MLB Rule Changes

[Guest]

Want to save time? Don't throw a new ball out every time a ball touches the ground. Have a time limit for getting on and off the field after the third out. Stay in the box between pitches. Limit the pregame non-baseball ceremonies, including flags, anthems, performances and awards. Don't let anyone like Miguel Sano play outfield. Injured players have to come out if play is stopped, so they get off the field quickly, but they can return the next inning, unless the umpire thinks they were faking injury for strategic reasons.

 

I don't really understand how shrinking the strike zone, which could cause longer counts and enable improved offense, will shorten games.

[Platoon]

I too wondered about shrinking the strike zone? More walks? More hits? More pitching changes? I have a sure fire way to shorten each game. Cut off a minute of commercials between innings. I am sure the owners would be more than happy to dispense with this small amount of revenue in the best interests of the game. (Still waiting for a response to my suggestion from Jim P.)

[biggentleben]

I believe the strike zone issue was an overreaction to the fact that umps were interpreting the strike zone of "at the knees" for years as "top of the knees". So, a few years ago, it was clarified as "bottom of the knee (or maybe even kneecap)" recently, and the calling low in the zone has been a reaction to that.

 

In talking with one minor league umpire, he did tell me that the independent league he started with had uniform regulations, and it made it easy to call a knee strike with guys, but with some guys even in the minors wearing tight uniform bottoms while others are wearing pants best described as pajama bottoms. With different physiology for everyone, some guys have very long lower legs while others have short, so the bottom of the knee has to be called individually.

 

Now, that is a bit of an excuse, but there's some reason behind it as well, and implementing these definitions without clarifying other aspects around it can often lead to more confusion rather than clarity.

[spinowner]

 

This is backwards. I don't want there to be a Kneel down in baseball.

There is currently no such actual thing as an "intentional walk," and there shouldn't be. The ball is live. The catcher must start in the catchers box, if there are runners on, the pitcher must start from the stretch. He is subject to the balk rule, runners can steal bases. The pitcher must throw the four pitches, just like any other plate appearance.

I can't believe people are in favor of adding dead ball base runners.

And that goes for starting an inning itch a runner on second. Worst idea ever.

Although...starting an inning with only one runner on would be a relief if one is watching the Twins bullpen. BA-dum-tsssssch

Nitpick: The rules allow the pitcher to pitch from the windup with runners on base.

[USAFChief]

Nitpick: The rules allow the pitcher to pitch from the windup with runners on base.

Yes they do...and the ball is live.

[mikelink45]

No to most, but I find the Intentional walk to be so boring that its absence will not be missed by me or 99% of fans.  The only thing it affects is how we choose to get refreshments or use the toilets.  The strike zone change is one I find ludicrous.  Maybe hitters can learn to hit the pitch instead.  We have lowered the mound, changed the strike zone and still have players striking out more than ever (and despite rankings of great pitchers, it is not because the quality of pitching in relationship to the batters has changed, just the approach).  If we want to speed the game, limit the number of relief pitchers to 2 or 3 per game - to be designated like the line up - not when they come in, but who is available and then allow one per inning in extra innings.  But don't put a runner on 2B - this is as bad as shoot outs to determine who wins a hockey game.  I would rather have ties and end after nine than create an artificial ending where teams load up with sprinters who can be pinch runners in extra innings. 

[twinssporto]

I'm still a baseball purest at heart.  Leave the rules alone please.  

 

If you change anything take away the DH.  It's unfair to American league teams having to cough up more cash for these players.  Maybe this topic should be it's own post...

[Circus Boy]

I've never made my peace with the DH, so these changes would be equally bad.

 

If this has already been said, sorry.

[ashbury]

Time was, the game wasn't over until one team or t'other scored 21 aces. I still don't like this business of cutting the game off at 9 innings.

