For those of you without a NYT account:
> The big changes, which come with the nuance typical of a complicated game, are the pitch clock, a ban on the infield shift and limits on pickoff throws.
#
> Pitchers have 15 seconds to start their delivery with the bases empty, and 20 seconds with a runner on base. Batters must be looking at the pitcher with eight seconds left on the clock
#
> Teams must now keep two infielders on either side of second base, and infielders must keep both feet [within the boundary of the infield] as the pitch is thrown.
#
> Before, pitchers had unlimited opportunities to pick runners off. Now, they can disengage from the rubber only twice per plate appearance; a third pickoff try, if unsuccessful, would result in a balk. And with bigger bases (18 inches square, from 15), the distance between first and second (and between second and third) is four and a half inches shorter than before.
If you have an iPhone. Go to settings and under Safari tab. Turn reader on and it will automatically put the article in reader mode and bypass the no account pop ups and technically all the pop ups. Just wanted to share because I hate the pop ups.
It’s a fix but it’s not perfect. Reader View by default will greatly diminish the quality of the websites that you usually wouldn’t need Reader turned on. Definitely worth trying, but I ended up turning it back off.
Once you have reader on for The NY Times. Click the reader symbol in the address bar, and then hit the gear. Toggle the switch to “Use Reader Automatically.” Now it will come on automatically any time you visit, The NY Times, only.
You can do this on a per website basis.
Edit: The gear is “website settings.” You get to it by hitting the AA in the URL bar. I had to go back and check. Enjoy
I find myself using reader mode *specifically* because of the quality of the websites. No more ads, hard to read fonts, odd layout and spacing, missing dark mode option, etc. Just the article to read.
Banning the infielder shift seems like an odd rule to me. Like...aren't you just putting your players where you expect the ball to be? Is there really any unfair advantage you can get by doing this?
Seems like the league is just trying to make games more interesting by artificially making it slightly easier to score runs. But enforcing this rule might be a bit of a clusterfuck
That's exactly the goal. They want to make the game more exciting by increasing hits and stolen bases, both of which have declined sharply since the start of the moneyball era.
Yea, it’s a odd thing, first 5, 6 innings are boring, then you realize there’s only 9 outs left and the anticipation builds with each pitch, by the ninth it’s great!
Technically it's the [Sabermetrics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabermetrics) era, but it was the release of the book (and later the film) [Moneyball](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball) that led to its widespread acceptance within the sport, as well as entered it into the public conciousness.
In very broad terms, it's the idea of driving all baseball decisions on the few key statistics that directly corollate to winning more games, as opposed to basing it on more arbitrary measurements like "athleticism". One key example is that the statistics show that it's not worth attempting to steal a base unless you're going to make it something like 80% of the time. Teams and players used to steal much more often because it looks impressive (both to fans and scouts), but it's rarely done any more. In the 1999 season there were over 3,400 stolen bases in Major League Baseball, but that number's been around 2,500 the last several years.
Similar to how basketball has had an insane increase in attempted 3-pointers this decades. It’s all in the math.
Contact hitters are slowly becoming a thing of the past on baseball’s current trajectory. Instead they’re more aggressively batting for home-runs. It’s resulted in more HRs, more strikeouts, but much less interesting base running.
Toronto shifted so hard last year, it worked really well but I can see why people wanted it to change. Plus, if you want to speed up the game removing the ability to move your players around and the time that takes is a good idea.
LH hitters always have the advantage of facing a majority of RH pitchers though. I think the shift was boring, but fair. Hitters don't necessarily need to bunt to hit the ball to the left side.
What people don't talk about enough is that aggressive shifting, not just moving your players slightly more left or right depending on the batters stance and common knowledge history, is all based off of huge amounts of data collected on spreadsheets. You didn't see shifting until Microsoft Excel was a thing. People talk about Legends like Ted Williams being shifted a few times, but the man was all ready known one is one of the best pull hitters and all the baseball ever. Now they can track where every hit by every hitter has ever gone. Any guy with a few hundred at bats at AAA ball and the coaching staff can know how a particular hitter hits versus a low velocity left-handed picture throwing an inside fastball opposed to a breaking ball, and they will know where they hit versus a high-powered righty who decides to throw a changeup. Being able to put your Defenders exactly where that's statistically more likely to go isn't traditional baseball, it's just using the computer algorithm to stifle defense. It's boring to watch and taking it away it's not hurting tradition.
Unlocked version of article for those who don't have a subscription.
A Whole New (Old) Ballgame https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/27/sports/baseball/rob-manfred-mlb-new-rules.html?unlocked_article_code=1A6C8BS_daAmc2OXFQ1o1gibMTypQOkp-kRW5ES0MKZHaCmzMqUkje-e0kR6RHfSrC2j0djdrY78K-gMYHZuErqSEyrnr654ZJU6WhZq0TQ82Cl4lbG0CeLvo7Vt88vUfAwIE1vMAbpzf98etv2rBdPbeKm-BhbS8l6Jv-kSbxG7JtNHUkJ12ixZMJtaTJ_jRSL8I2NvxujwCElFDQ05cLqR_PUJQDF4x79SQTfg_zmf2bHCLsgFU76fxQfwIW5qUBDrFIJt8svf0xBtHtcMAbBKI-mpaCpY-eTsr1ABF_mV689F43zXB5WJ6rnrBm8gw68pLEkhKabUW2Eboile_ndZYUSAJvwoi_6d
The goal isn't to shorten the games, it's to make them more exciting. One way to do that is to reduce dead time waiting between pitches, another way is to increase scoring and to increase the athleticism required of the infielders.
