The extra inning runner on 2B rule

[Frobby]

22 minutes ago, Oriole1940 said:

Thank God Almighty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He has bigger things to worry about.  

[SteveA]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Looks like this rule is going away in 2022, along with 7-inning doubleheader games.   Too bad, I like the rule.  
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/31812409/seven-inning-doubleheaders-extra-inning-runner-rule-likely-dropped-mlb-2022-commissioner-rob-manfred-says

What Manfred says now means nothing.   He doesn't get to set the terms of the next CBA.

I'm assuming the players like those 2020-21 changes because they lessen their workload without lowering their salary.   So now he has staked out a position that ownership wants to do away with them.   That's all.

If it can help get him something that means real $ in the next CBA, he'll give those items back to the players in a heartbeat.

[Punchandjudy]

Manfred suggesting he may do away with the 7 inning double header and extra inning rule gives me a sliver of hope for him as commissioner.  If only he could have a reset on allowing a juiced ball and turning a blind eye to pitchers doctoring the ball, he would could be in the running with Selig as worst Commisioner in the post-integration league (banning black ball players earns you a place as a special kind of stupid).  Unfortunately, he either was proactive or passive in allowing cheating and the game is worse off for his tenure because of it.  

[HowAboutThat]

Manfred is a Tool, But an inexplicable one. He has no personal charisma, he has bad teeth, for Pete’s sake’s. He can’t speak publicly at all, he constantly stumbles over his words, if any of the recent decisions are his and his alone, rather than the result of a really foolish committee, such as the extra inning rule, the seventh-inning doubleheader rule, minimum batter rule, the pitch clock, then he is incompetent.

he brings less than nothing to the position And I cannot fathom why they can’t find somebody without the flaws he demonstrates on such a regular basis.

Every time I think of that man I wonder why the bus keeps running over the wrong guy.

[HowAboutThat]

And with all due respect to Frobby, There is nothing good at all, for the fans,about the seven inning doubleheader. They are literally getting less than they pay for. They don’t have to pay 7/9 for a beer or parking or a Hot Dog, yet they only get 7 innings.

If that means the players are tired, well, boo-hoo, that’s why they’re getting $4000 a day or more, mostly more.

Same for extra innings, yes a 17-inning game is reminiscent of forced binge watching “Days of our lives” so what? That’s what makes the game exciting, and it is exciting.

I don’t mind rule changes, within limits, that will make the game better, but changes for the sake of change are stupid by definition because they create another layer of bureaucracy without accomplishing anything.

[MurphDogg]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

And with all due respect to Frobby, There is nothing good at all, for the fans,about the seven inning doubleheader. They are literally getting less than they pay for. They don’t have to pay 7/9 for a beer or parking or a Hot Dog, yet they only get 7 innings.

Only one team has tried to institute separate admission double headers, (The Mets) and the reaction was so negative, that I doubt another team will try.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

And with all due respect to Frobby, There is nothing good at all, for the fans,about the seven inning doubleheader. They are literally getting less than they pay for. They don’t have to pay 7/9 for a beer or parking or a Hot Dog, yet they only get 7 innings.

If that means the players are tired, well, boo-hoo, that’s why they’re getting $4000 a day or more, mostly more.

Same for extra innings, yes a 17-inning game is reminiscent of forced binge watching “Days of our lives” so what? That’s what makes the game exciting, and it is exciting.

I don’t mind rule changes, within limits, that will make the game better, but changes for the sake of change are stupid by definition because they create another layer of bureaucracy without accomplishing anything.

So far as I know, all the doubleheaders under the new rule have been single admission, whereas before they were usually separate admission.   So, fans going to a single admission doubleheader are getting 14 innings/2 outcomes for the price of 9 innings/1 outcome.  In a separate admission double header, you’re  just paying separately for two 9 inning games, plus you have a 2-3 hour break in between instead of 30 minutes.  

[HowAboutThat]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

So far as I know, all the doubleheaders under the new rule have been single admission, whereas before they were usually separate admission.   So, fans going to a single admission doubleheader are getting 14 innings/2 outcomes for the price of 9 innings/1 outcome.  In a separate admission double header, you’re  just paying separately for two 9 inning games, plus you have a 2-3 hour break in between instead of 30 minutes.  

So? You’re paying for a nine inning game and getting seven.

in the old days you paid for 9 and got nine.

You are my brother, Frobby,  but if you keep insisting on this, out Christmas get-together are going to be a bit tight-lipped…

jus’ sayin’……

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Philip said:

So? You’re paying for a nine inning game and getting seven.

in the old days you paid for 9 and got nine.

You are my brother, Frobby,  but if you keep insisting on this, out Christmas get-together are going to be a bit tight-lipped…

jus’ sayin’……

You’re paying for 9 innings and getting 14, not 7.   That’s my point.   

But that’s not the hill I’m going to die on.   I don’t care very much about the doubleheader rule.   I do like the runner on 2B in extra innings rule.   
 

 

[HowAboutThat]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

You’re paying for 9 innings and getting 14, not 7.   That’s my point.   

But that’s not the hill I’m going to die on.   I don’t care very much about the doubleheader rule.   I do like the runner on 2B in extra innings rule.   
 

