Baseball Banning Home Plate Collisions

[HFWR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kombat I think there's more than enough energy, excitement, action, and speed in all the other trilling aspects of baseball that it can sustain the loss of this one little thing.[/sarcasm] Maybe I'm just a naive Canuck, but I honestly don't see the appeal of a "sport" with approximately 9 minutes of actual action in a 3 hour game. I can't think of a sport with LESS athletic "athletes" than Baseball. Old, flabby, no cardio ... who gets excited to spend 3 hours watching these guys ride a bench or kick dirt in an outfield? And don't get me started on the designated runner rule. As if that could happen in any other sport. Imagine if a short white guy could make a lucky intercept in basketball, run the ball back to the net, then call a timeout and swap in Shaq. Or if the rookie defenseman in hockey intercepted the puck and made a breakaway to the opposing net, then called a timeout so Sidney Crosby could jump in and take the actual shot. It's ridiculous! Yet no one bats an eye in baseball. Between that, the steroids, the stubborn and inexplicable resistance to using instant replays, now this .. how does baseball have any credibility at all as a sport?

To each their own, but obviously you haven't watched baseball lately. There are a lot of very buff players in baseball.

[samclem]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kombat Maybe I'm just a naive Canuck, but I honestly don't see the appeal of a "sport" with approximately 9 minutes of actual action in a 3 hour game.

Queen Elizabeth II is officially monarch of all "Canucks." Until you guys change that, you're stuck having to defend the game of cricket (best thought of as a game of "pickle" that lasts two weeks). Think about that as you sit in your igloo glass house casting stones at our beloved pastime.

(There, that ought to extinguish any sense of civility in this thread)

[haha]

When most of these popular and now big business sports were developed players were not as big, strong, and fast. Plus they were not steroid-ed. Also, society knew much less about long term effects of trauma, expecially head trauma.

People who need carnage in their entertainment can always watch boxing or UFC.

From my POV the only downside to these rule changes is that it does insert the umpire/referee more deeply into the outcome of events on the field.

Ha

[1986pacecar]

I guess I'll wait to see how it's implemented before tossing my two cents in. I don't think it means the baserunner will pull up. I think he'll have to slide and the catcher will have to tag him rather than plant one foot on the plate and effectively block him from scoring. Kind of makes me wonder what Pete Rose thinks about all of this

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kombat I think there's more than enough energy, excitement, action, and speed in all the other trilling aspects of baseball that it can sustain the loss of this one little thing.[/sarcasm] Maybe I'm just a naive Canuck, but I honestly don't see the appeal of a "sport" with approximately 9 minutes of actual action in a 3 hour game. I can't think of a sport with LESS athletic "athletes" than Baseball. Old, flabby, no cardio ... who gets excited to spend 3 hours watching these guys ride a bench or kick dirt in an outfield? And don't get me started on the designated runner rule. As if that could happen in any other sport. Imagine if a short white guy could make a lucky intercept in basketball, run the ball back to the net, then call a timeout and swap in Shaq. Or if the rookie defenseman in hockey intercepted the puck and made a breakaway to the opposing net, then called a timeout so Sidney Crosby could jump in and take the actual shot. It's ridiculous! Yet no one bats an eye in baseball. Between that, the steroids, the stubborn and inexplicable resistance to using instant replays, now this .. how does baseball have any credibility at all as a sport?

You kinda contradict yourself.... I have never seen an old flabby guy that takes steroids....


Someone else already has thrown in the cricket aspect... talk about lack of action... and they even schedule a tea time in the middle of the game!!!!

[Independent]

Quote:

Essentially, Bochy said, the new rule would treat home plate like second and third base; plays at the plate would be tag plays, not contact plays. The runner needs a lane, and the catcher must give it to him or risk an obstruction penalty and possibly a fine or ejection. A runner would face the same consequences if he had a path to the plate and barreled into the catcher instead.

Seems reasonable.

[ziggy29]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1986pacecar Kind of makes me wonder what Pete Rose thinks about all of this

Wonder no more -- it's a pretty predictable answer to anyone who ever saw Rose play:

Pete Rose Slams MLB’s Decision To Eliminate Home Plate Collisions « CBS New York

Quote:

“What are they going to do next, you can’t break up a double play?” Pete Rose said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. “You’re not allowed to pitch inside. The hitters wear more armor than the Humvees in Afghanistan. Now you’re not allowed to be safe at home plate? What’s the game coming to? Evidently the guys making all these rules never played the game of baseball.”