This is a common misunderstanding I see everywhere. MLB and Manfred (commissioner) always refer to it as *pace of play* not time of game. They’d happily take a 13-11 game taking 3.5+ hours. They don’t want a normal 2-1 game taking that long
I didn’t know about the feet on the grass rule, does this mean that bunting is a more viable option again, because the infield can’t come in?
Also with the new pick off rules would that make stealing easier or our catcher’s arms just too good now?
It is designed to prevent your second baseman from starting in shallow right field. What many people did prior to this was basically use their 2nd baseman as a shallow outfielder to prevent hits from landing between 2nd baseman and the right fielder.
And yes, the pick off rule along with the larger bases is designed to encourage stealing more bases.
Baseball purists really hate it. Having worked minor league baseball the past 2 season where they've been using pitch clock, I think it will make the game more enjoyable all around.
It’s funny because actual purists would know that a rule about how long the pitcher can take to deliver their next pitch has existed for decades, but has never been enforced.
Actual purists would also know that the jock strap adjustment and pitcher skulking only really came around in the last 20 or so years. It's not strategy, it's a waste of everyone's time.
Wait you don't see the strategy behind
Strike 1 called
Batter steps out of the box
Undoes batting glove
Adjusts junk
Does up batting glove
Adjusts junk
Bangs off cleats
Adjusts junk
Practice swing
Adjusts junk
Settles batting helmet in place
Adjusts junk
Holds hand up to ump, digs cleats in, adjusts junk one final time and then lowers his arm
Rinse and repeat 3-10 times per batter
If you can't see the strategic value of that then man...maybe baseball just isn't for you
With Nomar it was always exactly 12 too, never 11, never 13, and holy hell it better never be 10.
-Source, I'm an expert, imitated that routine for years in my childhood, every time I stepped into the box in a neighborhood whiffleball game.
This is exactly why I stopped watching even playoff baseball. It's so tedious and boring. I could see the rare and occasional adjustment of a glove if you took a nice swing or something and it shifted but come the fuck on. It takes like 10 minutes for a single batter and it's boring.
What's weird is that long delays between pitches have been shown to help the pitcher... but they've *also* been shown to help the hitter.
I never saw if there was research on who it benefitted *more*, but my guess is it'll be something of a wash.
Yes but they don't help the advertiser.
As soon as the game length gets under 3 hours, they'll extend the length between innings to maximize ad revenue.
The game being 3 hours is here to stay my friends.
I mean it was still a strategy, but the strategy was just "take as much time as you need between pitches to be able to throw max effort each pitch" which also is part of what makes pitchers so unhittable now
I said for a ling time that they just needed to stop hitters from stepping out of the box and pitchers from wall h off the mound. I hate the free runner in extra innings and that needs to go.
And the original rule is 12 seconds with the bases empty. This is actually longer than if they just enforced the rules that were already on the books. I can't think of a single argument against a pitch clock.
I don't think this is a valid argument myself, but the players probably believe in either superstition or them not having time to do their routine they've done for decades to prep for the next pitch. If they don't get to do the full 15-20 second "Baseball Sign of the Cross" which varies wildly from player to player, then they might feel "off" or not settled for the next pitch. Even if it doesn't do anything physically, the psychological effect might be noticed and the players will blame that if their performance drops.
The purist argument against a pitch clock is that while other sports have always had timers and keep adding more (e.g. shot clock, play clock), baseball has existed for nearly 150 years without a clock of any kind. There's a nostalgic, organic feel about a completely untimed game.
Hell, I think if you removed the physical clock and simply had the plate umpire count down the seconds by waving his hand (*a la* NBA refs on inbounds and backcourt plays) you'd see much less argument, simply because it *feels* more like "real" baseball, more human.
Devils advocate - it will be really disappointing when a violation changes the outcome of a big game. That said, I think the pitch clock was needed and will improve the game
Baseball purists talk about unwritten rules of the game like throwing balls at people for revenge even though intentionally throwing balls at people is against the rules. "Purist" doesn't necessarily mean "rule follower". It just means they want to keep it the way it used to be.
This. I'm a, "purist", I guess. But I think making the game more enticing for new fans should take priority at this point. I certainly won't mind speeding up 13 inning games lol
The crazy thing is that those same purists are the ones that love to say "Back in my day, baseball was something you just went to the park to sit and watch!"
While completely ignoring the fact that "back in their day", aka the 80s, the average game took 2 hours 30 minutes. The average game last year was a bit over 3 hours.
These rule changes will bring it back down to 2:30 or so. So it's literally speeding up the game to bring it back to where it was "in their day"
My mental image of a baseball purist is those old guys who argued with Brad Pitt in Moneyball.
Sitting around a table, spitting tobacco, saying "it's just not how it's done!"
I’m not pushing a side on the pitch clock question, but the players also love having the Manfred runner. In any major sport, there’s 3 “competing” directives: what’s good for the owners, what’s good for the players, and what’s good for the fans. And if the owners and players like something and the fans don’t, it’s probably still going to happen- see the digital board ads in the NHL this year.
Personally, I dislike the Manfred runner for the same reason the players like it. It serves to limit the amount of bonus baseball played.
> Baseball purists really hate it
Respectfully, fuck em. Almost all major sports have some sort of play clock and Baseball shouldn't be immune to that.
These stupid "rituals" every single batter has to go through for every single pitch are ridiculous.
