<strong>Applenut, baseball's popularity is still declining because the casual fan just isn't interested in a 0-0 pitcher's duel.
There may bae nothing a pitcher can do, but there are plenty of solutions to this situation.
MLB can either ban body armor or expand the strike-zone (widen homeplate,) or whatever. It's time to get creative.</strong><hr></blockquote>
baseball's popularity is declining and offense is high... it's not because the casual fn doesn't like a pitcher's duel... it's because baseball is getting less and less enjoyable... records are being broke left and right, games start late and drag on for 4 hours for a 9 inning game.... there was an article in the NY Daily News a week ago.... it said something like the average World Series game in the 60s was 2 hours and a half hours or something... and that was for a high scoring game to.... now a low scoring 9 inning game crawls on for nearly 4 hours.... that isn't the only problem but its one of many.
The talent sucks... players move around too much, prices are too high, games are too long, too many records are broken, its turned into a strength contest rather than talent, there are too many bad teams, baseball doesn't market their product well, etc.
Would love to get rid of the armor and would love to see the brushback pitch make a comeback. The next time some moron admires his homerun it would be great to see him get beaned the first pitch his next time up.
uh... what would you do? a pitcher's best weapon is his fast ball.... in the past there were things called brush back pitches.... you can't do that anymore... batters don't have to fear em and get out of the way... they just sit in there and either get hit or pitchers don't throw inside.... this is one of the biggest reasons for guys like Bonds hitting so many damn homeruns a year.... they are in control.... not pitchers...
roll your eyes all you want.... but there's nothing else a pitcher can do..... the outside corner is now what use to be the middle of the plate... it's ridiculous.... and you know it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
ok, I didn't mean throwing at hitters in general is ridiculous but I made it seem that way. What I meant it specifically saying you're going to hit the guy and then hitting him like Clemens did with Bonds is ridiculous.
I would think the mind games between the pitchers and batters make games longer more than anything. Most players step out of the batter's box to adjust *something* after they swing at a ball. Most pitchers step off the mound after when batters are ready in order to cool them down, and vice-versa. That's where the game delays come from, not from extra hits.
Coincidentally, Bonds almost never steps out of the box once he's stepped in...and almost never calls for time. He and Lofton were pretty much the only Giants in the starting line-up that don't waste time at bat. And the only Angel to do the same was Eckstein. Almost everybody else plays that frustrating delay game.
ok, I didn't mean throwing at hitters in general is ridiculous but I made it seem that way. What I meant it specifically saying you're going to hit the guy and then hitting him like Clemens did with Bonds is ridiculous.</strong><hr></blockquote>
well yea... you shouldn't say your gonna hit him beforehand
but i can see why he would hit him... just shouldn't publicize it
Eugene,
You're right... I don't think increased offense makes them neccessarily longer... it contributes but what you talked about is the biggest problem.... inbetween innings has also gotten longer.
I'm not sure what they could do for the "stepping out" problem... have a time limit? not allow it? restrict how many times you could? all of those solutions IMO are stupid and could at times be more detrimental than beneficial..... I think the players have a lot to do with it and they should just stand in there and hit... it's ridiculous that baseball must create new rules just to get today's players to act like yesterday's
[quote]You espoused assumptions about how the Giants are exploiting their children for media attention... Prove it.<hr></blockquote>
Nooo, I said most of the 30 to 40-something crowd I have spoken to about the incidents involving kids in the dugout indicated to me they believed it was both inappropriate (regardless of safety) and possibly disingenuous for those guys to be showing off their kids like that (i.e. possibly a media play - meaning they knew the media would eat it up). They said that was their suspicion, and call me crazy but I wouldn't be surprised.
Do you not get that this isn't little league we're talking about? That just because they're safe in the dugout, doesn't mean they *belong* in the dugout? That this is professional athletics, the World freakin' Series, not "bring your kid to work day"?
[quote]You've implied that these kids are spoiled and that their parents don't know how to raise them. Prove it.<hr></blockquote>
The first part yes. Kids who are not of the spoiled rotten ilk probably wouldn't think it's OK to run out onto the field during the World Series, just because they feel like it.
