Source
r/Braves•
willfrost21

Against the new rule changes

Pitch clock: bad. Reason: baseball is not timed. It is based on the occurrence of a sequence of events. When those events are complete, the game is complete. Also, why would I want a game to end faster? What else am I going to be doing? It is, after all, a pastime.

Larger bases: strange idea but I don’t see a problem with it. Feels a little Little League-ish.

Runner on second in extra innings: horrible. Again, baseball is based on a sequence of events. These events have to occur in certain ways. If a runner is on a second, the runner should reached there through one of the established events (hit, walk, error, balk, combination thereof, etc.). The theme again seems to be speeding up the game but to what end? The point of baseball is to pass time. What are we rushing to do next? To me this change and the pitch clock seem part of the preoccupation of our present culture with “productivity” and “efficiency.” Can we please escape those in baseball?

Edit: After reading the comments in favor of the pitch clock, I have been persuaded that the pitch clock may not be all bad. Thanks for sharing your perspectives.

Posted Mar 4, 2023, 2:01 PM UTC · edited

036
[deleted]•

People that are against the pitch clock make no sense to me. Baseball is still not a timed sport. You’re still seeing 54 outs of action. There’s still 3 strikes and 4 balls. Nothing changes about the game besides eliminating the dead space in between pitches. Are you guys really that much of a fan of the pitcher taking sometimes a full minute in between pitches? How is that exciting? More action, more frequently.

29
-_chop_-•

Because I like the strategy. The hitter trying to control the situation. The pitcher controlling the pace. The mind games with a fake shake or step off. The mind games of calling time last second. I can’t sit there and think “okay he just went two breaking balls away. Now he’s going to bust him in” baseball used to be relaxing and peaceful. Now it just kind of stressed me out

I hope I get used to it but for the moment I hate that stupid clock. And the DH and the ghost runner

4†
willfrost21OPThe Spirit of ‘91•

It’s like when Dylan went electric.

1
b2w1•

But that ended up giving us the Rolling Thunder Review with Mick Ronson. The pitch clock will always be lame. As will the DH.

1
g-burn---Δ Mile High Chopper•

Which was ultimately for the better. Brining It All Back Home, Highway 61 Revisited, and Blond on Blonde are GOAT albums

1
Hugo_5t1gl1tz•

Considering an entire 9 innings could technically go by without a single pitch happening says that it is in fact timed.

But to give a different perspective on the pitch clock, no I’m not a “fan” of the pitcher or batter taking all night, but i am frequently working during games and it’s hard enough to keep up with everything going on in a game. Now I feel like I’ll probably be lucky to look up at the tv to catch a box score as they walk off the field every few minutes. So for those of us who aren’t always free during the actual game time, it’s literally “passing us by” in a way

-6
ThorgiTheCorgithe doñgs of WAR•

I mean, it technically could, but it wouldn't...

If we spend 3 hours and no pitches are thrown, it will still be the top of the 1st, and the visiting team is just walking laps around the bases.

4
Hugo_5t1gl1tz•

Unless it’s on the batter and it’s just strike after strike

1
ThorgiTheCorgithe doñgs of WAR•

correct, but that would require batter after batter to just refuse to stand in the box for a full 21(or 36 w/ a runner on) seconds not including the time between clock resets.

But it hardly matters, because either premise is so outlandish that even considering them is asinine. Using this argument to claim that baseball is now a timed event makes about as much sense as saying a war is a timed event because if the defender doesn't fight back, the war will end in the time it takes the invader to travel across the country unhindered.

3
g-rocklobster•

First, like u/-chop- said, there's the strategy and the gamesmanship. Saw an interesting video of how Scherzer is going to (and already has) weaponized it by doing the long hold, forcing the batter to call his one time out, then holding again. A few are also doing quick pitches now. Saw something about one pitcher who threw a strike out in under 15 seconds this week. That's 3 pitches. The batter has nothing they can defend this with.

But I'm also concerned about what's next? At what point are they going to put a time clock on the game itself? Game has to be completed in 3 hours. If a tie, a 15-minute "extra innings." Think it can't be done, it's already done in little league - why couldn't they incorporate that into an MLB game. Or a mercy rule. I can see Manfred saying "does anyone really want to watch 9 innings with one team up 10 runs and putting in a position player to pitch?" Yeah, Rob, I do.

Baseball is the only major sport that a team can be down by 20 runs in the bottom of the ninth with two outs and two strikes .... AND THEY STILL HAVE A CHANCE!!!! I don't want that to change.

Besides, think of all the great soundbites we'd have missed if Skip and Pete were subject to the pitch clock!

-6
ATLBraves93•

What? The pitcher can't force the batter to call timeout anymore because all the batter has to do is be set with 8 seconds left. IF the pitcher doesn't throw, it's a ball. Simple as that. In fact Scherzer had a double play was erased yesterday because he held the ball too long completely contradicting your incorrect observation.

2
g-rocklobster•

This is from a batter's POV and why they're at a disadvantage:

https://twitter.com/FlippinBatsPod/status/1631383875493724162

This if from Scherzer's POV and why he's at an advantage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9mwZhv5FH4

I've never played anything outside of rec ball so I'll take the opinion of someone who's at least hit at a pro (MiLB) level (as well as the brother of a 3x Cy Young winner) as well as the opinion of another 3x Cy Young winner. Ben's (the twitter link) is especially enlightening.

2†
doodoobutter82Gone Like a Freight train, Gone Like Yesterday•

Pitcher can’t force him to but a hitter does not like to stand in his stance for long. Then he calls time out. Then soon has he puts his second foot down in the box the pitcher quick pitches him.

