684548595E4F58181B2A0 wrote: Rather than retype my thoughts, I'll link to what I posted on Twitter today. I'm disgusted by these rule changes. The NL DH and extra innings fiasco did it for me. I'll probably still tune in, because that's my addiction, but I'm just disgusted right now. Yes, get rid of Manfred. He, the owners, the players...they've ruined the greatest game in the world.
https://twitter.com/FrPBehm/status/1275 ... 04809?s=20
We're experiencing connection issues this morning so I was unable to read your tweet but, like you, I'm having difficulty understanding why oddball rules changes are necessary. For me, if the owners have concerns about making the game more attractive for people with shorter attention spans, the solution is so very simple: have the umpires enforce the rules. After stern warnings for the first infraction, if a pitcher doesn't work in the allotted time, the batter receives a base on balls. If the hitter wanders from the batter's box, he's called out. If either argues, they're ejected. If the umpires slack in enforcing the rules, they risk suspension.
I think the reason why players are taking so long between pitches is because of the analytics. The game has become so over-thought that the managers, coaches, and players are paralyzed by all of the thinking they're doing, calculating the odds of what the next pitch should be based on the current situation. After all of that, to see the result of an at bat now mostly being a strike out, walk, or home run, where no on-field action occurs, it's no wonder fans are bored. Making it worse is the current philosophy of running up pitch counts which extend at bats, many of which end in one of those boring outcomes.
Weird rules aren't needed. The pace of the game would improve dramatically just by enforcing two rules already in place.
Totally agree Doc. [highlight]And the rule most in need of enforcement is the strike zone.[/highlight] And since umps can't or won't enforce it, I'm all for an electronic piece in the ump's ear to let him know so he can signal ball or strike and still be there for foul balls, HBPs, balks, catcher's interference and plays at the plate. Nothing has delayed the game more than the pitch count strategy. Make the pitcher get to 100 ASAP to force the other mgr to get into his BP. Batters don't have look for a strike to hit because it might not even be called a strike. Work that count. When I watch games that display the pitch track in the corner it seems about a third to a half of pitches in every AB are called wrong. Batters know a strike isn't necessarily a strike so they take pitches to drive the count up. Send batters to the plate knowing they won't get the benefit of bad calls and they will focus on hitting rather than taking as many pitchers as possible. Do that for every batter and the game will speed up.
Another good point. It seems that in the current game, a walk is regarded to be better than a hit because of the extra pitches that are thrown. But it has to be more difficult to draw a walk than to get a hit. After all, how many times does a hitter end a season with more walks than hits? Barry Bonds had more walks than hits seven times (all during his final years when teams refused to pitch to him). Ted Williams did it once. Babe Ruth never did it.
As for the electronic strike zone, I'm completely against technology being part of the game but I've come to the point that the inconsistencies demonstrated by the umpires have become too much of a factor in the outcomes of at bats and, ultimately, games. I'm not sure that their older eyes are good enough to follow the speed and movement of today's pitchers. I'm willing to try the technology.