Lets revisit this, because you've lost the forest thru the trees:
There were men on second and third with no out, The odds of the man on third eventually scoring are in Nebraska's favor as there are no out.
Erstad calls the contact play, which by your admission is a "gamble" (your words, not mine).
It doesn't work, the runner is thrown out at home.
I say its a poor call, the odds are the runner would've scored from third without taking the gamble.
You justify it, claiming I don't know how the play works.
It was a tight game, Nebraska lost by one run. Draw your own conclusions.
I didn't justify it based on your lack of understanding.....just pointing out you couldn't understand that the runner still tags on a fly ball...still freezes on a line drive....the only chance you take is if it happens to be a ground ball on the infield.
Of course there is a little risk, because your trying to force the issue/create a run, but overall, it is really not that risky of a play (especially given the situation).
You keep saying that they shouldn't have done it with no outs and runners on first and second; however that is a great time to do it......you think about what your saying.
If you don't do it, you have runners on second and third with one out after the ground ball.
If you do it (and get caught), you have runners on first and third and one out.
How is that sooo risky???
The only difference it makes, is now it gives the possibility of a double-play ball. But again, the chances of scoring from third are not that significantly decreased. However, the contact play does increase your chances of scoring on a routine ground ball....
Yes, there is some risk but it is fairly minimal in this situation vs. the reward
It didn't work, but that doesn't make it a bad call.
