User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.3231 seconds
48 querie(s) executed
| ||||||||
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
| ||||||||
Baseball Primer Newsblog — The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand Wednesday, March 22, 2023MLB making small changes to pitch clock rules, memo says
RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)
Posted: March 22, 2023 at 12:54 PM | 14 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags: defensive shift, pitch clock, review |
Login to submit news.
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks. Hot TopicsSox Therapy: RIP Tim Wakefield
(22 - 3:28pm, Oct 04) Last: Jay Seaver Newsblog: Rangers, Pirates, Orioles, & Reds post biggest local MLB ratings increases of 2023 season (17 - 3:18pm, Oct 04) Last: Walt Davis Newsblog: OMNICHATTER for the October Postseason 2023 (86 - 3:11pm, Oct 04) Last: Tony S Newsblog: Jerry Dipoto tells Mariners fans what they don’t want to hear (2 - 3:05pm, Oct 04) Last: Walt Davis Newsblog: Mariners' Cal Raleigh apologizes for calling out team after season-ending loss (14 - 2:57pm, Oct 04) Last: Tom Goes to the Ballpark Newsblog: The Athletic: Farhan Zaidi describes Giants’ search for a new manager, but what they need is a new identity (1 - 2:35pm, Oct 04) Last: Walt Davis Newsblog: Marlins-Mets ends night with rainout, frustration and a massive question mark in NL wild-card race (9 - 2:11pm, Oct 04) Last: Karl from NY Newsblog: Former Dodgers star Trevor Bauer settles lawsuit with woman who first accused him of sexual assault (17 - 2:09pm, Oct 04) Last: The Yankee Clapper Newsblog: OT Soccer - World Cup Final/European Leagues Start (138 - 1:51pm, Oct 04) Last: Infinite Yost (Voxter) Hall of Merit: Reranking Pitchers 1893-1923: Ballot (9 - 12:27pm, Oct 04) Last: Bleed the Freak Newsblog: Marlins clinch playoff berth: Miami headed to postseason in full season for first time since 2003 title (23 - 11:10am, Oct 04) Last: villageidiom Newsblog: Witt becomes first Royal in 30-30 club: 'No one like him' (14 - 10:49am, Oct 04) Last: Cowboy Popup Newsblog: OT - NBA Off-Pre-Early Thread for the end of 2023 (155 - 10:05am, Oct 04) Last: My name is Votto, and I love to get Moppo Newsblog: Curve honor 'worst baseball player of all time' (64 - 9:19am, Oct 04) Last: AndrewJ Newsblog: Jim Caple, former ESPN, national MLB writer, dies at 61 (8 - 5:53am, Oct 04) Last: McCoy |
|||||||
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2021 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
| Page rendered in 0.3231 seconds |
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: March 22, 2023 at 02:29 PM (#6121080)I don't even really understand the last one. "Placing the onus"? This seems to give more time to the batters, doesn't it? They get to decide. And why did the original rule lead to "pitchers potentially holding the ball for long periods of time"? Is that supposed to be better for the pitcher or the batter? And how does the change help?
edit: I realize that's a very pessimistic post. We can hope my pessimism is unwarranted. But many years' experience has led me to "I'll believe it when I've seen it, consistently, for several years" when it comes to MLB prioritizing what fans want over what players want.
No, your pessimism is definitely not unwarranted. They are going to add a few seconds here, a few seconds there and the 20 or so minutes they seem to be getting saved in wasted time will be cut down to like 5 minutes and we'll end up with the same ponderous pace of time wasting between pitches we had before.( I believe a meandering, ill conceived, run on sentence was most appropriate to describe what will surely happen)
At least we're all having the same doubts, so it means we're not crazy. At least not in this respect.
What's already noticeably happening as spring training wears on--I've been watching about a game a day--is that, while the clock is still being enforced, they're starting to take their time about starting it. It's still lickety-split on pitches that hit the catcher's mitt cleanly and don't end the at bat. But any foul ball, pitch in the dirt, throw to a base, etc., the batter and pitcher are both being allowed to take their sweet time settling back in before the clock begins.
And these seemingly small tweaks MLB has announced suggest that MLB is yielding the point, in that regard. If MLB declines to crack down on it, the players and umpires will continue wedging more and more wasted time into those spaces. The certain result is that while, yes, technically there is still a pitch clock and it is enforced if it runs down to 0, the game times will creep back toward 3 hours anyway as players are allowed to stand around doing nothing for a while before the clock is started, a hundred times per game.
Nothing less than a strong and public policy directive to umpires to start the clock immediately when the catcher receives the ball (from the pitcher or from the umpire) will prevent this from happening. But with the announcement of these seemingly innocuous adjustments, MLB is instead making weak and public allowances in the other direction. It's easy to see where that road leads.
I get the opposite from this. They're adjusting nitpicky details that were unfair in practice without altering the basic principle of "batter must be ready to hit, pitcher must pitch within a short amount of time".
I'm most surprised they haven't added an extra 30-60 seconds between half innings. That's what I would do. Generate a lot more ad revenue and give both tv and in-stadium fans more time between innings.
I don't understand the 4th bullet -- doesn't this mean the batter can waste as much time as he wants, cooling off the pitcher? Can't he not "indicate" until he is standing in the box and alert which saves no time at all?
I do like the idea of an operator winding a giant clock but it would waste a lot of time.
Then put a clock on that guy too.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main