« Alabama Law Review Symposium: The End of Animus: The Lifespan of Impermissible Purposes--In Print | Main | Should the House of Representatives Be Bigger? »
Tuesday, May 30, 2023
Life without the Infield Fly Rule
(H/T: Michael Risch, I think from last season).
Video here; a YouTuber's analysis of why the ump erred in failing to invoke.
The play illustrates why we have the IFR. The ump almost certainly did not invoke because the ball was not high enough. The commentator argues that height alone should not matter. It was not a line drive and landed directly in front of the shortstop who barely had to move, thus implicating the rule's purposes (or evils).
One other thing as you watch the play: The best move for the runner on second, recognizing non-invocation, is to retreat to second base and hope that the second baseman catches the flip and steps on the bag before tagging him. Stepping on the bag puts out the runner on first, but removes the force, allowing the runner on second to remain. But the runner must have the wherewithal to process that in an instant. And the second baseman must have the wherewithal to stay off the bag while catching the flip, tag the runner, then step on the bag--and to process that in an instant. So there are "counters" to the intentional non-catch, but none that players can reasonably pull off.
Posted by Howard Wasserman on May 30, 2023 at 02:35 PM in Howard Wasserman, Sports | Permalink
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.