New Baseball Rules

[godwulf]

Well, yesterday I tried to post about the new rules that MLB will be trying out in the AZ Fall League, ostensibly to speed up The Game. I had links, quotes, commentary, etc., and then my computer ate it. I don't have the energy to do it again...but I wanted to solicit some input, anyway.

When a manager signals for an intentional walk, the batter-runner will take First without the pitcher tossing any wide ones. (I don't like this, personally, because it eliminates the possibility that the battery will screw up and let base-runners advance or even a runner from Third to score.)

Time-outs will be limited, and a 20-second pitch clock will be enforced.

The batter will not be permitted to leave the box except in the event of a wild pitch or foul ball - no more taking a fifteen-second walk because you didn't like the umpire's call on that last pitch.

Those were the main ones, as I recall. What do you think?

[helf35]

Re: New Baseball Rules

I don't mind the automatic intentional walk pass. It really is a waste of 4 pitches and about 1 minute but really how many times does this happen in a game? Its not like they are really saving time here. It would be different if this happend 4 or 5 times every game. Sometimes guys do get to carried away with all there antics in between pitches which i wouldnt mind seeing them cut some of that down. You could probably realistically cut some decent time down in a game with that. I think this could create an advantage to some pitchers such as Mark Buehrle who seems ready to go as soon as the ball is thrown back to him and disrupt the timing of certain hitters.

[godwulf]

Re: New Baseball Rules

Speaking of saving time, I remember hearing or reading somewhere that Don Drysdale used to sometimes just hit a guy that he wanted to put on base, rather than go to all the trouble of throwing the ball four times.

[Roady]

Re: New Baseball Rules

Make batting gloves illegal and it will probably make the game go twice as fast. How many times do that have to adjust those things anyway?

[godwulf]

Re: New Baseball Rules

I think that maybe the limit on the number of time-outs that can be called will have a serious effect on the guys who think they have to unfasten and refasten their batting gloves after every pitch - even if they didn't swing. After a guy gets called out on strikes a few times because he ignored the fact that the umpire disallowed his request for time, the team Manager is likely to toss that guy's supply of batting gloves in the trash.

[Titans74]

Re: New Baseball Rules

I'm not even a fan of instant replay, nevermind more rule changes.

[Buccaneer Madden]

Re: New Baseball Rules

Speaking of saving time, I remember hearing or reading somewhere that Don Drysdale used to sometimes just hit a guy that he wanted to put on base, rather than go to all the trouble of throwing the ball four times.

I heard that about Bob Gibson. I think the walk one is dumb but the rest heck yeah... way too much wasted time adjusting gloves and jerseys after every dang pitch.

[godwulf]

Re: New Baseball Rules

The best part about instant replay, in my opinion, is that teams are now allowed to show controversial plays on the Jumbo-tron - they used to get fined for that. I've seen it happen a few times recently where an umpiring crew will reverse a call on its own after New York has declined to...because everybody in the ballpark has watched it on the big screen from four different angles, in slow-motion, and knows the ump screwed up.

[coxfan]

Re: New Baseball Rules

The wild pitch on an IBB in the playoffs, which turned into an out at home, will probably deflate that rule-change. Another point:The ball's live after a ball four, but is dead ( Runners can't advance) after a hit batsman. So which would it be if the batter simply was waved to first? If a manager decides to throw an intentional ball four after a legitimate 3-0 count was reached, would a rule change allowing him to do this without throwing a pitch be a factor with runners on?

Years ago, a pitcher yelled that they were going to put a batter on with an intentional ball four when he already had a 3-2 count. Then they fooled the batter, who'd relaxed, with a called strike. ( I think this occurred in a World Series.) By the way, I saw the 1957 World Series live, with its "shoe polish" hit batsman. (An early example of a "replay" without technology.)

The change I'd like is eliminate the uncaught 3rd strike. About 99% of the time the batters don't bother to run.

[godwulf]

Re: New Baseball Rules

Yeah, but when they do, things can sometimes get interesting. I remember a game in Atlanta years ago, when Kelly Stinnett with the Diamondbacks struck out to (in theory) end the game, but the pitch was in the dirt; despite being a slow runner, even for a catcher, he started chugging up the line, the catcher lobbed it over the First Baseman's head, Stinnett went to Second - then it was just hit after hit till Arizona had the lead and went on to win the game.

[Mark17]

Re: New Baseball Rules

Years ago, a pitcher yelled that they were going to put a batter on with an intentional ball four when he already had a 3-2 count. Then they fooled the batter, who'd relaxed, with a called strike. ( I think this occurred in a World Series.)

As I recall, it was in the early 1970s and the A's pulled it off against Johnny Bench. The catcher (must've been Tenace) stood up indicating they'd throw ball four, but then returned to his crouch and caught strike 3 that Bench stood there and took. I seem to remember Morgan or somebody on base at the time, yelling in to Bench to be careful, but it didn't help.

I'd love to see the game sped up, but not at the expense of losing those opportunities to outthink the other team.