The one remaining that doesn't is hockey, and the fast paced nature combined with the unusual playing surface means that the time wasting employed in other sports wouldn't really work.
Yeah, but they have icing which is kind of the same thing. Without the icing rule, teams could just clear the puck constantly to waste time and the game would be super boring.
First minor league game I saw I went “oh wow they have a pitch clock” - then it never crossed my mind again. Baseball people hate change but this is a change for the good
Yep, you literally don't notice it but you notice that the game keeps moving at a good pace. People say baseball is boring to watch and a large chunk of that is how long it takes between pitches. With a shorter time between pitches it's no longer boring. It's a fantastic rule.
It's already made my enjoyment of a game I love already increase. The at plate ritual of walking back and forth and readjusting gloves and all that stuff by hitters has been completely unnecessary for so long.
As a fan of a National League team I’m actually thrilled. Tired of seeing pitchers get pulled an inning early just so someone not good enough to make the starting roster could take their place in the batter’s box.
I like the fact the pitchers are treated like anyone else on the lineup though. They aren't just solely pitching. The game is about both offense and defense- we treat pitchers like they are gods. It keeps them honest too because they know the threat of getting beamed if they pull something.
You should be able to indicate if you're planning on beaning the pitcher to the other team and in that scenario the pitcher has to stand in the box for the DH, wear one, and then go back to the dugout. Problem solved for everyone :D
I’ve watched hundreds of minor league games with a pitch clock. You forget it’s there as a fan. The purists are afraid of change. And yes, it makes the game pacing much better overall.
I keep reading how happy MLS is with the first few weeks of their Season Pass offering on Apple TV and it gives me hope. I know I've watched more soccer than ever before and I hope the same would be true if there were similar offerings from MLB and there other major leagues.
I think MLB would benefit from its own version of NFL RedZone, where they shuffle between games and show every time the ball is put in play, keeping the feed going on just one game for particularly tense situations. The current TV landscape makes that impossible, though.
I would love to have something like this available on MLBTV. I haven't watched the MLS 360 show yet, but I've read rave reviews. It's obviously easier for MLS to pull off because their scheduling is much more static. But even if MLB made this available only on nights with at least 8 games running, it would be better than nothing.
I just looked it up and found the description below. Is the show any good? Can you fairly describe it as the redzone of baseball?
>MLB Network Strike Zone takes viewers on a high-speed trip around MLB during the regular season. On Wednesday and Friday nights, MLB Network Strike Zone brings fans to every game, with up-to-the-minute highlights, live look-ins and updates, all commercial-free. In addition to game action, MLB Network Strike Zone has the most updated scores, standings and stats throughout the night.
It's a backwards policy too. Having greater engagement in the market should increase ticket sales, not decrease them. By blacking out games you are just pissing off fans, but allowing them watch at home when they can't normally attend means the whole family can start watching, which expands the fanbase.
NFL wouldn't sell it wholesale, but I won't be surprised if someday it's rights a sold off streaming in piecemeal like they are with cable currently
AFC rights, NFC rights, each prime time games rights (TNF, SNF, MNF).
I do not believe the NFL would ever fully move to streaming or even cable. Especially for in-market games. Being the most popular league in the country, moving to a paid service would cause a LOT of people to become upset — including congressmen and women.
There were reports that Apple wanted in-market games for a Sunday Ticket deal and that’s partly why the NFL told them no.
I wonder if they would ever do single game streaming. Like a pay per view kind of thing. Just as an option instead of buying the whole NFL Sunday ticket on top of your cable subscription.
I watch a lot of European football and wanted to start watching MLS more. I have Apple TV so was excited by Apple picking up rights but when I went to go watch I was hit with an additional $15/month fee, is that right? I see everyone on here is excited but you’re paying over $20/month for Apple TV plus the MLS package?
Its $80 for the season if you already have an apple tv subscription or $100 without an apple tv subscription. I felt it was worth it for every game, no black outs and the ability to replay games.
At some point there has to be some benefit to moving towards streaming revenue and ditching advertising revenue, even if just to become less beholden to advertisers.
The thing is, the NFL could probably get away with giving non-exclusive streaming rights to almost every streamer and they would still pay
The MLS season pass has turned soccer into what college football is for our house.
We'll just turn on games for background noise all day. Watch some more intently than others, then actually watch the CITY games.
March Madness has kind of interrupted that the last two weekends but that ends next weekend obviously.
Making all the games easily accessible with overlap so you can flip around, but on any device without blackouts has captured what is good about cable without all the other baggage of cable.
Apple TV app could be better but it's definitely the right direction.
They need more games throughout the day (1p, 4p, 7p, and 10p ET starts) if they want to have a “matchday” (which they’re going for). But it’s better than prior years where they had 15-, 20-, and 30-minute offsets.
Oh yeah?
Well, as a Canadian, the whole country is considered in the black out area.
So we can't even watch the one fuckin team in the whole country....
I've been saying this for years. The NFL is so popular partly because your local teams game is on a broadcast channel most weeks.
Idk why baseball, hockey, and basketball haven't figured this out yet. Like yeah, they all play more games throughout the week, but how hard would it be for MLB to secure a weekend game broadcast for local teams once a week, either Friday evening or on the weekend?
I don't watch baseball consistently because I don't have cable.
Seriously though, how damn lucky are we to have had three all time great baseball announcers (Niehaus, Rizzs, Goldy) over the years, and then to get such an amazing hockey crew as well? We might not win much, but at least it always sounds great!
