Jump to content

Roger's Centre Moving Walls In


Can_of_corn

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, jabba72 said:

Im also confused why any team would want a 357 power alley in RF. That is just ridiculously short. 366 in LF is almost as bad. Its old Camden Yards bad, which I thought was the shortest in baseball. 

Im guessing a few years or less they'll so how bad of an idea it was and change it back. Because IMO, it is a bad idea. 

Their fans must have voted for this or something.

Maybe they’re trying to see if Vlad Jr can hit 60+ home runs this season. I don’t get it either this would be like if Elias brought in the left field fence at OPACY last year instead of moving it further back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Maybe they’re trying to see if Vlad Jr can hit 60+ home runs this season. I don’t get it either this would be like if Elias brought in the left field fence at OPACY last year instead of moving it further back. 

Thats going to make 3 launching pads in the AL east now, Camden Yards a 4th if your LH'er. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jabba72 said:

Thats going to make 3 launching pads in the AL east now, Camden Yards a 4th if your LH'er. 

It's too early to say for sure, but I don't think Camden is much of a launching pad for LHHs now, it's just ok. Sure, you can pull fly balls onto the flag court, but not being able to hit opposite field home runs hurts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/22/2023 at 9:19 AM, SpOkane said:

MLB should institute a new rule for every foot a wall is moved in the height of the wall increases so many inches.  And for every foot a wall is moved back the wall decreases so many inches.

The O's left field wall would be 8 feet underground.  On field seating will really provide a one of a kind experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

The O's left field wall would be 8 feet underground.  On field seating will really provide a one of a kind experience.

Ohhh... now there's an idea. Instead of a wall you have a trench.  I like it.  The question is do you just paint a line at the edge, or have a little triangular thing marking the boundary like on a cricket oval?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/22/2023 at 6:08 PM, spiritof66 said:

As you'll see from the article linked below, there have been a number of other exceptions granted, including those for Camden Yards and the new Yankee Stadium. In most of those cases, there was a practical reason for allowing a distance under the minimum. If that was the case in Toronto, I don't know what the reason was.  

https://www.closecallsports.com/2012/06/rule-104-note-minimum-field-dimensions.html

Yea, the "practical" reasons for the exemptions were we've designed the stadium this way because we thought it was cool, and how about we say it would be expensive and a pain in the butt to change the drawings now?

These are essentially $billion custom-designed stadiums and they're arguing that it's neigh impossible to move a fence back 3'. Yea, okay.  Camden Yards is 318' to RF because every stadium for the prior two decades had been a cookie cutter and they wanted to be different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2023 at 7:58 AM, DrungoHazewood said:

Ohhh... now there's an idea. Instead of a wall you have a trench.  I like it.  The question is do you just paint a line at the edge, or have a little triangular thing marking the boundary like on a cricket oval?

Not a trench.  A moat.  With crocodiles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...