires all think it's a bit of a joke. Not even a runner on second, but they've got a time limit on JV? Come on.

[@a_doggo]

The umps need to decisively call infield fly, do it loud, and make sure those runners hear it - at this level, you "can" kill the play if there's mass confusion that could result in a double or triple play on a dropped IFF to preserve the integrity of the game. That all said - these umpires should've covered this in their pregame conference, but must've only discussed the wind and not the sun.

[@MichaelHernandez-ke4jh]

Poor mechanics on the part of both umpires. They don't signal each other of the possible infield fly potential and then when they do call it, they only respond after a spectator yelled it out.

[@davej3781]

balks - yes, that pitcher was balking all the time. yes, the NFHS dead-ball balk rule is terrible.

[@eauhomme]

Makes no sense. I have had homers hit off balked pitches, and it would kill me to have to call one back. Fortunately, I have never worked under NFHS rules.

[@kellycejmer2024]

I'm not seeing the balk. Pitcher appearance to come 'set' and no motion of the core towards first base.

[@davej3781]

@@kellycejmer2024 no, he wasn't actually coming set with a discernable stop at all

[@kellycejmer2024]

@@davej3781 looks like he comes set. there isn't a length of time needed, just come set.

[@eauhomme]

@@kellycejmer2024 He's close, but not quite there. He slows way down, but never stops.

[@kerrytodd3753]

GHSA has the most screwed up rule book in the history of amateur athletics……in all sports.

[@umpireva5440]

Infield fly yes

[@perrytilton5221]

IF was correct, balks were correct, and the DO was not the right call from the view of the OF.

[@MH-Tesla]

Why don't you think the infield fly should be called in this situation?

[@perrytilton5221]

@@MH-Tesla IF=infield fly

[@MH-Tesla]

@@perrytilton5221 I know. But you comment says, "Infield fly WAS correct. " I assume you mean the umpires were correct to not call Infield fly in this situation. I'm curious why? But maybe your meant to say, "calling Infield fly in this situation is correct. " I'm just likely misreading you.

[@kerrytodd3753]

Infield fly for sure……balk call should stop play.

[@7thwardlord181]

This just made baseball look like a complete joke this sport is horrible