 

_{^{/ or, am I quoting Chief?}}

[spinowner]

 

No to most, but I find the Intentional walk to be so boring that its absence will not be missed by me or 99% of fans.  The only thing it affects is how we choose to get refreshments or use the toilets.  The strike zone change is one I find ludicrous.  Maybe hitters can learn to hit the pitch instead.  We have lowered the mound, changed the strike zone and still have players striking out more than ever (and despite rankings of great pitchers, it is not because the quality of pitching in relationship to the batters has changed, just the approach).  If we want to speed the game, limit the number of relief pitchers to 2 or 3 per game - to be designated like the line up - not when they come in, but who is available and then allow one per inning in extra innings.  But don't put a runner on 2B - this is as bad as shoot outs to determine who wins a hockey game.  I would rather have ties and end after nine than create an artificial ending where teams load up with sprinters who can be pinch runners in extra innings. 

The last time the mound was lowered was after the 1968 season, when it was set at its current height of ten inches. 

[mikelink45]

 

The last time the mound was lowered was after the 1968 season, when it was set at its current height of ten inches. 

I know, but remember that most baseball rule conversations start with tradition and in 1968 we blew things up for the pitchers because they were so much better than the hitters.  We have gone from 3 ball walks, asking for a pitch, and pitchers who won 40+ games and used their arms up in a year to what we have now.  Tradition is only what you remember.  To me 1968 is still well remembered, not ancient.  Tweak around the edges, but leave the pitching and hitting for the players to adjust to.  Waving and intentional walk is just fine, the other two changes are not acceptable to me. 

[spinowner]

 

I know, but remember that most baseball rule conversations start with tradition and in 1968 we blew things up for the pitchers because they were so much better than the hitters.  We have gone from 3 ball walks, asking for a pitch, and pitchers who won 40+ games and used their arms up in a year to what we have now.  Tradition is only what you remember.  To me 1968 is still well remembered, not ancient.  Tweak around the edges, but leave the pitching and hitting for the players to adjust to.  Waving and intentional walk is just fine, the other two changes are not acceptable to me. 

Points well taken. To me, altering the size of the strike zone and the height of the mound are tweaking around the edges (as long as it's done the way I say it should be ). Granting automatic bases on balls goes past that line.

[jctwins]

Take away one game per season over ten years to stretch out the impact to owners. 152 games.

 

Force relievers to either finish the inning or face three batters if they don't finish an inning.

 

Drop warm up pitchers for relievers down to 2 or 3, therefore a slight cut back in commercial time.

 

Make pitchers stay on the mound, and add a clock.

 

Have replays handled during the time it takes the TV crew to show the replay, and stop the game only if it seems to merit taking a closer look at. Let the off-field umpire make the call without taking everyone out of position. Put it up on the screen for the entire ballpark to see at once.

 

Cut the break between innings by 30 seconds, especially in the early innings of a game. Cut back one inning per year over 9 years to minimize the impact to owners.

 

All of the above doesn't mess with the game, and in a sense pushes it back toward its traditions without any gimmicks like adding runners.

 

Done!

 

 

[spinowner]

http://www.startribune.com/mlb-players-union-agrees-to-pitchless-intentional-walks/414488563/

 

Nooooo!

[Dantes929]

I am a bit surprised that intentional walks only happen once every 5 games.   Thought Joe got walked intentionally every other game or so.    I have never personally seen a blown intentional walk except on highlights and promise you I would not miss the throwing of the the 4 pitches if it were to be taken out.   High school and amateur already have that rule and I am fine with it and prefer it.   As said previously it is cumulative with other annoyances.   For me the 4 pitch walk is right up there with jump balls as most boring and tedious plays in sports.  I was thrilled when high school and college got rid of it except to start games and overtimes. I wish the pros would do the same.

[USAFChief]

http://www.startribune.com/mlb-players-union-agrees-to-pitchless-intentional-walks/414488563/

 

Nooooo!

Bleeping stupid.

[jimmer]

I have no problem with getting rid of having to throw the intentional walk pitches, but it is going to have minimal effect on pace of play.  Just not enough of them for it to make any difference.

 

They need to enforce the pitch clock and keep batters in the box between pitches (if they didn't make contact or it didn't almost hit them).  They also need to give the managers like 1 minute to challenge a call and the umpires in NY should only have 2 minutes to make a judgment.

[laloesch]

 

Bleeping stupid.

 

Why?  I don't think this is that big of a deal.  Going through the 4 pitch lobs slows down the pace of the game unnecessarily.

 

If they want to get real bold how bout changing things up even further and making a a foul ball on a 2 strike count a strikeout.  That will really speed up the pace of the game.  No more foul ball after foul ball after foul ball on two strike counts. That rule could be waived in the playoffs as a compromise. 

