MLB 1 BILLION IQ Plays

Same thing with the cubs grounds crew. More videos of them fucning up then any other team in the bigs.

A rundown shouldn't take more than 2 throws 😭

As a Cardinals fan, I wonder why you just dont root for the Sox

@@kylelococo7620 Hahahs

LOL...I want to shit on the Cubs SOOO bad as a Brewers fan, but...it's not like it's a stupid play by the Cubs. I mean, they've gotta assume someone is covering 1st or trailing Cain.

Yep. And it says in the rules that an umpire can still call the infield fly after the fact. He's supposed to if they blew calling it before.

I'm pretty sure it's only in effect with more than one runner on base.

@@Sindraug25 you are correct. It's only in effect if there are runners on 1st and 2nd or the bases are loaded with less than 2 outs. Which applies here (there were runners on 1st and 2nd that play).

@@TheDonkeyJote Oh, you're right. I didn't even notice the guy on 2nd.

Eh...maybe. They say a fly ball that takes ORDINARY effort to catch. For a pitcher...they may well say that was a difficult catch. I don't think it's clear cut either way. You're probably right, but it's close.

That was Holiday

@Repent and believe in Jesus Christ I hate people like you

You had to believe Ichiro because of all of his previous chase downs

Baseball has great rules...it's awesome to see players with presence of mind/wisdom to take advantage

@@disf5178 only sport of the big 4 where brains rival or outweigh brawn, and you don't have to be traditionally athletic (david wells lol)

He knew the paychecks would clear and he was no longer required to put in effort. Dude straight up stole that money from Cleveland.

His smile there lives in my head rent free lol

Can you explain that play? It was initially foul, how does it rolling back into fair territory make it fair? Also what was Swisher tagged out for, not being in the batter's box or something? It was a 1-1 count

@@omegamanGXE Before 1st and 3rd a ball is fair or foul where it's touched or where it stops. It started in foul territory and the batter assumed that's where it'd stay and he stopped paying attention but the ball was still rolling. If the ball had stopped in foul territory it'd have been a foul ball, if the ball had been touched in foul territory it'd have been a foul ball, but the ball continued to roll into fair territory and that's when the catcher picked it up and thus it was a fair ball.

I learned something today.

Not sure why they didn’t call IFF. It looked like runners in first and second, less than two outs, and a pop fly that could be caught with ordinary effort by an infielder.

It certainly seems like the umps dropped the ball on that one.

​@@G.Aaron.Fisher bu dum tsss

@@nicholasb8900 probably they was not fast enough. Umpires are also humans and such a short fly ball they might not have had time to come to a conclusion and make the call before it hit the ground.

@@martinbille8593 I agree on the short fly ball that bloops in the infield. Runners should know the situation as well and stay put. Not sure if umpires are allowed to place runners after not signaling IFF knowing that runners would never try to advance unless forced.

As a former umpire, I respectfully disagree. That was not high enough for the infield fly rule to be applied.

@@derekmillar8265 Except it was high enough for the defender to get under it, easily, and purposefully let drop. Which, by the MLB rules, is an infield fly. Not only that, they use this drop to pull of the exact thing the infield fly protects. A forced double play based on whether or not a fielder chooses to make this catch. You can use your umpiring background as an argument, but that just shows you were also a bad ump (in this situation). I've quoted the MLB rules. The rules are clear. And this is in clear violation of said rule.

Exactly

@@Wildcat2017 ​the infield fly rule is strictly a judgement call for the umpires to make. In other words if it’s not called on the field then it’s not infield fly. You can make the argument that it might’ve been appropriate to make that call but it can go either way. Regardless I wouldn’t go so far as to call it ‘bad umpiring’

@@javidappledehli2359 "judgement calls" very much can be bad umpiring. But judgement calls with a strict definition of when to call them are the easiest to call for bad umpiring. You can tell a fly rule was called incorrectly (in this case, the lack of a call) when the very thing the infield fly rule is supposed to protect happens on the play, while also meeting every criteria to make the call. Yes, this is a judgement call. But by every definition in the rules of the MLB, it was the WRONG judgement call. (which, again, yes, you CAN make an incorrect judgement call. You just can't overturn it).

What's that?

@@23davidian96 If a ball is popped up into the air with runners on base the infield fly rule can be called by umpires. When called the batter is automatically out even if the ball drops. It's to protect runners who've already safely reached base.