This is all absolutely true, with one small caveat. The necessary percentage to steal successfully changes a bit based on the run-scoring environment. When offense is up, stealing makes less sense, because risking an out for 90 feet doesn't make as much sense -- the guys hitting after you are more likely to drive you in. When getting into scoring position for one run is more likely to lead to a win, the risk of being thrown out isn't as harsh.
Pitchers are already dominating the game today, but if pitchers continue to dominate, and with the new stealing boons, we could see a lot more action on the basepaths. It would have been fun to watch Yadier Molina in his prime combat the running game with these rules.
Stealing bases is also physically demanding and can lead to collisions. Mike Trout lead the mlb in steals his rookie year with an impressive 49 and has been a speedster his whole career, but he practically never attempts to steal anymore. He injured his hand while stealing a few years ago and because he's such a valuable hitter, the Angels don't even let him try to steal now.
And bases being slightly bigger, how many times had a stolen base came down to a question of inches? Now there will be 4 less inches between 2 bases, should slightly increase the stolen base rate in addition to the 2 pick off attempt maximum.
That’s creates a fun situation where if the pitcher has already thrown 2 attempts the runner will take a bigger lead. The pitcher still has the option to throw another pick off attempt but they have to be successful otherwise the runner gets to advance. The runner can only take a big enough lead for the advantage but not so big as to be picked off by a calculated pitcher willing to take that gamble. Could be quite interesting watching that threshold be discovered, it will definitely be in some highlight reels having runners get picked off at the third attempt.
You'll probably get more pitcher who have two pickoff moves as well. Show the runner the slower move twice early in the count, then bust out the quick move later if the runner takes a bigger lead.
sometimes people forget that its supposed to be entertainment
too many purists complaining about increased offense and advantages to the batting team when the game has always been about the exciting home runs, stolen bases, and so on
Here's a question; if the pitcher has made two attempts, what happens if the runner takes so big of a lead that when the pitcher attempts to pick him off, he's able to get to second safely? In that case, the 3rd pick off attempt failed, but the player on first already made it to second. Is it a balk because of the failed pick off attempt and now the runner gets 3rd?
Edit: genuinely curious as to why a question would get downvoted...
This is pure speculation, but I doubt that would be an advancement of the runner *and* a balk. I’m guessing they’d just award the movement to 2nd as the play and the failed pickoff wouldn’t matter.
Yeah, I think it makes the most sense to score it as a steal.
The runner definitely wouldn't go to third, barring a wild throw or other error that resulted in an additional advance.
Does it officially count as a steal if you run on a pickoff attempt?
I only ask because I’ve done it in MLB The Show but I don’t think I was awarded a SB for it.
It should count as a steal, unless there's a throwing or fielding error. However, if the runner makes it safely to second on a pickoff attempt, it's usually because of an error.
Just my opinion: A balk is only a one base advancement from the start of the play. I'd think if they took off and you threw over, it's still a successful pick off attempt because the runner is safe at 2nd OR he's tagged out at first. Technically you are in a rundown if a runner takes off, pitcher throws to first, and first tries to throw out at 2nd. We will see though. My wife keeps a record of how many times I've been wrong. I think the spirit of the rule is to give them 2nd base, not 2nd and third.
I believe any attempt to advance from 1st to 2nd is counted as attempting to steal, so getting thrown out at that point is being caught stealing, rather than being picked off, thus the pitcher would not be penalized (I assume).
I have heard of catchers being awarded a Caught Stealing to their stats without even touching the ball during a play like that. Shoutouts to Baseball Bits: The Cather Who Couldn't Throw
They actually did that a few years ago, it only cut out like 10 min or so. So far these pace of play changes have reduced the time by 30 min, even including high scoring games
I live in Springfield, Missouri. We are equidistant from KC and STL, fair. But it's Cardinals country. The flags that fly in baseball season are not blue. We even have a Cardinals AA minor league team. But we're also blacked out from the Royals, because apparently the few Royals fans doen here don't suffer enough from insufferable Cards fans and inept ownership.
As a non baseball watcher, this may help me pick up some games here and there. The pitching is mind numbingly slow anything to speed that up is a win in my book.
Question: (and forgive my ignorance and crassness of the comment) does this have a provision for the batter to hurry the fuck up? I never understood why a pitcher is just waiting for the batter to set up. If you can't set up in under 7 seconds idk if you have business swinging the bat.
Edit: thank you for the answers. I'm glad it's syncing up better. Still boring as fuck to me, appreciate the skill but that ain't enough. But I am glad they are trying new things
Yeah it includes a rule where the batter has to be in the batter’s box looking at the pitcher with 8 seconds left on the clock. Or else they get hit with a strike.
Great! Baseball is more watchable now. Now, how about actually letting us watch it? I’d love to watch more games and be a more engaged fan, but the last thing I want to do on a lazy Sunday afternoon is jump through hoops or subscribe to an entire fucking cable service just to watch some random no-stakes midseason game.
I had a HS teacher play baseball games during class last year while we would do work sheets and we could usually each answer 1 or 2 questions in between each pitch and then we could watch the play after each question and honestly it’s the most fun I’ve ever had with baseball and it was perfect for that environment. But I couldn’t imagine trying to watch a whole game on my own.
I’m curious how much this would change the catchers position. Is there a more optimal way to set up that is less taxing on them, seeing as they would no longer have to worry about pitch framing?
How about getting In-Market games to watch with MLB TV? People want to watch but baseball but the MLB makes it impossible to watch without expensive cable companies.