[Squirrel]

 

I have no problem with getting rid of having to throw the intentional walk pitches, but it is going to have minimal effect on pace of play.  Just not enough of them for it to make any difference.

 

They need to enforce the pitch clock and keep batters in the box between pitches (if they didn't make contact or it didn't almost hit them).  They also need to give the managers like 1 minute to challenge a call and the umpires in NY should only have 2 minutes to make a judgment.

Agree. I think an even better way is to reduce commercial time.

[Pardon My Dinger]

 

We also recently had a discussion about the disadvantages of cross-time-zone travel, which would be worse in a balanced schedule. Two years ago I was in favor of balancing it out. Now I'm against it.

I'm also opposed to the idea of time travel in baseball. Sure, it would allow teams to protect their players from injury, but it would also give hitters an unfair advantage, if they know what pitch is coming all the time. 

[Oldgoat_MN]

As far 'pace of play'...

From the Chicago Tribune:

 

But the fastest game in professional baseball history was three years earlier, on Aug. 30, 1916, in Asheville, N.C., between the Asheville Tourists and the Winston-Salem Twins.

"It was one of the last games of the 1916 Class D regular season, and the Twins had a three o'clock train to catch out of Asheville," according to a CBSsports.com story. "The problem? The game was scheduled to start at 2 o'clock."

So the two teams agreed to start more than a half-hour early and to play as quickly as possible, the pitchers lobbed the ball and the batters swung at the first pitch.

 

Time of the game: 31 minutes. The game ended before it was officially scheduled to begin. Twins won 2-1.

Sources: Baseball-reference.com, CBSsports.com

[Willihammer]

TIL. The MN Twins aren't the first Twins.

[spinowner]

 

Agree. I think an even better way is to reduce commercial time.

This is by far the biggest reason for longer game times. It used to be that between-innings breaks were only about a minute long, even in the post-season. The players jogged out to their positions at the same time that the opposing team's players jogged in, the pitcher took 8 warm-ups, the ball went around the horn while the batter stepped in, and off they went. The players dictated the pace of the breaks and TV had to accommodate that. Now it's the other way around. I believe breaks are now 2:30. With 16 or 17 breaks per game that adds over a half hour to each game.

[Craig Arko]

If the number of commercial breaks is reduced, the revenue will be made up someplace else.

[ashbury]

If the number of commercial breaks is reduced, the revenue will be made up someplace else.

Well, if this were somehow imposed from somewhere, ownership would try. I don't know if they can dictate market forces, however.

 

I'm no Free Market evangelist. But market forces do exist, and you ignore or override them with full knowledge of what and why, and how to counteract them - or else you go down in flames.

[jctwins]

These issues are why you phase in the change over time. Reduce pitching changes to a one minute break, and drop 30 seconds per break from at a rate of one inning per year. Pretty easy to solve really.

 

 

[spinowner]

 

If the number of commercial breaks is reduced, the revenue will be made up someplace else.

One of the someplace elses would probably be ticket and concession prices. I'm in favor of any enhancement of revenue that keeps those down, even if it means having to make a 30-second increase in the amount of time I spend ignoring commercials between innings.

[Craig Arko]

One of the someplace elses would probably be ticket and concession prices. I'm in favor of any enhancement of revenue that keeps those down, even if it means having to make a 30-second increase in the amount of time I spend ignoring commercials between innings.

That was my thought.

[Willihammer]

I know this might not fit but didn't want to start a new thread.

 

Carter Capps is breaking the rules right? 

 

https://twitter.com/Padres/status/831917274227281920/video/1

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

Carter Capps is breaking the rules right? 

 

From MLB Official Baseball Rules, 2016:

 

Definition of Terms 

 

An ILLEGAL PITCH is (1) a pitch delivered to the batter when the pitcher does not have his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher’s plate; (2) a quick return pitch. An illegal pitch when runners are on base is a balk.

 

Rule 6.02 b  Illegal Pitches With Bases Unoccupied

 

If the pitcher makes an illegal pitch with the bases unoccupied, it shall be called a ball unless the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter or otherwise.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/downloads/y2016/official_baseball_rules.pdf