Rule takes away skill gap

@@its_mysterion not really. It just leads to an easy double play

@Finn Griggs There has to be a force at THIRD for the infield fly rule to take affect. That said I’m not sure exactly why they didn’t write the rule to cover this exact play as well. They should just make it force at second or third. There is also the intentional drop rule in any circumstance. But I believe the ball actually has to hit the glove for that to take affect. In any case they should expand the rule. And no. The infield fly rule doesn’t, “take away the skill gap.” Without it there is literally no correct choice for the runners at first and second with less than two outs and an infield fly ball. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t if an infielder purposefully drops a ball. Happened all the time in the late 1890s. Hence the rule. It’s a necessary rule...

@@blizzard8958 I think you are incorrect about the next inning starting with 1 out.

@@TheRealManbropig yeah I think you're right now that I'm looking into it, it's just something I heard years ago that I wanted to believe because I think that would be cool

@@blizzard8958 Wow..you literally just made that up out of thin air. It doesn't even make sense why you would think they start the next inning with 1 out. A game is made up of 9 innings with 3 outs each..not 27 outs. Think about it with common sense for a second...if you could get an extra out, then it would be common for defense to go for double plays when there are two outs. Thus getting a free out next inning.

@@FUGP72 Take a breather dude, no need to get so angry lol

@@SickRedApple You should probably look up the definition of angry before embarrassing yourself and your family again. Of course, looking at your subscription history, I can see why you have anger on the brain. Life's not working out for you, is it? Probably re-thinking your decision to not bother with college?

Cardinals fan here, but I’m no Marp apologist, but the 1st base coach is more at fault here than Matt. Heads up play by Helton.

It's actually even worse. He didn't fall for the hidden ball trick. Just watch the video, he never even SAW the fake throw happen. Helton literally could have just caught the ball and stood there and waited. Carpenter was just in lala land with his guard completely down, that's why he got a little chewing out from his first base coach who was not at fault.

Yeah it’s not really the hidden ball trick. A traditional hidden ball trick involves a mound conference and the first (or third) baseman walking back to the base with the ball while the pitcher pretends to have the ball. Which is why you don’t take your lead till the pitcher is on the mound. Because they cant legally actually touch the mound without the ball...

I can't believe they're describing it as a "1 in a billion play."

@@benhaney9629 No, it's really not, it's either or. It's not the whole thing where you have a meeting on the mound and the 1B comes back with the ball. It's actually the far less common version. How many times have you seen THAT work in Baseball? Not like...some youth travel team, but College, MiLB or MLB? That was definitely the most common version.

Freddie*

Yeah. What's up with that??? Any idea why it wasn't?

Probably before they created the IFR...

My thought too. The entire reason the rule was created was to prevent this situation. It’s a counter to the rule of runners requiring to tag up on a fly ball to avoid easy double / triple plays.

@@Herkfixer1 Infield fly rule was put in the rule book in 1895, it is in section 2.0. Yes, 1895, 127 years ago.

@@MichaelClark-uw7ex true.. guess it just didn't get much coverage until recently.

it's one of the rules that's left to the discretion of the umpire. The rule does state that it doesn't apply to bunts or line drives, or when a player has to make an extra effort to make the play. The only thing I can think of is that it appears that the batter tried to check his swing so maybe they deemed it a swinging bunt or that they didn't think it was high enough to be considered a fly ball. I think the infield fly rule should've been applied on the last one.

Most times the infield fly rule is called when the ball is coming down in a baseline with a runner trying to advance through it. In the last one the ball came down in the green between first and the mound. Their's no chance for interference on either side. A bases loaded situation might have been a different call due to the 10 people moving around in the area though only one runner would have actually been moving.

@@jameshendricks8526 The infield fly rule isn’t about interference, it’s about creating a double play opportunity by letting the ball drop instead of catching it. That’s why it’s only called if runners are on 1st and 2nd bases. If you catch the ball it’s 1 out and the runners don’t advance. If you let the ball drop, you throw to 3rd base, then 2nd base, double play - 2 outs. I think Patrick wall’s explanation makes sense about the discretion of the umpire. It seems like the infield fly should have been called in this case, imho.

