The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-02-14
lNFIELD FLY PUZzLING
 PROBLEM FOR UMPIRES
President DFeyfuss of Pirates Thinks Present Rule Should Be
 Changed.

President Barney Dreyfuss of the P1ttsburg Club is now turning his at rentAon to the ru'es of the game. The infe1d fly rule is one that bothers
 what Is an inheId 6y?' recently asked the magnate- Being informed of the wording of the definition as given fn inc rule book, Dreyfuss said should pc made so before another game of ball is played.
 According to the rule book. an inf1e!d fly is one which can be hand ed by an infiesdar. The Eitcher and the catch CT are classed as infelders, though the rule does not state SO Under if he puts ID an i1.feId fly with first and second or first. second and third bases occupied and less than two men out. The rule states that as soon as declare whether it is an inheld fly or not: that is, whether in his judgment 1t can be hepdledr by an inf1elder- There Is ther efore no abso' ute definition of an infield fly. but it is left to the um- pire to decide on each particular case
 The stteI.tion of Dreyfuss was call ed to tFe indefinite wording of this rule curing game between the Reds of Cincinnati and the Pirates at Forbes Field last summer. The Reds had two men on the bases when the next batter, in atempting to bunt. raised g little pop fly in front of the plate. The ball did not go over seven feet high, and Catcher Gibson of the Fira1es. who Trade a desperate effort to catch it, cou'6 not quite reach and the ball Fc1led off the end of his big mitt. .
 The two runners advanced and the play gave the Reds the game. Um. pire Johnstone, who was in charge of the game, declared that it was not an inheId fly, his judgment being disputed by Manager Clarke, who claimed that it came under the rule and the batter was out. The umpire refused to allow this claim and called attention to the wording of the rule which says that an infield fly is one which can be handled by an infelder Admitting that the catcher should be classed as an inf1elder, Johnstone sill maintained that Gibson had been un- able to catch the bal in spite of his best efforts, and therefore that the fly could not be classed as one that could be handled by an fnfielder. This interpretation of the rule was a literal and also a sensible one, and the Pitts burgh protest was not allowed
 Dreyfuss c'ains that the rule pla- ces too much responsibility on the un- pire, who is required to make a de- cfsion as son as the ball is hit and reol1y before he can tell where it is
 If Gibson had caught the ball" said Dreyfuss, 'It would have been called an infeId fly. Because he did not catch it it was not so ca led An inf1eld fly should be so whether it is caught or not DuL III case or thlS kind it Is pretty hard for the umpire to decide instantly and in time for the runners and the felders to hear his Gectkton.
 Therefore, say that the rule is in definite and should be changed so as to be clear to all. All the playing rul@s should be made so plain that there can be no argument about them, when the facts are once admitted In this case it was an inieId fly, if it was caught and not an infieId fly if it was not caught, and the umpire did not have time tc declare 1t until after the Tlay was over. There are some oTf,er rules which are ambiguous but this one certainly should be the first one cleared up.''