164 U. Pa. L. Rev. Online 145, 2016
10 Pages Posted: 11 Apr 2016
Date Written: March 28, 2016
In "Time to Drop the Infield Fly Rule and End a Common Law Anomaly," Judge Andrew Guilford and Joel Mallord offer the first cohesive scholarly critique of baseball's venerated and venerable Infield Fly Rule. They argue that the rule is grounded in outdated notions of sportsmanship and opposition to deception and that the game would be more exciting if players could be left to their own strategic and skillful devices on infield fly balls. This Response Essay builds on my previous work to argue that, properly understood, the Infield Fly Rule is justified, necessary, and appropriate in order to to eliminate perverse incentives and to avoid extraordinary cost-benefit imbalances within the game.
Keywords: Baseball, Infield Fly Rule, Cost-Benefit, Sports, Procedure
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Wasserman, Howard M., Just a Bit Aside: Perverse Incentives, Cost-Benefit Imbalances, and the Infield Fly Rule (March 28, 2016). 164 U. Pa. L. Rev. Online 145, 2016; Florida International University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 16-06. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2755680