0†
hairyboater•
  • the batter has nothing they can defend with

What does this even mean? The batter is playing offense. They get in the box and wait for a pitch that is guaranteed to come within 15 seconds.

All this mind game stuff is mostly in the imagination of us - the fans.

1
scottevil110•

I don't mind the pitch clock. I'll admit watching a clock down to the second feels a bit methodical and even stressful, so there might be a better way, but I like it better than watching absolutely nothing happen for 45 seconds between pitches while the batter takes a leisurely stroll around the area, the pitcher examines his shoe laces for a while, and both of them just kind of ponder life.

7
willfrost21OPThe Spirit of ‘91•

Or Nomar Garciaparra going through the most elaborate ritual imaginable.

2
Tampammm•

I don't know anybody that likes that gimmicky extra-inning rule with the runner on 2nd base? But MLB seem undeterred about it.

Good point on the "productivity". I think a better term though would be more like "instant gratification". The goal is to get results more quickly and instantly. Not necessarily in a "productive" way though.

6
mywifiisbadtho•

I like it for regular season games but not postseason games tbh

2
Tampammm•

It's expedient for sure.

I have another suggestion, why don't they just go full gimmick, though. Similar to a hockey game with penalty shots, or a soccer game with free kicks?

And have your best slugger come out for 10 pitches and see how many home runs he can hit?

1
welcometohotlanta•

From what I’ve seen a lot of the pitchers are throwing well before the 3 second mark. I think the game will slow down when the games matter more and you’ll see pitchers wait to throw til the last few seconds.

4
cman1098•

The rules have always had a pitch clock that the umpires never enforced. Pitchers were required by rule to make the pitch in 15 seconds. Now the MLB has made a rule that the batter has to be set and ready in time and the umps will actually be enforcing a rule they never enforced before.

3
DonBuchelos•

As for extra innings, I wouldn't mind seeing no base runners in the 10th. Man on first to start the11th, man on 2nd to start the 12th. Then man on 3rd to start the 13th and every inning after.

2
doodoobutter82Gone Like a Freight train, Gone Like Yesterday•

Come mid season most will have forgotten about the pitch clock.

Yesterday Scherzer was testing how to mess with the hitters timing using the clock

https://youtu.be/qQ2BKc-zC2Y

2
hairyboater•

I seriously doubt the clock will go away. They might be more lenient, or let the first few violations slide and issue a warning but it’s here to stay you can bet on that.

From what I heard, Max missed out on a double play because he pitched the ball too late. Dangerous game to play.

Honestly, these batters are professionals. With the clock, they are guaranteed a pitch within 10-15 seconds after they are dug in (they can push the time limits too!). A stall from the pitcher won’t bother them.

1
doodoobutter82Gone Like a Freight train, Gone Like Yesterday•

no it can be used to mess up a hitters timing. This is according to a former mlb hitter https://youtu.be/qQ2BKc-zC2Y

Hitters don’t like to stand in their stance for 10 to 15 seconds.

1
alrighty_then33•

I like the new pitch clock rules, but they need to tweak them a bit. I don’t get the 8 seconds left batter has to be looking at the pitcher thing. And they need to waive the clock entirely in the 9th inning. The stakes are too high during the last inning of a close game to be rushed by a clock, and it takes away from the drama of the final at bats.

2
b2w1•

But sometimes the drama and stakes come before the 9th.

1
alrighty_then33•

Yeah but they aren’t as final in the earlier innings. I’m just suggesting tweaks to the rule, not taking it away entirely

1
b2w1•

Yeah, I’m just pointing to a flaw in your exception. It could give one team an advantage.

1
JakenMortyThere is only Swansby•

you know, i didnt rhink the pitch clock would have that much of an effect. today was the first game i watched in person where they used it. im totally with you, i hate it. it changes the whole feel of the game. it feels rushed. i dont like it either...

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
RoundingDown•

Let me guess your age - over 45. This is intended to save the game. We will die, and if younger fans aren’t brought into the game, it will die. That will be long after we are dead, but with no fans these games don’t happen.

There were certainly purists that were upset in 1954 when the NBA added the shot clock. I am certain that viewership would be much lower without that advent. Who wants to watch a game end at 35-25 when the winner gets the ball and just plays keep away.

It will be refreshing not having to watch a batter do a huge reset for every pitch. Step out of the batters box, adjust necklace, play with the Velcro on each batting glove several times, step into box while calling time so they can dig there back foot into the dirt, and then be ready for a pitch. The clock will allow a casual fan to watch the game and know that something is going to happen at least every 20 seconds. And let’s be honest, most pitches do not result in a ball being put into play, so even then not much is happening.

As for the larger bases, I too am ambivalent. But, If it makes the game safer and encourages more attempts at a steal I am all for it.

-4
[deleted]•

[deleted]

4
willfrost21OPThe Spirit of ‘91•

I’m under 45 but feel over 45.

5
RoundingDown•

My only point that most of the purists are in the older crowd. I am in the older crowd and understand the sentiment. However, I am pragmatic and understand that change is inevitable and that mlb needs to adapt or die.

Football fans thought that the forward pass would be the end of the sport in 1906. We now know that did not happen. This pitch clock will not ruin the sport, and may make it more exciting.

Something has happened to lengthen the games since 80’s or 90’s. The first team to average 3 hour games was the 1988 Yankees. The league was averaging over 3 hours, and with the increase in time the scoring was down. This change should nip it in the bud.

Based on the Yankees being the first team to go over 3 hours I think we all know who to blame: Don Mattingly.

-5
hairyboater•

Age has nothing to do with it. I’m older, a purist, and I absolutely love this clock.

Your first post is fine other than that first statement and this second one is just you refusing to admit the age qualifier was totally out of line.

0
RoundingDown•

The exception does not prove the rule.

0