Robin attended a high school baseball game at the local high school baseball field. The field had fencing 24 feet high and 50 feet wide behind home plate. The 24 foot high fencing was located in front of bleachers for spectators. Robin chose not to sit in the bleachers even though there were plenty of available seats there. Instead, she stood along the third base line behind a three foot high fence. While watching the game, Robin was struck in the eye by a sharply hit foul ball. She suffered serious injury as a result and sued the school district. Under these circumstances, which of the following is/are true? Robin's strongest argument is that the school district is liable for her injuries based on a claim of negligence. The school district can make a strong argument that it is not liable under the doctrine of assumption of the risk. The school district can make a strong argument that it is not an insurer of the safety of its spectators and that the fencing it provided was reasonable under the circumstances and satisfied its duty of care. All of the above.