Used to be, time of game didn't bother me.

[USAFChief]

Then I partially watched game five between the Yankees and Indians. Close to four hours for a nine inning game.

 

And the strikeouts. 31 K's. Thirty. One.

 

I love baseball, and I turned the game off.

 

Baseball needs to do something about length of games. Something, or things, that are meaningful, and ruthlessly enforced.

 

And for petes sake, figure out a way to get more balls in play. K, K, K, K, K, Walk, HR, K, K, K isn't very fun to watch.

[Squirrel]

Did you time and count all the commercial breaks? While those aren't likely to go away, I think that's the most egregious addition of time to a ballgame. I'd hate to alter the game over that. And yeah enforce the pitch clock and don't let batters take so much time out.

[Eris]

It is not just about the length of games.  It is also the start time.  Try living on the east coast.  One option that I have been thinking about is to move to Denver or further west for the playoffs.  I don't think there are any real solutions as long as major TV networks are paying for the rights to broadcasts. The Yankees in prime time, game 5, I am sure Fox Sports made out well.  But I am tired.

[notoriousgod71]

Baseball in 2017 is truly not the game I fell in love with.

 

Can't wait for next year when the starting pitcher throws one pitch and in comes reliever number 1 of 12.

[jimmer]

I really have no issues with pace of play or how the game has evolved. I would like to see them implement a pitch clock like they do in the minors and then also enforce some rules put on the batter a couple years ago yet for some reason only enforced for like two weeks.

[wavedog]

I would like to see games average around the 3 hour mark - last nights game was so good to watch that I did not mind the extra time too much although I find myself fitting other stuff in between the breaks. Amazed by the number of strikeouts in last nights game.     One thing that has increased recently is multiple visits to the mound by the pitcher and catcher.    They need to limit all visits to the mound to two per inning - catcher goes out there the 2nd time - have to replace the pitcher.  Another rule just for Yankee games and their batters - start the count at 1-1  they get 3 balls and 2 strikes.   I am half-joking on these but maybe that is a solution to quicken the game overall and might help the starters last longer if we just moved to 3 balls and 2 strikes.    But then that would make the lyrics to Take me out to the Ballgame obsolete. 

[VirginSturgeon]

The Cubs and Nationals game was even more unbearable yesterday once the top of the 8th inning happened.  It had to take like 30 minutes minimum, I told my wife this why I can't watch a full game anymore.  Multiple visits by the catcher during the same at bat is inexcusable.  Relief pitchers just take forever to make a pitch.  

[Squirrel]

Yeah, I have difficulties sitting and watching a full game, especially with all the commercials and pitching changes. I usually have it on and unless it's a really good game, it's background listening while doing other things.

[Vanimal46]

 

Baseball in 2017 is truly not the game I fell in love with.

 

Can't wait for next year when the starting pitcher throws one pitch and in comes reliever number 1 of 12.

 

Hell, it's not the game from even 10 years ago. It's becoming a 3.5 hour affair with 3 true outcomes... 

[ashbury]

Not to hijack the discussion by bringing in a thought from another thread, but I expect an automated strike zone will help with some of the things you are bothered by.

 

It takes away from the human element, they say; but the human element of umpiring means that batters, even the ones with an eagle eye, can't be sure what's a strike and what's not. This human element makes for an arguably more interesting game, just as soccer players' lack of precise knowledge of how much time remains in the game adds a certain interest. But in the cat-and-mouse game between batters and hitters, it plays entirely into the pitchers' hands (except maybe for the few pitchers with sterling command of every pitch in their arsenal anyway), and we are close to having a remedy.

 

So to restate it, an "unintended consequence" of robot plate umpiring could be a tilt toward the batter and a reduction in whiffs, at least by the better hitters. Maybe at some later point some kind of further remedy would need to be thought of, to help the pitcher. Bring back the spitball?