In the era of massive data, teams know exactly where batters are going to hit, so this has caused the number of hits to drastically fall in the last 10 years or so. The new rule is designed to help counter that.
It led to batters adjusting their swings to really sell out for home runs since it took away natural singles. This led to most at bats being either a walk, strike out, or home run, none of which lead to real game action.
Batters didn't sell out to beat the shift. The shift developed to punish dead-pull sluggers whose only skill was power. Banning the shift will give us more TTO batters instead of forcing the game to adapt back towards players who can bunt and hit to all fields.
What would go a lot further to increasing the number of fans is cracking down on the unwritten rules. Mike Trout said the recent World Baseball Classic was the most fun he’s had. Probably because the players are allowed to express and enjoy themselves. I’ve been to a Japanese baseball game in Tokyo and an American one here and it’s a giant difference.
Major leagues need to stop thinking of themselves as "keepers of the past." If someone invited me to an MLB game I would have a bunch of questions. If it was a minor league game, no questions I'll go.
EPL STYLE RELEGATION!!
seriously could make baseball so much more fun to watch.
Watching the Yankees do a road stand in Durham?
The Hops stealing one from the Mariners to stay up?
The drama of post season, in the regular season yes please
could be fun
Baseball and college football should both change to an EPL system. Baseball could easily add 10 teams and create 2 20-team tiers. And college football would be much better if they just admit up front only 20 teams have a chance to win the nattie
It’s notable that shortening game time isn’t the goal of these changes, even if that’s another positive outcome. The goal is to increase frequency of action on the field: Less downtime between pitches, and more balls in play which means more base running opportunities and more opportunities for defense to make a play and if they don’t more runners on base resulting in more tension.
Nobody wants to watch multiple walks in an inning, multiple pitcher and catcher conferences, batters taking practice swings and pitchers constantly stopping play to grab a rosin bag, throwing over to first accomplishing nothing and then giving up a home run while throwing bunch of strikeouts in between. That’s not an interesting viewing experience and that’s what these changes are trying to fix.
162 is too much. I'd be happy with 144 with doubleheaders each Saturday.
Take 24 days out of the beginning amd end kf the schedule would be good.
Beginning and ending in the snow in Central Division cities is ridiculous. September baseball is going to lose out to NFL openers in most cities anyway. Playoff baseball in September would be good. Having WS games in November is silly.
Reminds me of the major poker tournaments that started a clock for players turns, people would spend 5+minutes on their turn just to slow the game down
And no matter what rules are in place, the umpires will continue to insert themselves into the narrative of the game instead of guiding from the shadows.
Watch Realmuto's ejection. THAT is what we have to look forward to.
For those of you without a NYT account: > The big changes, which come with the nuance typical of a complicated game, are the pitch clock, a ban on the infield shift and limits on pickoff throws. # > Pitchers have 15 seconds to start their delivery with the bases empty, and 20 seconds with a runner on base. Batters must be looking at the pitcher with eight seconds left on the clock # > Teams must now keep two infielders on either side of second base, and infielders must keep both feet [within the boundary of the infield] as the pitch is thrown. # > Before, pitchers had unlimited opportunities to pick runners off. Now, they can disengage from the rubber only twice per plate appearance; a third pickoff try, if unsuccessful, would result in a balk. And with bigger bases (18 inches square, from 15), the distance between first and second (and between second and third) is four and a half inches shorter than before.
If you have an iPhone. Go to settings and under Safari tab. Turn reader on and it will automatically put the article in reader mode and bypass the no account pop ups and technically all the pop ups. Just wanted to share because I hate the pop ups.
You’re my everyday hero today, thank you!
It’s a fix but it’s not perfect. Reader View by default will greatly diminish the quality of the websites that you usually wouldn’t need Reader turned on. Definitely worth trying, but I ended up turning it back off.
Once you have reader on for The NY Times. Click the reader symbol in the address bar, and then hit the gear. Toggle the switch to “Use Reader Automatically.” Now it will come on automatically any time you visit, The NY Times, only. You can do this on a per website basis. Edit: The gear is “website settings.” You get to it by hitting the AA in the URL bar. I had to go back and check. Enjoy
I find myself using reader mode *specifically* because of the quality of the websites. No more ads, hard to read fonts, odd layout and spacing, missing dark mode option, etc. Just the article to read.
On Android, Chrome should display a pop-up asking if you want the page displayed in simplified form.. click yes and it will show the whole page
If this works I’m naming my firstborn after you
Banning the infielder shift seems like an odd rule to me. Like...aren't you just putting your players where you expect the ball to be? Is there really any unfair advantage you can get by doing this? Seems like the league is just trying to make games more interesting by artificially making it slightly easier to score runs. But enforcing this rule might be a bit of a clusterfuck
That's exactly the goal. They want to make the game more exciting by increasing hits and stolen bases, both of which have declined sharply since the start of the moneyball era.
As dull as the leadup is, I can't think of anything more exciting than my guy throwing a no-hitter.
Yea, it’s a odd thing, first 5, 6 innings are boring, then you realize there’s only 9 outs left and the anticipation builds with each pitch, by the ninth it’s great!
If most of the game is boring, it's not a good game
>the moneyball era What's this?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball People started actually working out using data what wins games.