 

You’re paying for a game and getting part of two games. That’s my point. If major-league baseball wants to have a single or double admission DH, I do not care, but a game needs to be nine innings and not seven. The point that you’re paying for nine innings and getting 14 is meaningless, because you’re paying for something that is complete and you’re getting two things that are not complete. It is unbelievably stupid, and we’re already seeing the loopy results when we have incomplete no-hitters that aren’t no-hitters because hey, it’s only seven innings. And a seven inning game that goes nine, well is THAT a complete game or an extra inning game? Silly. 
(btw I’m sure there are answers for those questions and examples have probably already happened, but that just illustrates how silly the concept is.)

I want nine innings or more, I do not want seven innings, and it is de facto wrong to say that seven innings is equal to nine. The two are not the same. If you’re getting seven innings twice, it’s just twice as wrong. And for what it’s worth, except in extraordinary conditions, a rain-postponed game should always be completed.

[DrungoHazewood]

12 hours ago, Frobby said:

So far as I know, all the doubleheaders under the new rule have been single admission, whereas before they were usually separate admission.   So, fans going to a single admission doubleheader are getting 14 innings/2 outcomes for the price of 9 innings/1 outcome.  In a separate admission double header, you’re  just paying separately for two 9 inning games, plus you have a 2-3 hour break in between instead of 30 minutes.  

Don't know about you, but I buy my baseball by the pound.  If I can get nine innings for $20 that's fine, but if I can get 23 innings for $20 all the better!

The special thing about baseball is it doesn't have a clock.  So an inning could last 90 minutes, and a game all day.  If you don't like it, go watch some other sport.  And then another, and another, and then the baseball game might be over.

All kidding aside, 7 inning doubleheaders and the runner-on-second are just reactions to games taking forrr....ev...er.  There are nine inning games now longer than the famous Oscheger-Cadore 26-inning tie.  During the Orioles dynasty years they'd regularly play doubleheaders in four hours.  If a baseball game was 1.5-2 hours nobody would even consider these changes. They need to fix the pace of play to placate the folks who can't stand the new rules.

[DrungoHazewood]

10 hours ago, Philip said:

You’re paying for a game and getting part of two games. That’s my point. If major-league baseball wants to have a single or double admission DH, I do not care, but a game needs to be nine innings and not seven. The point that you’re paying for nine innings and getting 14 is meaningless, because you’re paying for something that is complete and you’re getting two things that are not complete. It is unbelievably stupid, and we’re already seeing the loopy results when we have incomplete no-hitters that aren’t no-hitters because hey, it’s only seven innings. And a seven inning game that goes nine, well is THAT a complete game or an extra inning game? Silly. 
(btw I’m sure there are answers for those questions and examples have probably already happened, but that just illustrates how silly the concept is.)

I want nine innings or more, I do not want seven innings, and it is de facto wrong to say that seven innings is equal to nine. The two are not the same. If you’re getting seven innings twice, it’s just twice as wrong. And for what it’s worth, except in extraordinary conditions, a rain-postponed game should always be completed.

In 1907 Christy Mathewson was credited with nine complete games that were less than nine innings.  Red Ames had five complete game shutouts of five innings each.  For much of baseball history rain and darkness caused many, many games to go less than nine.  Sometimes teams would agree before the game that one of them had to catch a train and they'd end the game after two hours no matter what.  There's reasons why the rulebook has always said an official game only has to go 4.5 or 5 innings.

[eddie83]

48 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Don't know about you, but I buy my baseball by the pound.  If I can get nine innings for $20 that's fine, but if I can get 23 innings for $20 all the better!

The special thing about baseball is it doesn't have a clock.  So an inning could last 90 minutes, and a game all day.  If you don't like it, go watch some other sport.  And then another, and another, and then the baseball game might be over.

All kidding aside, 7 inning doubleheaders and the runner-on-second are just reactions to games taking forrr....ev...er.  There are nine inning games now longer than the famous Oscheger-Cadore 26-inning tie.  During the Orioles dynasty years they'd regularly play doubleheaders in four hours.  If a baseball game was 1.5-2 hours nobody would even consider these changes. They need to fix the pace of play to placate the folks who can't stand the new rules.

It was a reaction to protecting pitchers. If it was about pace of play it would have been implemented years ago.

I’m not saying pace of play isn’t an issue. 

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

In 1907 Christy Mathewson was credited with nine complete games that were less than nine innings.  Red Ames had five complete game shutouts of five innings each.  For much of baseball history rain and darkness caused many, many games to go less than nine.  Sometimes teams would agree before the game that one of them had to catch a train and they'd end the game after two hours no matter what.  There's reasons why the rulebook has always said an official game only has to go 4.5 or 5 innings.

So? Each paying customer went to that game expecting nine innings and the fact that they weren’t completed was a matter of circumstance and not design.

Deliberately shortening a nine inning game to seven is stupid. Again, the examples you stated were exceptions rather than the rule. You are suggesting that making it the rule is acceptable and I strenuously disagree.

[Frobby]

Funny, I play softball every Sunday for 7 innings and I don’t feel cheated.   

I think it’s a moot point.  Manfred has made clear that the rule was adopted last year due to the expected large increase in doubleheaders due to Covid game cancellations (which proved true), and now that those have abated he’s not planning to keep them.  I’m fine with that, just saying that paying a single game price to see two 7-inning games doesn’t strike me as a ripoff at all.    Obviously the strategy for substituting pitchers changes a little in a shorter game, but it doesn’t change that much.