IT'S A CONSERVATIVE COUNTRY:

For readers who haven't leafed through the rulebook lately, the infield-fly rule specifies the following: if the team at bat has runners at first and second base, or first, second, and third base; has fewer than two outs against it; and hits a pop-up in fair territory that an infielder could catch with routine effort, the umpire invokes the rule and calls the batter out.

The purpose of the rule is to prevent chicanery from the team in the field. If not for the infield-fly rule, a savvy infielder could camp under the pop-up, prompting the baserunners to retreat to their bags of origin, then intentionally let the ball drop to the ground, giving his team the chance to turn a double (or triple) play.

The infield-fly rule thus robs fans of what would otherwise be a bit of frenetic, exciting action every third game or so. Instead, we watch an umpire point skyward and essentially put the brakes on the play, ruling the batter out and keeping the runners safely aboard. The infield-fly rule grants the defense one out, but denies it the chance at two (or three). On its face, the rule makes the game less interesting without any obvious justification.

Why shouldn't the team in the field be rewarded for a real-time reaction that gives it the advantage? Why shouldn't the team at bat be punished for popping the ball into the air? Looked at in the abstract, there would seem to be no moral downside to scrapping the infield-fly rule. 

Looked at from the conservative cast of mind, however, the rule's wisdom is clear. Developed by practitioners of the game, rather than rationalist observers, the infield-fly rule slows rapid reversals of fortune. The infield-fly rule prevents the batting team's mounting threat of two or three baserunners from evaporating via an unsportsmanlike drop by the defense. To the conservative, the infield-fly rule is more than a benign relic. It is a mild, but positive, good.

The filibuster is similar. Notorious to some, vaunted in the minds of others, it prevents one faction from leveraging a narrow legislative majority to enact sweeping political change. By offering the minority a chance to block significant legislation that lacks 60 votes, the filibuster ensures that any political change enacted by a divided Senate is more measured and widely agreed upon. 

Tweet   @brothersjudd