 

 

[drjim]

 

Not to hijack the discussion by bringing in a thought from another thread, but I expect an automated strike zone will help with some of the things you are bothered by.

 

It takes away from the human element, they say; but the human element of umpiring means that batters, even the ones with an eagle eye, can't be sure what's a strike and what's not. This human element makes for an arguably more interesting game, just as soccer players' lack of precise knowledge of how much time remains in the game adds a certain interest. But in the cat-and-mouse game between batters and hitters, it plays entirely into the pitchers' hands (except maybe for the few pitchers with sterling command of every pitch in their arsenal anyway), and we are close to having a remedy.

 

So to restate it, an "unintended consequence" of robot plate umpiring could be a tilt toward the batter and a reduction in whiffs, at least by the better hitters. Maybe at some later point some kind of further remedy would need to be thought of, to help the pitcher. Bring back the spitball?

 

I don't know if this would remedy the problems, just change the boundaries where the battle is being "fought". 

 

Part of the "problem" is that players might be getting too good, as pitchers, hitters and defenders, so the game starts to be played more and more on the margins on the strike zone and turns more into the 3 true outcomes. 

 

Do think they can tweak rules a little around catching visits and shortening breaks for between innings and pitching changes, but I fear a little for the change of the game. I wonder what the adjustment will be as pitchers throw harder, are more precise, and batters have better eyes and swing for more power.

[wsnydes]

For me, it's not so much that a game takes a long time, it's WHY the game takes so long.  If a 12-10 game goes 3.5 hours I'm generally fine with it because there's a legitimate game related reason for it.  It's the batter stepping out of the box after every pitch, the pitcher taking a lap around the mound after an out, endless catcher to mound visits, etc.  Things that don't really need to be there taking up time.  The rules to speed up the pace that are in the rule book need to be enforced - and enforced consistently.  I like the pitch clock in the minors.  It makes the game much more interesting with a constant flow and you really don't know the clock is there.

 

I know that some don't feel that it's a problem and that's fine, but there are some pretty big baseball fans in this thread stating that they can't watch a full game anymore.  That's a problem whether you agree with the pace of play debate or not.

[ashbury]

Things that don't really need to be there taking up time. 

I tend to think that you can't cure a problem until you think about why it arises.

 

You often hear players and coaches using the phrase "need to slow the game down". They don't mean it in the sense of delaying the game, but to say that if a player's not careful he can get overwhelmed by the pace of the game. I recall this being said about (or by) Buxton when he was going badly, for example.

 

All the tactics you mention are an attempt to regroup and regain one's focus - the ritual of the batter adjusting his gloves and of the pitcher turning his back to the plate for a cleansing breath are examples. The pause, charitably viewed, means that hitter and pitcher are both at the top of their game, and the battle between them is acute.

 

Unfortunately, the tactics do indeed slow the game down for the fans too.

 

The remedy for that is to enforce rules that take away this regrouping time for both sides. Not much is really lost, IMO, if the batter is not allowed to routinely step out and if the pitcher is required to throw another pitch within a certain number of seconds; both adversaries are relatively disadvantaged, keeping the competition fair.

 

Other rule changes such as expecting that a pitcher coming in from the bullpen is warmed-up and ready to go would help a little too. If players are to slow the game down for themselves, it needs to be figuratively but not literally.

[Craig Arko]

Go to seven innings.

[Bill]

Too many trips to the mound.  Fix that.

[ashbury]

Go to seven innings.

And give the starting pitcher credit for the Win if he completes three innings, because managers will still go to the bullpen for the final four or so.

[Craig Arko]

 

And give the starting pitcher credit for the Win if he completes three innings, because managers will still go to the bullpen for the final four or so.

A quality start. 4 innings/2 earned runs or less.

[wsnydes]

 

 

The remedy for that is to enforce rules that take away this regrouping time for both sides. Not much is really lost, IMO, if the batter is not allowed to routinely step out and if the pitcher is required to throw another pitch within a certain number of seconds; both adversaries are relatively disadvantaged, keeping the competition fair.