@@christopheranderson9982 that does make sense though back when I played it was never called except the rare occasion of the base line. Runner looking straight ahead and fielders looking up, it was a dangerous situation. I guess as kids the calls may have been different

The infield fly should be called when a ball hit is in the air and can be caught with routine effort by an infielder. The pitcher is an infielder for purposes of the rule. The fact that the announcer said “he lets it drop” tells you that the ball was catchable with “routine effort.” It makes no difference where the ball is hit except for fair or foul if it can be caught with … “routine effort.”

If the fielder has enough time to think about whether or not to catch the ball, it went high enough to call the rule. The umps screwed that one up good.

It's literally in the infield fly rule that it can be called after it falls. And should be called after if they mess it up initially.

Inciarte put his hands up acting like he didn’t see the ball to fool the runner into taking a bigger lead off 1st.

12th inning, tie game, only 1 out, runner on 3rd. If he catches it, the runner on 3rd can easily tag and score. Letting it drop gives them a chance to not give up a run.

@@grantgates9164 gotcha. I didn't hear them say there was a runner on third.

@@m1lkl1zard8 You have to look at the graphic on the screen, they didn't say it but the info is there.

I missed it the first couple times also, but if he caught it, it's a sac fly and a runner on third base scores. That's why, as a baseball player, you HAVE to know the situation. You HAVE to be aware of the score, inning, how many outs, etc otherwise a less astute fielder would have caught it and lost the game.

No human in the history of ever has had a 10,000 IQ, of course the title click bait; the title is hyperbolic lol

It was an infield fly. The runners took off on their own accord.

No, they didn't run on their own accord, they waited until the infielder didn't catch the ball and that forced them to run. There's a rule preventing this situation they for some reason the umpire chose not to call.

I'm wondering the same thing. Should have been ruled infield fly. This happens all too often. They do the same thing when there is only a runner on first. To me it's cheap gimmick and the batter should just be called out with no double play because there is always a double play in that situation.

@@noone4479 It's only an Infield fly IF there is a force at 3rd. You need runners on first AND second before they can call the rule. It will never be called with ONLY a runner at first because there is no reason to. If the batter runs he should be able to stay out of the double play every time.

It's always the umpires judgment. I think why they didn't call it was that the ball didn't go high enough to be considered a fly ball. Usually a fielder need to be camped under the ball before they call it demonstrating normal effort.

In this case runners on 1st & 2nd. If the catch can be made in a routine manner it is an automatic infield fly call.

It wasn't nearly high enough to be considered a pop fly. It was more of a looping shot.

It is, and there was. The runners were dumb to advance.

Lol don't blame the first base coach because carpenter does something stupid. It's not little league, players gotta remember the basics and keep there head in the game when on the field.

@@MC-24 Scratching my head as well - thanks!

There was a runner waiting on third. Had Holliday caught the ball, the runner at third could run home and beat Holliday's throw home. Letting it drop makes it so the runner on base can't try to advance. I'm not sure the outcome of this particular game but it happened in the top of the 12th inning tied 3-3 so that runner could've scored the game winning run had Holliday caught the ball.

@@rustyshackleford1842 It depends on the importance of the run and when play occurs. If you're up by at least a few runs, by all means take the out. If that run would possibly beat you, let it drop. Also maybe early in the game, make the catch, conceding the one run, in the hope of avoiding the big inning.

Because if he caught it the runner would've tagged up and scored and since they were in extra innings they would've won

Depends on the situation. But it was extra innings tied game home team up. Catching the ball would have literally lost the game. He got all this praise from the announcers. Literally saying that, “Not many fielders would think you do that...” God I hope that isn’t true. It’s an obvious play. I’d know to do the same at 8 years old. These are pros. But maybe they’re right. I don’t know. Depressing if so though...

No force at third. Although I agree in principle. The rule should be expanded imo. But the umps didn’t mess up.

Nah. There needs to be a force at third to be in affect. So runners or first and second or bases loaded.

@@benhaney9629 on the last play, there are runners at first and second.

Might want to edit your post. Were the runners on 1st and 2nd, or 1st and 3rd?

@@Subangelis They were actually on 5th and Broadway.

Could you explain to someone who knows nothing about baseball why he would do that?

@@ts944 because the runner on third can “tag up” meaning he can run home and would likely score once that ball is caught. but since he let that ball drop in foul territory it’s a dead ball and no runners can tag up or advance. it’s very situation since in this case there was less than 2 outs and a runner on third in a close game where every run matters

@@JL1009 thanks for taking the time. That makes sense 🙂

“Insane...”? Catching that ball literally ends the game... I’d 100% know to do the same when I was 8 years old. I mean I knew a lot about baseball but these are pros... I mean maybe it’s true not many major leaguers would think to do that but if that’s the case it’s a depressing thought...

