Post by nuraman00 on Feb 22, 2018 13:24:34 GMT -8
There's a proposed rule change by an anonymous executive about letting the trailing team pick any 3 batters to start the 9th.
www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-to-allow-any-player-to-bat-in-9th-lets-discuss-the-dumbest-rule-proposal-ever/
I'm unclear as to what happens if the road team is losing to start the 9th, and what happens if they take the lead. Can the home team then pick any 3 batters to start the bottom of the 9th?
I would prefer not to have this rule change.
I don't like shootouts in soccer or the NHL.
I don't like the college football overtime rule.
I don't like tiebreakers in deciding sets in tennis.
I like those random marathon sports games, where the game isn't over until someone properly takes the lead. I remember where I was anytime those marathon games happen.
I don't like changing the rules at the end of a game, just so the game has a quick ending. I like the drama of not knowing when a game might end timewise, and keeping the same rules as earlier in the game.
BUT, MLB has changed a lot.
* From 1857 - 1872, the game was played as the first team to score to 21.
* Between 1867 - 1887, a batter would actually call for either a high pitch or low pitch.
* Prior to 1864, it was still an out if the ball was caught after one bounce.
* Prior to 1883, pitchers had to throw underhand.
* Walks were scored as hits in 1887.
* Between 1880 - 1889, batters got 4 strikes.
* Prior to 1901, foul balls were not counted as strikes.
* Black players were allowed to play, starting with Jackie Robinson.
* 1870, the every team played 70 games. In 1892, 154 games. In 1962, 162 games. People were upset when Roger Maris broke Ruth's home run record, because they didn't want it broken. And they said "he did it in more games".
* The D.H.
So when the MLB introduces a change, it can be a big one.
IF they're going to have this change, then:
Strategy:
* Do you go with your 3 best hitters? What if one of the hitters is in a 2-24 slump, while someone else is in a 7-10 stretch or is 3-3 that day?
What if one player has good splits against the closer that's not normally the 3 best hitters?
Managers can be even more open to questioning with the choices they make.
Marketing:
Teams can market their 3 best offensive players to be used if trailing in the 9th inning.
It will also make fans stay until the 9th inning in a 1 or 2 run game, because they know their best offensive players will bat.
It will also make fans who have Extra Innings tune into games in a close 9th inning.
Roster Sizes:
If this rule is ever passed, then they have to increase the roster sizes to allow one more pitcher.
There will be a lot more relief pitchers used, especially to face one of those "Big 3" offensive hitters.
Other corresponding rule changes:
If this rule is ever passed, and the trailing team activates this rule, then they should start the ABs with an 0-1 count.
Or, even more dramatic, with 1 out.
There should also be a rule to be able to bring back a pitcher for one batter. If they're going to let a batter bat wherever he wants in the 9th, then pitchers should have more flexibility too.
BTW, all of this scoring goes against the movement to shorten the game. Increasing scoring increases the length of the game.
Other affects of this rule:
I'm not sure if the amount of walk-offs would increase or not. It depends on how often trailing road teams use this rule and take the lead, vs. trailing home teams using this rule to win the game.
I'm sure the home teams who were leading after 8 innings who go on to lose in the 9th would be pissed that their pitchers had to face the other team's best hitters. They shouldn't have to face that kind of situation, especially after already facing these guys in the 7th or 8th.
The amount of no-hitters would theoretically decrease, but you never know.
www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-to-allow-any-player-to-bat-in-9th-lets-discuss-the-dumbest-rule-proposal-ever/
I'm unclear as to what happens if the road team is losing to start the 9th, and what happens if they take the lead. Can the home team then pick any 3 batters to start the bottom of the 9th?
I would prefer not to have this rule change.
I don't like shootouts in soccer or the NHL.
I don't like the college football overtime rule.
I don't like tiebreakers in deciding sets in tennis.
I like those random marathon sports games, where the game isn't over until someone properly takes the lead. I remember where I was anytime those marathon games happen.
I don't like changing the rules at the end of a game, just so the game has a quick ending. I like the drama of not knowing when a game might end timewise, and keeping the same rules as earlier in the game.
BUT, MLB has changed a lot.
* From 1857 - 1872, the game was played as the first team to score to 21.
* Between 1867 - 1887, a batter would actually call for either a high pitch or low pitch.
* Prior to 1864, it was still an out if the ball was caught after one bounce.
* Prior to 1883, pitchers had to throw underhand.
* Walks were scored as hits in 1887.
* Between 1880 - 1889, batters got 4 strikes.
* Prior to 1901, foul balls were not counted as strikes.
* Black players were allowed to play, starting with Jackie Robinson.
* 1870, the every team played 70 games. In 1892, 154 games. In 1962, 162 games. People were upset when Roger Maris broke Ruth's home run record, because they didn't want it broken. And they said "he did it in more games".
* The D.H.
So when the MLB introduces a change, it can be a big one.
IF they're going to have this change, then:
Strategy:
* Do you go with your 3 best hitters? What if one of the hitters is in a 2-24 slump, while someone else is in a 7-10 stretch or is 3-3 that day?
What if one player has good splits against the closer that's not normally the 3 best hitters?
Managers can be even more open to questioning with the choices they make.
Marketing:
Teams can market their 3 best offensive players to be used if trailing in the 9th inning.
It will also make fans stay until the 9th inning in a 1 or 2 run game, because they know their best offensive players will bat.
It will also make fans who have Extra Innings tune into games in a close 9th inning.
Roster Sizes:
If this rule is ever passed, then they have to increase the roster sizes to allow one more pitcher.
There will be a lot more relief pitchers used, especially to face one of those "Big 3" offensive hitters.
Other corresponding rule changes:
If this rule is ever passed, and the trailing team activates this rule, then they should start the ABs with an 0-1 count.
Or, even more dramatic, with 1 out.
There should also be a rule to be able to bring back a pitcher for one batter. If they're going to let a batter bat wherever he wants in the 9th, then pitchers should have more flexibility too.
BTW, all of this scoring goes against the movement to shorten the game. Increasing scoring increases the length of the game.
Other affects of this rule:
I'm not sure if the amount of walk-offs would increase or not. It depends on how often trailing road teams use this rule and take the lead, vs. trailing home teams using this rule to win the game.
I'm sure the home teams who were leading after 8 innings who go on to lose in the 9th would be pissed that their pitchers had to face the other team's best hitters. They shouldn't have to face that kind of situation, especially after already facing these guys in the 7th or 8th.
The amount of no-hitters would theoretically decrease, but you never know.
