Baseball History Comes Alive Now Ranked #2 by Feedspot Among All Internet Baseball History Websites and Blogs!
Guest Submissions from Our Readers Always Welcome!
Please Don’t Ruin Our game!
WEEKLY POLL QUESTION
HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE POSSIBLE CHANGES TO BASEBALL CURRENTLY BEING DISCUSSED?
In the name of Babe Ruth and all that’s good in the world, let’s be careful with what we do to our game!
Baseball, like all other sports, has evolved over the years. If we start with the Deadball Era of the early 20th century, the game has slowly modernized with better equipment, more manicured fields, night baseball, new stadiums, flashier uniforms, and certainly much larger contracts for the players. Yet through it all, the game itself has remained essentially the same.
Maybe the first real change to the structure of the game was the advent of the designated hitter in the American League in 1973. It’s still only in the American League, but that may soon change. However, some of the additional proposals now being considered by Major League Baseball could begin to make the game look very different.
I read recently that some of the things being considered as future possibilities include robot umps (using new technologies) to call balls and strikes, moving the pitching mound back (it didn’t say how far) and starting extra innings at some point with a runner on second (something already used in international play).
If these changes and more begin happening, baseball may start to look very different. What, as a fan, will this mean to you? Consider the following options we’ve provide below, then vote in the poll box below. If you have something additional to add, use the “Other” option and we’ll record your response in the comments section below.
- Baseball has to change with the times. If the lords of the game feel these changes will bring in more young fans and make the game better, I’m all for it.
- A tweak here and there is okay, but baseball is America’s grand old game and the basic rules and field dimensions should remain the same. Even a pitch clock will change both pitchers and hitters approach and isn’t needed.
- Each proposed changed should be decided on its own merits. If both the owners and players agree to a change I’m OK with it.
- If these kinds of changes are implemented count me out. I won’t watch anymore.
We’d love to hear what you have to say, so be sure to leave any other thoughts you might have in the comments section below!
Rule 8:04 has always said a pitcher shall deliver the ball within 20 seconds. I’m all for a pitch clock to enforce the already in effect rule.
It is already used in the minors, although in the 5 years attending Eastern League games, I have never seen an umpire call a ball because of tge rule. Does it work? I think there has been a mindset established.
Minor league rules also go with runner at second in extra innings. Since last year. I don’t like that rule. I keep score at every game I attend, major or minor league and it seems cheesy and it ruins the statistics in that the first batter gets an opportunity to knock in a run without the team setting it up. I’ve been to a few games that went extra innings and it seems gimmicky.
The pace of the game does need to quicken. Analytics and replay have at times turned the game into too much of a chess match.
Don’t know the answer or if it is old age. I think it may be a little of that as I continue to get Google Ads on your site that want me to seek out assisted living….🤪
Great points Paul…I might go for the three batter rule for relievers. That would knock about an hour off every game all by itself! But I doubt it’ll get passed. As far as the Google Ads…are they trying to tell you something? I told you…I’m seeing chicks in bathing suits! Haha!
I am all for the 20 second rule. It will speed things up a bit and force batters to stand in, too. Odubel drives this Phillies fan nuts. Robot umps? How about robot players next? The idea of putting a runner on second is terrible. Smacks more of little league than major league. You’ve got to earn those runners, not be given a gift. Not sure what moving the mound back would accomplish. To this old timer the problem with baseball, as well as every other professional sport, is that the average American middle class working man and woman has a hard time relating to these young guys making millions of dollars to play a game. I’m old enough to remember the fuss when Ted Williams cracked the $100,000 mark. Today that’s chump change. Still love my Phillies but $330M for Mr Harper? What???
Thanks Alan, you make some great points. Can’t say I disagree with any of them! $330 million…and 13 years!!!
Yes, the players are making big bucks, but so are the owners. At least now, the individuals actually playing the game are sharing in the take. Changing the rules isn’t going to help when it costs too much to take your kids to a game.
I have mixed feelings about the electronic strike zone and the extra innings-man-on-second-rule. That one does seem a bit gimmicky but college football uses something similar and it works. There’s nothing worse than a game ending in a tie in football… except maybe trying to stay up or stay freezing at the ballpark until the wee hours in the umpteenth inning because the game is tied.
Hey – that brings to mind another alternative – let games that are still tied by the end of say the 12th inning be called a tie! What’s that? You hate the idea? Me too, so maybe helping the game end a bit earlier with a guy on 2nd ain’t so bad. AND it might be less apt to happen if the DH was universal.
I don’t know what the stats say for extra inning games in the AL vs. the NL, but even though I’m a lifetime NL fan, in 95% of the cases, pitchers can’t hit. Period. We all know it so let’s give the DH a try.
I no longer watch baseball on tv or live. I can’t stand the new players and their approach to the game. Between bat flips, standing at home plate and watching your home run go out, and being so lazy that a strikeout is your favorite play, the players have runined it. In addition, I was never a fan of all the changes Selig made to the game and Manfort is just like him. No, I research old baseball, 19th century and dead ball baseball. I do follow along with today’s results because looking at the play by play of a game does not tell me how non-baseball the player was.
The only people complaining about the game are the media and that’s because they have a deadline. The first question to ask them is, “Are you here with a solution, or are you part of the problem?”
If they truly want to make the game shorter, they could make it a strikeout if the batter hits a foul with two strikes on him.
Thanks Jim…some interesting thoughts. I totally agree with today’s game being a turnoff. Like you, I’m much more interested in the “Old Days.” I’m a Cub fan. If they go with a pay per view thing for Cub games, that might just put me over the edge with today’s game…
Here’s another thought about what changed our beloved game more than anything – it wasn’t the DH in 1973, it happened 26 years before that when Jackie Robinson broke the color line. Our game is WAY better because we have players of color. The ‘lords of the game’ kept that from happening for decades. They’re not infallible by any means.
