GDT: 2019 NLDS (2) Atlanta Braves vs (3) St. Louis Cardinals - STL wins 3-2

[MMC]

Braves in 4.

Click to read more...

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Good postseason history between these 2....most recently the infamous infield fly rule wild card game.

 

[robert terwilliger]

aka, the worst call i have ever seen in a baseball game.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Ugh. Two franchises I very much dislike.... but I really like this Braves team so them in 5 because that’s better baseball

 

[Cassano]

Braves are better in all departments, but I can't bet against Cardinal voodoo magic in playoffs.

 

[Le Magnifique 66]

I like the Braves in 4

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Braves in four.

 

[LeBlondeDemon10]

Pitching...St. Louis in 5

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

I see Braves going to NLCS with a 4 game series win

 

[Canes]

Sam Holbrook is umpiring this series. Put all your money on the Cardinals.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Historically, the Cards have the Braves number, especially with this much on the line. Hope I'm wrong, but voting Cards here.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Sam Holbrook is umpiring this series. Put all your money on the Cardinals.

Worst call ever. I was mad for weeks.

 

[SSF]

Cards fan but Braves in 4.

 

[bluesfan94]

Worst call ever. I was mad for weeks.

(It was the right call)

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

(It was the right call)

Baseball field according to Sam Holbrook

 

[Canes]

(It was the right call)

Yeah, I'm sure as a Cardinals fan you are unbiased.

 

[bluesfan94]

Baseball field according to Sam Holbrook

That's not how infield fly is defined. Kozma could have caught it with ordinary effort. A botched call off attempt late in the play does not change that. Kozma was camped underneath the fly ball. Kozma was an infielder. Therefore, infield fly rule applies.

Yeah, I'm sure as a Cardinals fan you are unbiased.

As opposed to Braves fans being the paragon of objectivity?

 

[robert terwilliger]

(It was the right call)

if by "right call" you mean "wrong call" then yes, we are in agreement.

in most circles we call that a bloop hit to left field

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

The fact that the ball dropped and they weren’t able to get any of the force outs on the runners advancing tells me that it shouldn’t have been an infield fly. The whole point of the rule is to prevent the defence from making a bush league double play. They couldn’t even get one out let alone two.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Yeah, this ain't it Jerry

I'd like to know analytics such as 'What % of batted balls like that have since been ruled IFF' and 'What % of Shortstops make that putout on batted balls like that'....I'm willing to bet the answer is very, very low in both cases.

Just think about the IFF rule and why it exists, so you can't get a double play on a pop up. Look at how far into the OF that ball was...the runners were halfway like they were taught. Even if the defense purposefully drops that ball, they aren't doubling you off unless you make a real baserunning blunder.

The ball was way too deep in the outfield for that 1) to be an 'ordinary' play by an infielder and 2) to actually do the thing the rule exists to prevent.

Bad call, also watch when Holbrook's arm goes up..like a half-second before the ball drops to the ground. More proof that it was far from 'ordinary'.

 

[bluesfan94]

Yeah, this ain't it Jerry

I'd like to know analytics such as 'What % of batted balls like that have since been ruled IFF' and 'What % of Shortstops make that putout on batted balls like that'....I'm willing to bet the answer is very, very low in both cases.

Just think about the IFF rule and why it exists, so you can't get a double play on a pop up. Look at how far into the OF that ball was...the runners were halfway like they were taught. Even if the defense purposefully drops that ball, they aren't doubling you off unless you make a real baserunning blunder.

The ball was way too deep in the outfield for that 1) to be an 'ordinary' play by an infielder and 2) to actually do the thing the rule exists to prevent.

Bad call, also watch when Holbrook's arm goes up..like a half-second before the ball drops to the ground. More proof that it was far from 'ordinary'.

The analytics are irrelevant. It doesn't have to be an ordinary play, nor does it have to prevent the double play. Nor does it have to be in the infield. That's not the way the rule is written. It's ordinary effort by an infielder. Kozma was not sprinting. When Holbrook called the IFF, Kozma was backpedaling and looked like he was settling under it. Because he was. It was less ordinary that he suddenly sprinted out of the way (ostensibly due to being called off). You can complain about how the rule is written, or how this wasn't in the spirit of the rule (even though it is) but under the letter of the law, it's pretty obviously the right call. People are just mad because they don't understand that being in the infield isn't at all a relevant factor. If it wasn't Kozma settling under the ball, it wouldn't have been IFF.

Also, Holbrook's arm goes up when it looks like Kozma is slowly backpedaling to the ball.

The fact that the ball dropped and they weren’t able to get any of the force outs on the runners advancing tells me that it shouldn’t have been an infield fly. The whole point of the rule is to prevent the defence from making a bush league double play. They couldn’t even get one out let alone two.

They couldn't get one out because of the miscommunication. Again, imagine if Kozma hadn't change course, which Holbrook did not know when he called it. Kozma would have been right there. If he had intentionally let that drop, he could have easily gone to third and then likely onto second to get a double play. You can see the runner on second drift back to the bag because of how routine that fly ball looked like for Kozma.

 

[Blitzkrug]

Cardinals meme magic is too damn strong when they get to the playoffs. They win it in 5

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

The analytics are irrelevant. It doesn't have to be an ordinary play, nor does it have to prevent the double play. Nor does it have to be in the infield. That's not the way the rule is written. It's ordinary effort by an infielder. Kozma was not sprinting. When Holbrook called the IFF, Kozma was backpedaling and looked like he was settling under it. Because he was. It was less ordinary that he suddenly sprinted out of the way (ostensibly due to being called off). You can complain about how the rule is written, or how this wasn't in the spirit of the rule (even though it is) but under the letter of the law, it's pretty obviously the right call. People are just mad because they don't understand that being in the infield isn't at all a relevant factor. If it wasn't Kozma settling under the ball, it wouldn't have been IFF.

Also, Holbrook's arm goes up when it looks like Kozma is slowly backpedaling to the ball.

They couldn't get one out because of the miscommunication. Again, imagine if Kozma hadn't change course, which Holbrook did not know when he called it. Kozma would have been right there. If he had intentionally let that drop, he could have easily gone to third and then likely onto second to get a double play. You can see the runner on second drift back to the bag because of how routine that fly ball looked like for Kozma.

No. There was no way they were getting a double play on that. It was a botched call. It went your way. You don’t need to defend it.

 

[bluesfan94]

No. There was no way they were getting a double play on that. It was a botched call. It went your way. You don’t need to defend it.

Getting a double play is still irrelevant. But because we’re into making definitive counterhistorical statements, it would have been a guaranteed double play and Braves fans would be claiming it should have been an infield fly.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Getting a double play is still irrelevant. But because we’re into making definitive counterhistorical statements, it would have been a guaranteed double play and Braves fans would be claiming it should have been an infield fly.

In what world could they have gotten the double play? Ball lands in front of the LF. He takes two quick steps, picks up the ball and throws it in. They weren’t even close to getting 1 out. There was no way even if it was perfectly executed that they were going to get two. Even if they did somehow manage to pull it off the right call would be to call an infield fly because it goes towards the spirit of the rule. As it happened though there was no attempt at an infield fly, it was a classic miscommunication between fielders in the outfield on a pop-up. The right thing to do was to let it play as is.