Why? Because anyone who makes sure their kid understands they don't always get what they want, would make sure they didn't step foot onto that field until after the *series* was over. They'd explain it to them from [Game] 1. Just my interpretation of course. I'm sure there are parents all over SF who would've loved it if the little kiddies had been paraded around more often during the games. Maybe have the kid run out to first base and high-five Daddy after a walk. Whaddya think Eugene?
As to the second part, no. Again you're jumbling up the things I said to make false assertions. I generally implied the parents in this country who don't know how to raise their kids (i.e. the ones who let their kids run roughshod over them) probably don't notice or care about such things. And that their way of doing raising kids is BS (again my opinion).
I didn't say the ballplayers themselves must all be bad parents. Maybe they are, maybe not. But I'm not going to [think] "family oriented team" and say "aww isn't that cute?" just because two guys give their kids little unis and batting gloves and sit them in the dugout / let them run onto the field during a game (which WAS a safety issue btw, and even Baker knew it - you could see it by the expression on his face).
That's all the more I have to say about this dead horse. Think what you want; it was a ridiculous display to most of us in the 30 and above crowd. Maybe we're just not hip enough to get it and should move to SF or seek counselling from Dr. Phil, but I doubt it.
(edited for grammar / legal technicalities so as not to continually have things mis-attributed to me...)
do you think your kid belongs by your side at work?
no... it's a little ridiculous....
The only reason I would support it is if they were one of the batboys and were of age.... the New York yankees require batboys to be 16 years of age to work part time... most are older... that's mostly due to working papers and salary which players' sons may not get or need but still.... a 3 year old is a bit ridiculous to have running around the dugout of a major league baseball team
[quote](which WAS a safety issue btw, and even Baker knew it - you could see it by the expression on his face).<hr></blockquote>
Oooh, so it was a safety issue. Well the dugout's one of the only places that has a fence between the field and the ball, so it's safer than most of the seats.
And that bullshit about spoiling kids is just that. It's as if you trying to find any way to bolster your own superiority.
Using applenut's Yankee example, what makes it so different when the kid is 16? 14? 12? 10? Darren Baker made one mistake, and he'll never do it again either way. It's not even a mistake only a 3 year old would make either.
Comments
There may bae nothing a pitcher can do, but there are plenty of solutions to this situation.
MLB can either ban body armor or expand the strike-zone (widen homeplate,) or whatever. It's time to get creative.
<strong>Applenut, baseball's popularity is still declining because the casual fan just isn't interested in a 0-0 pitcher's duel.
There may bae nothing a pitcher can do, but there are plenty of solutions to this situation.
MLB can either ban body armor or expand the strike-zone (widen homeplate,) or whatever. It's time to get creative.</strong><hr></blockquote>
baseball's popularity is declining and offense is high... it's not because the casual fn doesn't like a pitcher's duel... it's because baseball is getting less and less enjoyable... records are being broke left and right, games start late and drag on for 4 hours for a 9 inning game.... there was an article in the NY Daily News a week ago.... it said something like the average World Series game in the 60s was 2 hours and a half hours or something... and that was for a high scoring game to.... now a low scoring 9 inning game crawls on for nearly 4 hours.... that isn't the only problem but its one of many.
The talent sucks... players move around too much, prices are too high, games are too long, too many records are broken, its turned into a strength contest rather than talent, there are too many bad teams, baseball doesn't market their product well, etc.
<strong>
uh... what would you do? a pitcher's best weapon is his fast ball.... in the past there were things called brush back pitches.... you can't do that anymore... batters don't have to fear em and get out of the way... they just sit in there and either get hit or pitchers don't throw inside.... this is one of the biggest reasons for guys like Bonds hitting so many damn homeruns a year.... they are in control.... not pitchers...
roll your eyes all you want.... but there's nothing else a pitcher can do..... the outside corner is now what use to be the middle of the plate... it's ridiculous.... and you know it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
ok, I didn't mean throwing at hitters in general is ridiculous but I made it seem that way. What I meant it specifically saying you're going to hit the guy and then hitting him like Clemens did with Bonds is ridiculous.
