Jump to content

Timeouts


DrungoHazewood

Recommended Posts

I feel like I'm in the minority in society today, but I think the speed of the game is exactly the speed it's supposed to be. It's as much a "game" as it is a "sport". Throwing over to first base ten times is sometimes part of the chess match. Stepping out of the batters box when the pitcher is trying to mess with your timing is part of the game. If people have a problem with the speed of the game, they would probably be happier picking a different sport than trying to correct the problem.

That might be a good point if games weren't as likely to go over four hours today as they were under two hours 35 years ago. There's a point where things just go too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eliminate one thirty second commercial from each break.

Automate the strike zone.

Length of game shortened, no effect on strategy/gamesmanship.

And completely implausible. The league doesn't care how long the games are, up to a point. More ad revenues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Umps used to make the pace of the game a priority, back before lights were in every park. If you didn't keep the game moving, every one would have ended after six or seven innings. But without a real motivating factor like that it's pretty clear the umps can't or won't do much to improve the pace of the game.

You could recreate that. Put the lights on a timer. They go out after 4 hours unless the game goes to extra frames. If the lights go out, the game doesn't count and the umps have to work the makeup game for no pay.

I think I'm kidding. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I'm in the minority in society today, but I think the speed of the game is exactly the speed it's supposed to be. It's as much a "game" as it is a "sport". Throwing over to first base ten times is sometimes part of the chess match. Stepping out of the batters box when the pitcher is trying to mess with your timing is part of the game. If people have a problem with the speed of the game, they would probably be happier picking a different sport than trying to correct the problem.

I just want the pacing of games of my youth. And I'm no 80-year-old geezer, I was in middle school the last time the O's won the Series. I remember when 4-hour games were noteworthy enough to get comment about how they were approaching a record. Now they're just known as "Yankee games".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched a bit of the 1960 Game 7 World Series on MLB Network... one thing I immediately noticed was how hitters did not leave the box.

Pitchers would get the ball back and pitch. Hitters were not wearing gloves or armor, and spending time rearranging.

Totally agree about calling the strike zone as the rulebook states. That is my number one peeve about baseball.

#2 for me, behind the stupidity that is the balk rule. Why shouldn't the pitcher be able to deceive the runner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree about calling the strike zone as the rulebook states. That is my number one peeve about baseball.

Back in the late 80s or early 90s they changed the book definition of the top of the strike zone from shoulders (or armpits or something) to "is a

horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants". Essentially the letters. So I'm not sure rigidly enforcing this would slice some huge chunk of time off of games, although tinkering in the past (think 1963) has led to big changes in offense.

Now, if they suddenly went back to the old strike zone definition of bottom of the knee to the shoulders you'd probably see a fairly substantial reduction in game times. But you'd probably also see runs scored fall by 1/3 or more, and strikeouts go into the stratosphere. Basically every game would be 2-0, with two solo homers and 24 strikeouts.

#2 for me, behind the stupidity that is the balk rule. Why shouldn't the pitcher be able to deceive the runner?

I completely agree that the balk rule is almost unexplainable. There are sections of the rule that defy all logic and common sense ("It's a balk if the pitcher delivers the ball to the batter while he is not facing the batter" Really? What does that even mean? This actually appears to be a rule preventing the Harlem Globetrotters from fielding a major league team.)

It was pretty clearly written 100+ years ago, possibly before there was even a pitching rubber/mound, and may have made sense back then.

I'd erase the whole thing and try to forget it ever existed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched a bit of the 1960 Game 7 World Series on MLB Network... one thing I immediately noticed was how hitters did not leave the box.

Pitchers would get the ball back and pitch. Hitters were not wearing gloves or armor, and spending time rearranging.

Totally agree about calling the strike zone as the rulebook states. That is my number one peeve about baseball.

I kind of like how each ump establishes their own strike zone and has a reputation for preferring a certain strike zone. One of my biggest pet peeves is that the umps don't seem to be held accountable for ever changing strike zones.

Hate to sidetrack the thread, but do we even know how MLB handles this? It seems simple to me. Use the technology that exists to weed out the umps that are the least competent (most erratic).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree that the balk rule is almost unexplainable. There are sections of the rule that defy all logic and common sense ("It's a balk if the pitcher delivers the ball to the batter while he is not facing the batter" Really? What does that even mean? This actually appears to be a rule preventing the Harlem Globetrotters from fielding a major league team.)

It was pretty clearly written 100+ years ago, possibly before there was even a pitching rubber/mound, and may have made sense back then.

I'd erase the whole thing and try to forget it ever existed.

I think the point is to try and maintain some semblance of focus on the actual act of pitching, rather than encouraging teams to figure out ways to trick people. As enforced, I don't think the balk rule is an issue at all, outside of the fake-to-third-throw-to-first, which for whatever reason gets a pass though it is clearly a balk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point is to try and maintain some semblance of focus on the actual act of pitching, rather than encouraging teams to figure out ways to trick people. As enforced, I don't think the balk rule is an issue at all, outside of the fake-to-third-throw-to-first, which for whatever reason gets a pass though it is clearly a balk.

I think every once in a while it's a huge issue. A couple years ago the O's lost a game on a Steve Kline balk that was too slight to be seen with the naked eye. Apparently one of the tiny muscles in his wrist twitched while he was in the set position with a runner on third in the 9th, the ump used his SuperUmpVision to track it, and that was enough to call a balk.

That kind of thing happens in the World Series and Bud Selig is doing his creepy All Star backtracking apology thing and putting together blue ribbon committees to reform the balk rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an aside, MLB should consider a pitch clock, which I believe the SEC will be using this year after test driving it in the conference tournament.

The Northern League used this the first year they were around, but found there were so many exceptions and it was so unwiedly that they gave it up halfway through the year. Maybe the SEC has a better approach. I like the idea, if a good implementation can be found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...