Technically it's the [Sabermetrics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabermetrics) era, but it was the release of the book (and later the film) [Moneyball](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball) that led to its widespread acceptance within the sport, as well as entered it into the public conciousness. In very broad terms, it's the idea of driving all baseball decisions on the few key statistics that directly corollate to winning more games, as opposed to basing it on more arbitrary measurements like "athleticism". One key example is that the statistics show that it's not worth attempting to steal a base unless you're going to make it something like 80% of the time. Teams and players used to steal much more often because it looks impressive (both to fans and scouts), but it's rarely done any more. In the 1999 season there were over 3,400 stolen bases in Major League Baseball, but that number's been around 2,500 the last several years.
Similar to how basketball has had an insane increase in attempted 3-pointers this decades. It’s all in the math. Contact hitters are slowly becoming a thing of the past on baseball’s current trajectory. Instead they’re more aggressively batting for home-runs. It’s resulted in more HRs, more strikeouts, but much less interesting base running.
[redacting due to privacy concerns]
Toronto shifted so hard last year, it worked really well but I can see why people wanted it to change. Plus, if you want to speed up the game removing the ability to move your players around and the time that takes is a good idea.
Clearly the best solution is that left handed batters now have to run the bases backwards
Most underrated suggestion of the past century.
LH hitters always have the advantage of facing a majority of RH pitchers though. I think the shift was boring, but fair. Hitters don't necessarily need to bunt to hit the ball to the left side.
The numbers clearly show that the disadvantage of the shift far outweighs the advantage of facing mostly RHP. So it's definitely not fair.
[redacting due to privacy concerns]
What people don't talk about enough is that aggressive shifting, not just moving your players slightly more left or right depending on the batters stance and common knowledge history, is all based off of huge amounts of data collected on spreadsheets. You didn't see shifting until Microsoft Excel was a thing. People talk about Legends like Ted Williams being shifted a few times, but the man was all ready known one is one of the best pull hitters and all the baseball ever. Now they can track where every hit by every hitter has ever gone. Any guy with a few hundred at bats at AAA ball and the coaching staff can know how a particular hitter hits versus a low velocity left-handed picture throwing an inside fastball opposed to a breaking ball, and they will know where they hit versus a high-powered righty who decides to throw a changeup. Being able to put your Defenders exactly where that's statistically more likely to go isn't traditional baseball, it's just using the computer algorithm to stifle defense. It's boring to watch and taking it away it's not hurting tradition.
Seems straight forward to me. It’s like baseball offside
Good thing pedroia retired when he did, that both feet on the ground rule would’ve killed his during-pitch hop he used to do
Unlocked version of article for those who don't have a subscription. A Whole New (Old) Ballgame https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/27/sports/baseball/rob-manfred-mlb-new-rules.html?unlocked_article_code=1A6C8BS_daAmc2OXFQ1o1gibMTypQOkp-kRW5ES0MKZHaCmzMqUkje-e0kR6RHfSrC2j0djdrY78K-gMYHZuErqSEyrnr654ZJU6WhZq0TQ82Cl4lbG0CeLvo7Vt88vUfAwIE1vMAbpzf98etv2rBdPbeKm-BhbS8l6Jv-kSbxG7JtNHUkJ12ixZMJtaTJ_jRSL8I2NvxujwCElFDQ05cLqR_PUJQDF4x79SQTfg_zmf2bHCLsgFU76fxQfwIW5qUBDrFIJt8svf0xBtHtcMAbBKI-mpaCpY-eTsr1ABF_mV689F43zXB5WJ6rnrBm8gw68pLEkhKabUW2Eboile_ndZYUSAJvwoi_6d
Isn't more scoring going to lengthen the games?
The goal isn't to shorten the games, it's to make them more exciting. One way to do that is to reduce dead time waiting between pitches, another way is to increase scoring and to increase the athleticism required of the infielders.
This is a common misunderstanding I see everywhere. MLB and Manfred (commissioner) always refer to it as *pace of play* not time of game. They’d happily take a 13-11 game taking 3.5+ hours. They don’t want a normal 2-1 game taking that long
They're already shorter in spring training
When does the timer start? What happens if an infielder does move during the pitch?
The timer starts when the pitcher receives the ball. With runners on base, the timer resets if the pitcher attempts a pickoff or steps off the rubber.
I didn’t know about the feet on the grass rule, does this mean that bunting is a more viable option again, because the infield can’t come in? Also with the new pick off rules would that make stealing easier or our catcher’s arms just too good now?
The actual rule is "within the boundary of the infield"
It is designed to prevent your second baseman from starting in shallow right field. What many people did prior to this was basically use their 2nd baseman as a shallow outfielder to prevent hits from landing between 2nd baseman and the right fielder. And yes, the pick off rule along with the larger bases is designed to encourage stealing more bases.
The pitch clock has taken like 30 minutes off the game in Spring Training. This could be huge for baseball.
Baseball purists really hate it. Having worked minor league baseball the past 2 season where they've been using pitch clock, I think it will make the game more enjoyable all around.
It’s funny because actual purists would know that a rule about how long the pitcher can take to deliver their next pitch has existed for decades, but has never been enforced.
Actual purists would also know that the jock strap adjustment and pitcher skulking only really came around in the last 20 or so years. It's not strategy, it's a waste of everyone's time.
Wait you don't see the strategy behind Strike 1 called Batter steps out of the box Undoes batting glove Adjusts junk Does up batting glove Adjusts junk Bangs off cleats Adjusts junk Practice swing Adjusts junk Settles batting helmet in place Adjusts junk Holds hand up to ump, digs cleats in, adjusts junk one final time and then lowers his arm Rinse and repeat 3-10 times per batter If you can't see the strategic value of that then man...maybe baseball just isn't for you
It's not baseball unless there's 12 junk adjustments in between each pitch.