Coincidentally, Bonds almost never steps out of the box once he's stepped in...and almost never calls for time. He and Lofton were pretty much the only Giants in the starting line-up that don't waste time at bat. And the only Angel to do the same was Eckstein. Almost everybody else plays that frustrating delay game.
[ 11-01-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
<strong>
ok, I didn't mean throwing at hitters in general is ridiculous but I made it seem that way. What I meant it specifically saying you're going to hit the guy and then hitting him like Clemens did with Bonds is ridiculous.</strong><hr></blockquote>
well yea... you shouldn't say your gonna hit him beforehand
but i can see why he would hit him... just shouldn't publicize it
Eugene,
You're right... I don't think increased offense makes them neccessarily longer... it contributes but what you talked about is the biggest problem.... inbetween innings has also gotten longer.
I'm not sure what they could do for the "stepping out" problem... have a time limit? not allow it? restrict how many times you could? all of those solutions IMO are stupid and could at times be more detrimental than beneficial..... I think the players have a lot to do with it and they should just stand in there and hit... it's ridiculous that baseball must create new rules just to get today's players to act like yesterday's
Nooo, I said most of the 30 to 40-something crowd I have spoken to about the incidents involving kids in the dugout indicated to me they believed it was both inappropriate (regardless of safety) and possibly disingenuous for those guys to be showing off their kids like that (i.e. possibly a media play - meaning they knew the media would eat it up). They said that was their suspicion, and call me crazy but I wouldn't be surprised.
Do you not get that this isn't little league we're talking about? That just because they're safe in the dugout, doesn't mean they *belong* in the dugout? That this is professional athletics, the World freakin' Series, not "bring your kid to work day"?
[quote]You've implied that these kids are spoiled and that their parents don't know how to raise them. Prove it.<hr></blockquote>
The first part yes. Kids who are not of the spoiled rotten ilk probably wouldn't think it's OK to run out onto the field during the World Series, just because they feel like it.
Why? Because anyone who makes sure their kid understands they don't always get what they want, would make sure they didn't step foot onto that field until after the *series* was over. They'd explain it to them from [Game] 1. Just my interpretation of course. I'm sure there are parents all over SF who would've loved it if the little kiddies had been paraded around more often during the games. Maybe have the kid run out to first base and high-five Daddy after a walk. Whaddya think Eugene?
As to the second part, no. Again you're jumbling up the things I said to make false assertions. I generally implied the parents in this country who don't know how to raise their kids (i.e. the ones who let their kids run roughshod over them) probably don't notice or care about such things. And that their way of doing raising kids is BS (again my opinion).
I didn't say the ballplayers themselves must all be bad parents. Maybe they are, maybe not. But I'm not going to [think] "family oriented team" and say "aww isn't that cute?" just because two guys give their kids little unis and batting gloves and sit them in the dugout / let them run onto the field during a game (which WAS a safety issue btw, and even Baker knew it - you could see it by the expression on his face).
That's all the more I have to say about this dead horse. Think what you want; it was a ridiculous display to most of us in the 30 and above crowd. Maybe we're just not hip enough to get it and should move to SF or seek counselling from Dr. Phil, but I doubt it.
(edited for grammar / legal technicalities so as not to continually have things mis-attributed to me...)
[ 11-01-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
would you bring your kids to your job?
would your employer allow it?
do you think your kid belongs by your side at work?
no... it's a little ridiculous....
The only reason I would support it is if they were one of the batboys and were of age.... the New York yankees require batboys to be 16 years of age to work part time... most are older... that's mostly due to working papers and salary which players' sons may not get or need but still.... a 3 year old is a bit ridiculous to have running around the dugout of a major league baseball team
Oooh, so it was a safety issue. Well the dugout's one of the only places that has a fence between the field and the ball, so it's safer than most of the seats.
And that bullshit about spoiling kids is just that. It's as if you trying to find any way to bolster your own superiority.
Using applenut's Yankee example, what makes it so different when the kid is 16? 14? 12? 10? Darren Baker made one mistake, and he'll never do it again either way. It's not even a mistake only a 3 year old would make either.