Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Report: Rule change in minors will put runner on 2B in extra innings
MLB will test a rule change in the rookie-level Gulf Coast League and the Arizona League this summer that will automatically place a runner on second base at the start of extra innings.
A similar rule has been used internationally and will be in place for next month's World Baseball Classic.
I wonder about the scoring. Baseball has always been an accounts balanced dynamic. For every batter who gets a hit, there is a pitcher who gives up a hit. For every assist there is a baserunner or batter retired. This will upset that, producing a runner for whom no one was accountable.
If that placed runner scores, is that an earned run for the pitcher? It would certainly be a RBI for the hitter, but the pitcher wasn't responsible for the baserunner...so the run isn't charged? It is a run in Limbo.
The thinking obviously is to try and cut down the length of ML games by avoiding prolonged extra innings. After 2014 MLB put a bunch of undisclosed speed up the game rules into effect, and while 2015 games were played a bit faster, last season the average game times rose once more to over 3 hours.
The idea stinks! It would be far better to reduce the home-team advantage in extra innings by not terminating the game until the opposing team has an opportunity to tie the game, or take the lead in the next half-inning -- the game should continue until a lead change goes unanswered.
The idea stinks! It would be far better to reduce the home-team advantage in extra innings by not terminating the game until the opposing team has an opportunity to tie the game, or take the lead in the next half-inning -- the game should continue until a lead change goes unanswered.
Your proposal would lengthen game times, and since the goal of MLB right now is to shorten them, I would not look for your idea to gain any traction.
Another silly gimmick, like college football's overtime. Either play the overtime/extra innings the way the rest of the game is played or live with ties. If you're desperate to shorten games, then play fewer innings.
The idea stinks! It would be far better to reduce the home-team advantage in extra innings by not terminating the game until the opposing team has an opportunity to tie the game, or take the lead in the next half-inning -- the game should continue until a lead change goes unanswered.
What? The visitors already had a chance to score in the first half of the inning, How is this an advantage for the home team?
I think all nine innings should start with the bases loaded.
Or there should only be three innings, each requiring nine outs (so a full game would still be 27 outs).
As for extra innings? How about making the opposing team play with only 8 (or even 7) fielders?
Hell, just have a home run derby to decide it all!
Or...
Just have every game last until one team leads after even innings. Play nine innings each time teams meet for a day. Occasionally, that will only result in one game. Other times, four, five, six or even more games will be tallied. Pitchers will sometimes get several wins (or losses) in a single day. Teams will finish the season with wildly different total games played than other teams.
I think all nine innings should start with the bases loaded.
Or there should only be three innings, each requiring nine outs (so a full game would still be 27 outs).
As for extra innings? How about making the opposing team play with only 8 (or even 7) fielders?
Hell, just have a home run derby to decide it all!
Or...
Just have every game last until one team leads after even innings. Play nine innings each time teams meet for a day. Occasionally, that will only result in one game. Other times, four, five, six or even more games will be tallied. Pitchers will sometimes get several wins (or losses) in a single day. Teams will finish the season with wildly different total games played than other teams.
Good ideas, but far too complicated. Better would be that if teams are tied after nine innings, each club sends out their biggest/toughest player armed with a bat. They both stand on the mound and the first one to knock the other off of the mound wins the game for his team.
Either keep the game the way it is, and I love extra innings, the more extra innings the better! Nothing better than seeing bonus baseball at the ballpark, especially when ticket prices continue to rise & rise. Now if MLB doesn't want long games I have an incredibly easy solution: Follow what the Nippon League & the Korean Baseball League do for extra innings. If you aren't aware about those 2 leagues, each league plays 3 innings of extra innings. If games are still tied after the 12th, the game is called there as a tie. I'd settle that as a fair compromise. And for the American's screaming out "There can't be ties in real sports" This NFL season produced a tie in back-to-back weeks, and really there should have been 3 or 4 other regular season games that ended in a tie this year. So I guess the NFL isn't a "real sport" to those people either??
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
