Infield Fly Rule

[Centerfield9]

I appreciate everyone's response. I'm not a lawyer; I'm just trying to understand the rule as it is written. After re-reading that sentence, it still doesn't make sense to me. It would be better if MLB would simply remove "retouch and advance after the ball is touched," then it would eliminate a possible exception to "as in any flyball."

[nopachunts]

Originally Posted by Centerfield9

I appreciate everyone's response. I'm not a lawyer; I'm just trying to understand the rule as it is written. After re-reading that sentence, it still doesn't make sense to me. It would be better if MLB would simply remove "retouch and advance after the ball is touched," then it would eliminate a possible exception to "as in any flyball."

Or you could just join us in the real world. There are numerous discrepencies and contradictions in the MLB rule book. By going with the intent of the rule as accepted by interpretations, umpires, players, coaches; you will do just fine. Don't nitpick where there is no need to.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Centerfield9

I appreciate everyone's response. I'm not a lawyer; I'm just trying to understand the rule as it is written. After re-reading that sentence, it still doesn't make sense to me. It would be better if MLB would simply remove "retouch and advance after the ball is touched," then it would eliminate a possible exception to "as in any flyball."

If you removed that, the rule would no longer mean what it's supposed to mean.

It amazes me how often we see similar posts like this... "I misunderstand this one word here in a rule ... we should change it to this other thing", yet if we made the change being suggested, it would create bigger logical holes in the rule.

[CecilOne]

cf 9 is kind of new to the forum, so let's be gentle.