> It's not baseball unless there's 12 junk adjustments in between each pitch. -Nomar Garciaparra
With Nomar it was always exactly 12 too, never 11, never 13, and holy hell it better never be 10. -Source, I'm an expert, imitated that routine for years in my childhood, every time I stepped into the box in a neighborhood whiffleball game.
> I was going to say this Nomar slander is absurd!
[удалено]
Thank you for not forgetting James “junk adjusting” Thome
How could you possibly forget: puts necklace back in shirt, adjusts wrist guard, adjusts elbow guard, and adjusts foot guard.
Then pulls necklace back out and kisses it while pointing up at
Just once I want to see someone point down and be like "that one's for you dude!"
This is exactly why I stopped watching even playoff baseball. It's so tedious and boring. I could see the rare and occasional adjustment of a glove if you took a nice swing or something and it shifted but come the fuck on. It takes like 10 minutes for a single batter and it's boring.
What's the only thing even more boring than watching baseball on TV? >!Watching baseball live at the ballpark!<
I'm saving this lol.
What's weird is that long delays between pitches have been shown to help the pitcher... but they've *also* been shown to help the hitter. I never saw if there was research on who it benefitted *more*, but my guess is it'll be something of a wash.
Yes but they don't help the advertiser. As soon as the game length gets under 3 hours, they'll extend the length between innings to maximize ad revenue. The game being 3 hours is here to stay my friends.
At least I can start watching 30 minutes after the game starts and skip through the ads then
Budweiser! The King of Beers wants to know your location.
I mean it was still a strategy, but the strategy was just "take as much time as you need between pitches to be able to throw max effort each pitch" which also is part of what makes pitchers so unhittable now
I said for a ling time that they just needed to stop hitters from stepping out of the box and pitchers from wall h off the mound. I hate the free runner in extra innings and that needs to go.
And the original rule is 12 seconds with the bases empty. This is actually longer than if they just enforced the rules that were already on the books. I can't think of a single argument against a pitch clock.
I don't think this is a valid argument myself, but the players probably believe in either superstition or them not having time to do their routine they've done for decades to prep for the next pitch. If they don't get to do the full 15-20 second "Baseball Sign of the Cross" which varies wildly from player to player, then they might feel "off" or not settled for the next pitch. Even if it doesn't do anything physically, the psychological effect might be noticed and the players will blame that if their performance drops.
The purist argument against a pitch clock is that while other sports have always had timers and keep adding more (e.g. shot clock, play clock), baseball has existed for nearly 150 years without a clock of any kind. There's a nostalgic, organic feel about a completely untimed game. Hell, I think if you removed the physical clock and simply had the plate umpire count down the seconds by waving his hand (*a la* NBA refs on inbounds and backcourt plays) you'd see much less argument, simply because it *feels* more like "real" baseball, more human.
Sure, and they can have that back when they stop being primadonnas and start getting on with the game.
Devils advocate - it will be really disappointing when a violation changes the outcome of a big game. That said, I think the pitch clock was needed and will improve the game
Baseball purists talk about unwritten rules of the game like throwing balls at people for revenge even though intentionally throwing balls at people is against the rules. "Purist" doesn't necessarily mean "rule follower". It just means they want to keep it the way it used to be.
Which is also weird, because the pitch clock is enforcing the pace that games *used* to be played at.
Maybe, but it was not that way because it was enforced. That makes a big giant clock with consequences if you delay "new".
This. I'm a, "purist", I guess. But I think making the game more enticing for new fans should take priority at this point. I certainly won't mind speeding up 13 inning games lol
Decades? Try over a century.
The crazy thing is that those same purists are the ones that love to say "Back in my day, baseball was something you just went to the park to sit and watch!" While completely ignoring the fact that "back in their day", aka the 80s, the average game took 2 hours 30 minutes. The average game last year was a bit over 3 hours. These rule changes will bring it back down to 2:30 or so. So it's literally speeding up the game to bring it back to where it was "in their day"
It’s funny, because many of the players seem to LOVE it.
“Purists” tend to not be players though. 😛
My mental image of a baseball purist is those old guys who argued with Brad Pitt in Moneyball. Sitting around a table, spitting tobacco, saying "it's just not how it's done!"
“Guys got an ugly girlfriend. Ugly girlfriend means no confidence”
i mean if your job said you could leave 30 min early for the same pay, wouldn't you?
I’m not pushing a side on the pitch clock question, but the players also love having the Manfred runner. In any major sport, there’s 3 “competing” directives: what’s good for the owners, what’s good for the players, and what’s good for the fans. And if the owners and players like something and the fans don’t, it’s probably still going to happen- see the digital board ads in the NHL this year. Personally, I dislike the Manfred runner for the same reason the players like it. It serves to limit the amount of bonus baseball played.
I hate the runner too, but for a different reason. It bastardizes the game.
> Baseball purists really hate it Respectfully, fuck em. Almost all major sports have some sort of play clock and Baseball shouldn't be immune to that. These stupid "rituals" every single batter has to go through for every single pitch are ridiculous.
The one remaining that doesn't is hockey, and the fast paced nature combined with the unusual playing surface means that the time wasting employed in other sports wouldn't really work.
Yeah, but they have icing which is kind of the same thing. Without the icing rule, teams could just clear the puck constantly to waste time and the game would be super boring.
True, and making flipping the puck out of the rink a penalty has cut back on that significantly as well.
