Possible MLB Rule Change

Radioguy41

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 7, 2008
1,631
1,051
Lehighton, Pennsylvania
Quite possibly THE dumbest proposed rule change I've ever heard of. :thumbdown

The length of the games, and I mean all regular inning games, has been growing due to two things; more and more TV commercials (good luck trying to change that) and poor umpiring. The problem with the umpires is primarily in two areas; bad calls on the field and calling balls & strikes. Since managers have been allowed to challenge umpire calls the overturned call rate has averaged around 50%. Thank about that, 50%! If they want to fix it then start by getting rid of the bums, like Joe West (and others). As for balls & strikes maybe it's time for MLB to start experimenting with the electronic strike zone. Umpires who line up on the outside shoulder of the catcher can't see the outside pitch on the other side of the plate, they just can't so instead they make the call based entirely on where the catcher frames the catch. So much so that framing the catch has become a factor in rating catchers, a rather large factor. The MLB Network spent a considerable amount of time discussing the Framing abilities of various catchers, on one show last week, and how it's factoring into any given catcher's contract offer. That tells you that MLB knows it's a problem and yet year after year MLB does nothing about the umpires behind the plate. If MLB is serious about speeding up the game they can accomplish it without actually changing the game itself by focusing on the umpires. An electronic strike zone alone would speed the game up by quite a bit. Placing a runner at 2nd to start every half inning in extra innings games isn't speeding up the game, it's corrupting it.
 
Last edited:

Derwin0

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 16, 2004
32,864
13,164
Jackson, GA
If they really want to reduce the length of extra innings games, just end the game in a tie if no one wins in the 10th. There's enough games in the season that they can stand a few ties.

The real rule they need to tackle is getting rid of the DH.
 

Derwin0

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 16, 2004
32,864
13,164
Jackson, GA
The problem with the umpires is primarily in two areas; bad calls on the field and calling balls & strikes. Since managers have been allowed to challenge umpire calls the overturned call rate has averaged around 50%. Thank about that, 50%! If they want to fix it then start by getting rid of the bums, like Joe West (and others). As for balls & strikes maybe it's time for MLB to start experimenting with the electronic strike zone. Umpires who line up on the outside shoulder of the catcher can't see the outside pitch on the other side of the plate, they just can't so instead they make the call based entirely on where the catcher frames the catch. So much so that framing the catch has become a factor in rating catchers, a rather large factor. The MLB Network spent a considerable amount of time discussing the Framing abilities of various catchers, on one show last week, and how it's factoring into any given catcher's contract offer. That tells you that MLB knows it's a problem and yet year after year MLB does nothing about the umpires behind the plate. If MLB is serious about speeding up the game they can accomplish it without actually changing the game itself by focusing on the umpires. An electronic strike zone alone would speed the game up by quite a bit. Placing a runner at 2nd to start every half inning in extra innings games isn't speeding up the game, it's corrupting it.
I wholeheartedly agree. It's long past time that MLB moved to electronic monitoring of Strikes & Balls.
 

cosmo_kramer

Master of my Domain
Oct 13, 2005
17,883
10,868
41.605N, -72.879W
If they really want to reduce the length of extra innings games, just end the game in a tie if no one wins in the 10th. There's enough games in the season that they can stand a few ties.

The real rule they need to tackle is getting rid of the DH.
Actually they need to keep the DH. With the pitcher's spot in the lineup there are too many pinch hitters, pinch runners, and pitching changes in the NL that actually slow the game down.

As for the extra innings proposal, recent stats show that only about 9% of games go into extra innings. Why put such a drastic change into such a small number of games?

There's things like extra commercial time, replay reviews, batters stepping out of the box, pitcher/catcher meetings that can be addressed.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimbo and BillD1984

Derwin0

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 16, 2004
32,864
13,164
Jackson, GA
Actually they need to keep the DH. With the pitcher's spot in the lineup there are too many pinch hitters, pinch runners, and pitching changes in the NL that actually slow the game down.
I'm not a fan of the DH, as it reduces the strategy towards the end of the game. For example, do you pull a hot pitcher in order to use a pitch hitter. Makes things more exciting to watch in the late innings.

If they don't want pitchers to hit, then just eliminate the position from the batting order, and have 8 men bat. I'm not a fan of people hitting but not playing defense.

As for the extra innings proposal, recent stats show that only about 9% of games go into extra innings. Why put such a drastic change into such a small number of games?

There's things like extra commercial time, replay reviews, batters stepping out of the box, pitcher/catcher meetings that can be addressed.....
On both these points I agree.
 

Balcy24

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
Jan 19, 2009
32
1
St. Louis, MO
At least with pitching changes you eventually run out of pitchers. As for the DH, I wonder what the average time of a NL game is compared to the AL? Shouldn't that show how much the DH affects the game time? MLB instituted a rule 2 or 3 seasons ago to try and speed up games by preventing batters from stepping out of the batter's box after every pitch. That was followed for maybe half a season before players went right back to adjusting their batting gloves, grabbing their cups and whatever else they can do to break the pitcher's rhythm. Eliminating pitchers from hitting is not the answer either. There are several pitchers who actually help their team win with RBIs and extra base hits and not just with a successful sacrifice. It is kind of ironic that MLB will split hairs with a replay review at first base yet there is NO reviews of bad pitch calling by umpires.
 

cosmo_kramer

Master of my Domain
Oct 13, 2005
17,883
10,868
41.605N, -72.879W
If you really want to shorten the length of games, limit the number of pitchers you can use. Five pitching changes in one inning? Really?
Nah, you'll always have pitcher injuries, so then pitchers would feign injuries to get around a limit. If you run out of pitchers, that's on you. That's like the recent talk of eliminating the defensive infield 'shift'. You can't legislate where players play, so just hit it where they ain't.....
 

Bronxiniowa

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 15, 2013
408
86
Iowa
Nah, you'll always have pitcher injuries, so then pitchers would feign injuries to get around a limit. If you run out of pitchers, that's on you. That's like the recent talk of eliminating the defensive infield 'shift'. You can't legislate where players play, so just hit it where they ain't.....
Good point. So limit the number of pitchers you can carry on your 25-man roster from game to game, say 10. You can have more pitchers above this limit but some would have to sit out like hockey's "healthy scratches."
 

BillD1984

SatelliteGuys Master
Apr 9, 2008
14,608
257
MA
They did put in a rule for intentional walks to just walk to first base with no pitches thrown. I like that rule.
Good!! It's about time on this. I could never understand why they had to go through that foolish exercise on an IBB. I get that the time saved is marginal, but every little bit helps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Annie61

Bronxiniowa

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 15, 2013
408
86
Iowa
I remember in the 1972 World Series an Oakland A's pitcher struck out a Cincinnati Reds batter on an apparent intentional walk. I also remember uncounted wild pitches on intentional walks. It's taking something away from the game to save a couple of seconds.
 

cosmo_kramer

Master of my Domain
Oct 13, 2005
17,883
10,868
41.605N, -72.879W
I remember in the 1972 World Series an Oakland A's pitcher struck out a Cincinnati Reds batter on an apparent intentional walk. I also remember uncounted wild pitches on intentional walks. It's taking something away from the game to save a couple of seconds.
This could happen too, if the pitch isn't far enough off the plate....

 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Top