 

Other rule changes such as expecting that a pitcher coming in from the bullpen is warmed-up and ready to go would help a little too. If players are to slow the game down for themselves, it needs to be figuratively but not literally.

Exactly.  I think both the pitchers and batters need to be quicker about things.  It does need to be equal.  I'm not asking for a full at bat to be completed in 30 seconds, but there's little reason that the average AB take 4 or 5 minutes.  A few minor adjustments made to the frequency at which something as simple as a pitch being thrown can have a pretty large cumulative effect on pace of play and game length.  

 

Whatever change, if any, ever end up being employed I simply ask that it not dictate strategy or how the game is played.  

[ashbury]

Exactly.  I think both the pitchers and batters need to be quicker about things.

And just to be clear, I should have stated that my analysis wasn't meant in contradiction to your post, but to say that the players aren't just randomly or thoughtlessly prolonging the game, but are doing it in their individual self-interest, making it hard to remedy except by strict enforcement.

[wsnydes]

 

And just to be clear, I should have stated that my analysis wasn't meant in contradiction to your post, but to say that the players aren't just randomly or thoughtlessly prolonging the game, but are doing it in their individual self-interest, making it hard to remedy except by strict enforcement.

I didn't take it that way, no worries.  

 

I do agree with your analysis.  Something as simple as adjusting your batting gloves doesn't seem like much if you're the one doing it, but compound that each batter doing it and over the course of 60 ABs a game, it really adds up.

 

It's akin to the backpacking adage that ounces equal pounds.  

[notoriousgod71]

Game times were half as long 100 years ago when most players were liquored up. That's my solution.

[USAFChief]

 

Game times were half as long 100 years ago when most players were liquored up. That's my solution.

get liquored up...that might work now, too.

[mickeymental]

or maybe dock ellis had the right approach: lsd for players and fans alike.

[Pardon My Dinger]

I like it when squirrels run onto the field. Otherwise, not for me. 

[spinowner]

Here are the solutions, IM not-so-H O:
1. One minute between half innings. The players hustle in, hustle out. Fielders need to be ready to take their positions. Pitcher gets 15 seconds to get to the mound then another 45 seconds to get his 8 warm-ups in then play ball. That's how it was up until about the 1970's. Double the price of a 30-second advertising spot and your revenue would stay the same. Advertisers will be willing to pay. The same for pitching changes. Get the reliever to the mound as quickly as possible using a golf cart or something. He has 45 seconds to get his 8 warmups in.
2. Pitch clock and batter clock, but only when the bases are empty.
3a. Larger strike zone.
3b. Lower pitcher's mound. Pitchers will be able to throw strikes more easily and batters will be less likely to try to work the count because there will be more strikes. The lower mound will reduce K's because the balls will be easier to hit, however this will be offset by the larger zone resulting in fewer strikes being hit well. Fewer deep counts, more balls in play, fewer K's, fewer BB's, fewer HR's.
With these changes it will not be necessary to ruin the game by limiting pitcher changes or trips to the mound.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Nine inning Yankees-Indians game referenced in the original post: 3:38

 

Nine inning game last night: 4:37

[USAFChief]

Nine inning Yankees-Indians game referenced in the original post: 3:38

 

Nine inning game last night: 4:37

Jeebus.

[Vanimal46]

Anyone see John Lackey in the 9th inning last night? It literally took him 5 minutes to throw 6 pitches. He just refused to pitch the ball and continued to step off the rubber. It was a joke. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

And in the end, he lost the game.

 

I am shocked more pitchers don't work more quickly and assert control of the game that way.

[Vanimal46]

 

And in the end, he lost the game.

I am shocked more pitchers don't work more quickly and assert control of the game that way.

 

Yep. I don't know why this isn't a strategy more pitchers use to keep batters off-balance. Mark Buehrle was the GOAT at working quickly and getting batters out of their routine.