Force the players to make decisions.

The infielders have to know what the baserunners are doing to make the optimal decision.

(I keep editing this because the strategy gets sorta complex; I don't know why some of you don't want the players to make challenging choices)

What choice does the runner have? Take my out at the base I vacated or take my out at the base I didn't run to?

I don't think you understand. With players on first and second, if the runners tag up, the defender can easily just let the ball drop and then throw to third and second for the double play. If the runners lead off, the infielder can catch the ball and double up at least one runner. This is why the rule was put into effect so long ago and why it still makes sense today.

The only way they could change it is to come up with some distance into the outfield for which it does not apply, but that would be next to impossible to measure in real time. Therefore, it is left up to the judgement of the umpires. In the recent case, the umpire made a terrible judgement, because it was so far in the outfield it was very unlikely the runners could have been doubled up. It was probably because, as one of the extra playoff umps, he wasn't used to being set up so far out into the outfield.

I think the best way for MLB to handle this situation in the future is to encourage the umpires consult each other after the play, much like the homeplate umpire consults with the first or third ump on a check swing. Only problem is it may not always be possible if the call stopped the play. Maybe it won't happen again anyway because the umps will learn from this, and it's not like players drop easy pop ups very often unless you happen to be a Cardinals left fielder, SS or third baseman...

The Cushing hit was marginal. It was clearly not a chop block as he wasn't engaged at the time but it was close as to whether it was illegal clipping. Inside the tackle box it's legal to clip above the knees but not below. It's also legal in all cases if you make contact with the side initially and then roll onto the back of the legs, providing you're in continuous contact.

I think the hit is borderline for both those parts of the definition and given that the officials are also not allowed to flag for clipping if they don't see the initial contact it's not surprising that it wasn't flagged. I actually don't think it's a particularly dirty hit though, the same sort of play happens multiple times per game, it just happened that in this case the timing was horrible as Cushing had all his weight on the leg that hit.

Why can't one player tag up and the other advance?

exactly

Are line drives to infielders (w/men on base) a "tricky angleshooting problem"? Should we have an infield line drive rule?

I'm not as knowledgeable about baseball as I am other sports. Can you explain how this eliminates the fielder from angle shooting?

Well, the only one that could advance would be the lead runner (since the runners behind them couldn't advance if the lead runner didn't also), and if the lead runner advanced the defender could just catch the ball and throw to that base and double him up (since he didn't tag).

That's a good question. IFR wouldn't apply because the ball, if not caught, would of course go well into the outfield for a hit. What could come into play is a similar, but different rule pertaining to intentionally dropping a ball (after touching it)

From wikipedia:

The guy on first can't run 90% of the way to second while the guy on second tags up?

Interesting. I've never seen that called before.

One rule change that would definitely improve baseball is an act of congress making the game illegal.

so the offense wants to give the defense a lock double play by catching the ball and throwing to first, with a good chance of throwing the runner out at third too?

honestly, you don't seem to have any idea what you are talking about here. I dont see how baseball would be improved by allowing a pop up to kill every scoring chance even with no outs.

The whole "having one guy go halfway but another guy stay home" could potentially keep a team out of a triple play in a bases-loaded no-out situation, but would still likely be a double play.

It would be interesting to see how the strategy evolves if they did get rid of the IF rule for a while...I could picture there being a couple of disastrous plays where teams let it drop and then the ball skips away and creates a huge inning, and then managers around the league decide to "play it safe" and tell their players to always catch it, kinda like the punt-happy coaches in the NFL.

Keep the ifr, but punish the fielder for dropped balls by letting runners advance a base. Don't let it be a way to hide behind sloppy defense.

Any runner who gets double-up off a low line-drive deserves to be. From about age 5 kids are told to make sure liners get through the infield before advancing. Anyone who gets double-up basically made a mental mistake or took a gamble and lost.

Eh...it's fairly close to a block below the waist from behind. That play is almost identical to what put me on the football IR for life(I was engaged with a player a little more than Cushing was).

I really think that cut blocks down field really need to be in front of the player and ones to the side are as dangerous as behind. To defend yourself vs a cut you have to have your hands out in front. It's a difficult task period in the NFL /NCAA due to never know how a player is going to engage you. And there are reasons cuts are not allowed on returns nor change of possession.

Blocking in the back between the waist and knee is legal in "close-line play", which, as it's defined in the rule book (within the tackles laterally and within 3 yards of the LOS), this was. It's the sort of block that seems to be attempted very regularly when a lineman gets beat, just in most cases the defender is anticipating it. In this one Cushing beat the defender so badly I don't think he was expecting him to try to get back and block him.

I definitely agree that making the rule much stricter would be good though, possibly something along the lines of only being able to cut anywhere if when you go to initiate contact you're in front of the player. There needs to be some leniency for players turning as you go to cut them but I don't think a change such as this would make it an unreasonable amount more difficult on offensive linemen.

I like the infield fly rule. The fact that it's been around for a long time and we so rarely discuss it means it's working pretty well.

(This will be my last post on the IFR).

A query for ye who have a zero tolerance for angle shooting:

Should the IFR be applied when there is only one runner on first? (This way the fielders can't decide who ends up on first).

no because the risk/reward there is awful

with so many obvious flaws in sports in seems dumb to focus on a rule that makes a ton of sense and no one had ever had a problem with until it was misapplied once.

He is rewarded. By getting an out. It adds strategy in the same way "get rid of table stakes" would add strategy to poker. Its ******ed.

There is no decision, and there are no challenging choices. Its just always a double play.

Yes? And if they drop them on purpose, the runner is called out. But more importantly, there isnt time for anything on line drives, so they are not the same. There is really no room for angleshooting, except trying to intentionally drop it. Which they sometimes do, and are almost never rewarded for.

NFL:

Should there be a rule against an offense intentionally taking a saftey (near the end of games)? Isn't that an angle shoot?

Boxing: no hugging like little girls and actually box. Why the **** is it called boxing if they allow that. It should be completely illegal and points should be deducted.