@@benhaney9629 I think the awareness of being in foul territory and letting it drop would not be common in little league or the majors

I don't think its obstruction if they have the ball and are going for the tag. And even then, they will reach their hand out and tag before you touch them.

It's happened, maybe the cardinals or angels, I'm pretty sure they didn't call obstruction and basically let it play out and the guy got tagged on the ground....but it was 100% accidentally they crashed right after the throw basically so there was no way for him to get out the way

In the first play in the video, the fielders were pretty careful about exiting the base path as soon as they threw it. The one between 3rd and home at the end of the video, the 3rd baseman doesn’t get out of the way very quickly and there’s almost a collision. I think if the runner took a step towards the pitcher’s mound as he turned then he would have hit the fielder and would have a case. But he’s more focused about extending the play and trying to get the batter all the way to 3rd if he can since he was caught off base by the pitcher in the first place. Runners aren’t really trained to look for contact unless they’re sliding into a base.

The smartest ideas in the world are stupid if they dont work.

It was... just because commentary misses it you assume ump blame.... GG

bad officiating is my only thought. to say that isn't a routine flyball is just a horrible call.

He did that to prevent the runner from tagging up. It was a smart play

@@phroge9045 but the runner made it to third anyway? He could've gotten a "free" out if he simply caught it instead of trying to be fancy

@@micmac1719 I’m a bit confused too, but whatever he did was the right choice.

Only in the infield

@@newironsideso Swisher should have run to first?

They were either confused or thought one of them was out. Cain basically just knew running to 2nd would cause confusion and hoped it would be enough to get Yelich back safely. Since nobody covered 1st, Cain knew he could get back.

because they thought both runners were going to be doubled up on 2nd, making the lead runner out anyway. but the runner from first never touches the base, so he isint risking getting doubled up

Generally in that situation you are driving the runner back to second with another runner standing there. Normally both runners would be standing on the base, you just need to walk the runner back, tag both runners and the trailing runner will be called out so he's getting an out regardless without the risk of throwing the ball. Normally what he did was the correct play, but the trailing runner noticed no one was covering first and at no risk of being put out, re retreated to fist base and everyone was safe.

@@brandonfrancey5592 Which means that they weren't paying attention to what the base runners were doing. Could probably got both out with a quick throw to second, then first, but at least one of them.

@@my3dviews Nope, first off the defense is not in a position to tag out the first runner. They are in rundown position. That's why the runner is standing next to the base. Had someone got into position to tag him, he just steps on the base and he's safe. Maybe they get the other guy but either way they come out with nearly best position, 1 out and a runner on 2nd. The catcher should have covered first to prevent this from happening but they get no outs because of that. No way they get 2 outs from a quick throw. That's just not happening.

The batter would be out but the game was tied, in extra innings with only one out and a runner on 3rd base. Most likely the runner on 3rd would’ve tagged up and scored after the ball was caught so this play prevented him from being able to score there, keeping the game tied.

No. If the ball comes back into fair territory in the infield (i.e. before going past first or third base) it's a fair ball.

Tie game in the 12th inning with a runner on 3rd base and only 1 out. If he catches the ball then the runner on 3rd can try and run home to score and take the lead in extra innings. It would be hard for the outfielder to get a clean throw straight to home plate after catching that ball since he is running straight at the close wall. Letting it drop resulted in a foul ball and the runner can't advance.

Runner at third would have scored if he'd caught the foul. I'm not sure of the game situation, but it might have been the go ahead or winning run.

By the looks of it, its riding the line of being a routine fly. Routine fly (not much effort) and this play (somewhat effort by the pitcher). So its really whatever the umpire decides to call 🤷🏻‍♂️

@@B1GM3X1C4N The infield fly rule is about being settled under the ball. The pitcher had stopped with both feet on the ground with the ball within reach. Exactly how much more "settled under" does someone need to be? The umps fucked up and should have called the play dead when the ball hit the grass.

Yeah it should have been called an Infield Fly

It is rarely called on bloops like that. Technically, it COULD be called, but I really doubt most umpires would considered that a routine fly. Generally most umpires will only call it if there is time to get under it, and wait for it to come down.

@@danielhurd1452 Yeah...because you understand the rules of baseball more than these major league umpires!