Moving the mound? Silly. Pitch clock? Either enforce it or eliminate it. I say enforce it. The slooooow pitchers drive me nuts. Three batter rule for relievers? I like it. That will speed things up and/or result in more offense.
That is all.
The robot umps and moving the mound back are experiments that MLB will find with the independent Atlantic League, so we’ll see how that works.
Gary, I see ads for chicks, too. But they’re from Tractor Supply, just in time for Easter 🐣 . No bathing suits, though.
Hi Gary:
My opinion shouldn’t count because I no longer watch the game. What really ruined baseball is greed. It’s not about baseball anymore, it’s all about money. As far as I can see, most of these things detract from the humanity of the game Change the rules. Get rid of the umpires; regiment the pitchers; put phantom runners on base. It might be something but it isn’t baseball. When I was a fan it was the ultimate adversarial confrontation. Every move by the pitcher every nuance by the batter psyching each other out to gain a fraction of advantage in the duel. That was every single pitch. That was baseball. Baseball is to be admired and savored. Remember, it’s called the national pass time, not the national race time.
Kind regards,
Joan
Thanks Joan…great points!
I am a purist and do not like any of the changes except the review on home runs.
Don’t make any changes to the game of baseball. Like it the way it is. Gary, the only thing that bothers me is the political correctness decision on eliminating Chief Wahoo from the Indians uniforms and also politics creeping into the game. Players not wanting to go to the White House to visit a President because they don’t agree with his views or policies. Shouldn’t matter. Being invited to the White House is an honor. You said if the Cubs going to pay per view games might be your breaking point. Personally, I believe my breaking point would be inviting/honoring Colin Kaepernick to throw out the first ball at Red Sox game in Fenway Park. If that happened I guess I’d have to depend on baseball column to continue my love of baseball. And that’s all good with me!
Well said Tom!
No rule changes! Keep the real umpires and let them speed up the game. What I would really love is more day games. But I get it…it’s about the money!
Thanks Diane, good points. I’ve thought about the technology replacing umpires. I’m OK with that. I say if the technology is ther, let’s go for it…or at least give it a try!
OK. Just ready today that all MLB managers must submit their line ups to the Commissioners office 15 minutes before they release them to anybody else. This is a slippery slope situation where the purpose is so that MLB can release them to the gambling conglomerate that they now have a marketing relationship so that they can set up the “odds”.
Wow! I know sports betting is now a reality with NJ and RI expanding the availability of gambling on sports beyond Las Vegas and many more getting in line to follow; but,
this is a long way from when Bowie Kuhn banned Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays from any association with MLB simply because they were spokesmen for a casino!
Am I just being a reactionary fuddy duddy or is this something that could open the doors to scandal. Yes, the players make money that makes this less feasible than the Black Sox players. But, Pete Rose is banned for life for doing something that now MLB is promoting via their marketing relationship with gambling establishments.
I know this isn’t exactly a reply to your original question, but I think this opens up a possibility where the pursuit of the golden egg may not be wise.
I, too, saw the new MLB requirement regarding the lineups, Paul. Ever since the movement to legalize sports gambling has taken hold I’ve thought about the possibility of shenanigans with the gamblers. The NFL is already a huge gambling league and I’ve heard where fans may soon be able to place bets from their seats. Gambling has always been a part of the games and will continue in one form or another. By making it easier and legal, many more people will lose money and some will become addicted. That MLB is requiring this with the lineups indicates there is some concern. College basketball is one sport that has always been suspect, and has had previous point shaving scandals, with many of the players needing money. The NBA has already had a scandal involving a referee. Could an umpire be the next to help influence the outcome of a baseball game? Who knows, but certainly could happen and the temptations will now only grow. Be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Bill, interesting perspective by Peter Abraham in today’s Boston Globe on the subject:
“This is naive on my part, but it seems inappropriate that lineups will not be posted in clubhouses until they are first sent to MLB so the information can be quickly forwarded to bookmakers. I get it, Baseball had little choice but to find some way to profit from state sponsored sports betting once the Supreme Court made it legal. But the door to scandal, long sealed shut, is now cracked open. We may not be in danger of players throwing games, but now the smallest bits of insider information—who’s not feeling well, which reliever is unavailable that day, who may be called up from Triple A,etc.—becomes something a player or team staffer could sell to get what they consider their share of the pie. “We all have concerns,” Red Sox manager Alex Cora said. “It’s just a matter of staying true, I guess. Hopefully, nothing happens. It’s something new that we have to deal with.”…
I agree with Peter Abraham, Paul. There’s always a chance of shenanigans somewhere. No one has mentioned the umpires. Look what happened in the NBA when a referee was on the take. There are plenty of ways to alter the outcome of a game. This has been a problem since the beginning of sports. Apparently it happened often in baseball even before the Black Sox scandal of 1919. There have been a number of college basketball scandals involving point shaving, not necessarily losing the game, but failing to top the spread. With legalized sports gambling the chances of something happening will increase. Even Pete Rose pointed out that he’s banned for life for gambling and now it’s legal and everywhere. Should be interesting to see what happens over the next few years.
Meanwhile, Arnold Rothstein is warming up in the bullpen.
Good points Paul…the door is cracked open a bit…
Not much change will be implemented to speed up the game for 2019.
Down time between innings
was cut.
And, if the All Star game goes to extra innings, that gimmicky man on 2nd base to start the inning will be in effect.
Hit the snooze alarm…
I guess didn’t have any ‘good points.’ No one commented on my points or ideas. I’m crushed but I’ll get over it.
Sure, some of the ideas may be beyond what’s been considered but once the snowball starts rolling downhill, these are things that could happen. Careful!