Let's settle this squeeze play shit

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=53189:date=Jul 29 2009, 02:19 PM:name=Sandberg)-->QUOTE (Sandberg @ Jul 29 2009, 02:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=53185:date=Jul 29 2009, 02:16 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 29 2009, 02:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=53177:date=Jul 29 2009, 02:10 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 29 2009, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->My point has always been that Lou made the wrong move. It's quite simple, really.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course he did. But we're calling the wrong decision, they're calling it the least likely to succeed option or a riskier option. Just because we see it in black and white, doesn't mean everyone else does or even has to. There's a gradient of choices here and I think we all agree where on the gradient the squeeze play falls, we're just calling it 2 different things.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yup. Is there anyone on the board that doesn't think Fox should have been batting?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly.

So why would anyone make the call to:

A) hit Fontenot in that spot
B) have Fontenot attempt a squeeze?

Can anyone can explain that to me? I can't comprehend why anyone, when presented with several options, would ever choose the option that is less likely to succeed.