[GrayHare]

Yup, whenever I'm undecided on an issue I think to myself, "Now, what would Pete Rose do?"

[RunningBum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kombat And don't get me started on the designated runner rule.

There is no designated runner rule. I guess you meant designated hitter. But here's an idea. If you don't like a pasttime or hobby, just don't read and post on the topic, rather than crapping on other people's fun.

[Theduckguru]

I don't think a batter should be hit my a 100 mph ball, a second baseman's shine speared with a runners foot, a out fielder should be landing hard after diving for a catch or an umpire having to wear black on a hot sunny day.

[Bestwifeever]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrayHare Yup, whenever I'm undecided on an issue I think to myself, "Now, what would Pete Rose do?"

He would bet on the catcher

[kombat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud You kinda contradict yourself.... I have never seen an old flabby guy that takes steroids....

OK, let's approach this logically.

If I'm contradicting myself, then one of my statements must be false. We know they take steroids, so therefore I must be incorrect about them being flabby, overweight guys.

And yet many of them are clearly sporting plenty of extra body fat.

How to reconcile this?

The answer, of course, is that steroids don't make you skinny. You can take steroids and still be fat.

I'm continuing to ignore the cricket red herring, as it's not actually played in Canada. Our national sport is hockey, where teams of fit guys slap razor-sharp steel blades to their feet and race around a sheet of ice slamming into each other.

[kombat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunningBum There is no designated runner rule. I guess you meant designated hitter.

No, I meant what I wrote.

As should be clear by now, I'm not a baseball fan, so I can't quote chapter and verse of the rules, but as I understand it, in certain circumstances, after accomplishing a base hit, a batter is permitted to substitute another player to take their place on the base, and run the rest of the bases in their stead.

[GrayHare]

That's a pinch runner, and there is a cost: the player who is removed cannot return to the game. There was, however, long ago in MLB a "courtesy runner" rule.

[robnplunder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha When most of these popular and now big business sports were developed players were not as big, strong, and fast. Plus they were not steroid-ed. Also, society knew much less about long term effects of trauma, expecially head trauma. People who need carnage in their entertainment can always watch boxing or UFC. From my POV the only downside to these rule changes is that it does insert the umpire/referee more deeply into the outcome of events on the field. Ha

Not to mention how expensive (these days) it is to a player and his team for a key player to get injured in such collision. Big money talks. Having said that, I agree with the ban. Violence in baseball seems to be out of place.

For martial sports, I don't support dumb'ng things down. I was disappointed when boxing did away with 15 round matches. I think that pro boxing's decline and they never recovered hitherto.

[kombat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrayHare That's a pinch runner, and there is a cost: the player who is removed cannot return to the game.

Do teams routinely take advantage of this rule strategically? For example, if it's the bottom of the 9th inning and there's little chance the batter will need to hit again anyway, do they ever substitute in a much faster runner, simply for the tactical advantage?

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kombat No, I meant what I wrote. As should be clear by now, I'm not a baseball fan, so I can't quote chapter and verse of the rules, but as I understand it, in certain circumstances, after accomplishing a base hit, a batter is permitted to substitute another player to take their place on the base, and run the rest of the bases in their stead.

Well, then why are all those hockey players subed after about 2 minutes on the ice.... seems their fitness is not up to snuff...

I think that the players should play the whole game and not get a break.... more like soccer....

And if they do sub for them, heck, they can come back and play later!!! What woooses....

[Bestwifeever]

Lord Stanley's Cup is enjoying its year in Chicago.

[RunningBum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kombat Do teams routinely take advantage of this rule strategically? For example, if it's the bottom of the 9th inning and there's little chance the batter will need to hit again anyway, do they ever substitute in a much faster runner, simply for the tactical advantage?

If it's a tie or one-run game where that run is critical, yes. Just like most team sports, specialists are put in for special situations. Football is the most common, you have pass rush specialists and an extra defensive back for passing situations, an offensive lineman may come in as a blocking back in goal line situations, and entire squads come in for special teams--not to mention the obvious offense and defense platoons. In basketball, coaches call timeouts late in the game to get the best free throw shooters in when they know the other team will foul, and defensive specialists when they don't have the ball. In hockey a goalie will be pulled late in the game to add an extra attacker, and aren't there specialists for penalty killing?

[robnplunder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kombat Do teams routinely take advantage of this rule strategically? For example, if it's the bottom of the 9th inning and there's little chance the batter will need to hit again anyway, do they ever substitute in a much faster runner, simply for the tactical advantage?

Yup. It happens often enough.