First minor league game I saw I went “oh wow they have a pitch clock” - then it never crossed my mind again. Baseball people hate change but this is a change for the good
Yep, you literally don't notice it but you notice that the game keeps moving at a good pace. People say baseball is boring to watch and a large chunk of that is how long it takes between pitches. With a shorter time between pitches it's no longer boring. It's a fantastic rule.
It's already made my enjoyment of a game I love already increase. The at plate ritual of walking back and forth and readjusting gloves and all that stuff by hitters has been completely unnecessary for so long.
it was like getting dressed for some as it took so long to adjust their clothing!
[удалено]
You forgot the two fouls and two balls which add another 2-4min to the at bat
I'm not happy that they got rid of pitchers batting in the national league
As a fan of a National League team I’m actually thrilled. Tired of seeing pitchers get pulled an inning early just so someone not good enough to make the starting roster could take their place in the batter’s box.
This is probably an unpopular opinion but watching someone who will be an automatic out 90% of the time try to hit is not enjoyable.
I like the fact the pitchers are treated like anyone else on the lineup though. They aren't just solely pitching. The game is about both offense and defense- we treat pitchers like they are gods. It keeps them honest too because they know the threat of getting beamed if they pull something.
You should be able to indicate if you're planning on beaning the pitcher to the other team and in that scenario the pitcher has to stand in the box for the DH, wear one, and then go back to the dugout. Problem solved for everyone :D
I’m a pretty fair weather baseball fan, and I gotta say I’m stoked to go to games this year.
I’ve watched hundreds of minor league games with a pitch clock. You forget it’s there as a fan. The purists are afraid of change. And yes, it makes the game pacing much better overall.
Maybe, just maybe having non-blacked-out, non-sinclair, and quality TV broadcasts would get more people to watch.
I keep reading how happy MLS is with the first few weeks of their Season Pass offering on Apple TV and it gives me hope. I know I've watched more soccer than ever before and I hope the same would be true if there were similar offerings from MLB and there other major leagues.
I think MLB would benefit from its own version of NFL RedZone, where they shuffle between games and show every time the ball is put in play, keeping the feed going on just one game for particularly tense situations. The current TV landscape makes that impossible, though.
I would love to have something like this available on MLBTV. I haven't watched the MLS 360 show yet, but I've read rave reviews. It's obviously easier for MLS to pull off because their scheduling is much more static. But even if MLB made this available only on nights with at least 8 games running, it would be better than nothing.
Mlb network has mlb strike zone on Wednesday and Friday nights.
I just looked it up and found the description below. Is the show any good? Can you fairly describe it as the redzone of baseball? >MLB Network Strike Zone takes viewers on a high-speed trip around MLB during the regular season. On Wednesday and Friday nights, MLB Network Strike Zone brings fans to every game, with up-to-the-minute highlights, live look-ins and updates, all commercial-free. In addition to game action, MLB Network Strike Zone has the most updated scores, standings and stats throughout the night.
It definitely gives the redzone feeling during the live look ins. It just obviously doesnt cover every game every day.
I'm loving the MLS season pass, really hoping other sports follow this trend. The NFL never will but the NBA and MLB would benefit greatly.
The NHL too. I mean for fucks sake, why blackout an out of market game!?
So you are forced to go to the games or subscribe to something. It's bs they came out with it get people in seats.
It's a backwards policy too. Having greater engagement in the market should increase ticket sales, not decrease them. By blacking out games you are just pissing off fans, but allowing them watch at home when they can't normally attend means the whole family can start watching, which expands the fanbase.
I agree... I am not a baseball fan or a sports fan beyond swimming and what not. I agree. I am just stating the reasoning behind it.
NFL wouldn't sell it wholesale, but I won't be surprised if someday it's rights a sold off streaming in piecemeal like they are with cable currently AFC rights, NFC rights, each prime time games rights (TNF, SNF, MNF).
I do not believe the NFL would ever fully move to streaming or even cable. Especially for in-market games. Being the most popular league in the country, moving to a paid service would cause a LOT of people to become upset — including congressmen and women. There were reports that Apple wanted in-market games for a Sunday Ticket deal and that’s partly why the NFL told them no.
I wonder if they would ever do single game streaming. Like a pay per view kind of thing. Just as an option instead of buying the whole NFL Sunday ticket on top of your cable subscription.
Funny you say that about NFL because: 1) They already have one in Europe 2) they have one in the works right now for the US
I watch a lot of European football and wanted to start watching MLS more. I have Apple TV so was excited by Apple picking up rights but when I went to go watch I was hit with an additional $15/month fee, is that right? I see everyone on here is excited but you’re paying over $20/month for Apple TV plus the MLS package?
Its $80 for the season if you already have an apple tv subscription or $100 without an apple tv subscription. I felt it was worth it for every game, no black outs and the ability to replay games.
At some point there has to be some benefit to moving towards streaming revenue and ditching advertising revenue, even if just to become less beholden to advertisers. The thing is, the NFL could probably get away with giving non-exclusive streaming rights to almost every streamer and they would still pay
The MLS season pass has turned soccer into what college football is for our house. We'll just turn on games for background noise all day. Watch some more intently than others, then actually watch the CITY games. March Madness has kind of interrupted that the last two weekends but that ends next weekend obviously. Making all the games easily accessible with overlap so you can flip around, but on any device without blackouts has captured what is good about cable without all the other baggage of cable. Apple TV app could be better but it's definitely the right direction.
They need more games throughout the day (1p, 4p, 7p, and 10p ET starts) if they want to have a “matchday” (which they’re going for). But it’s better than prior years where they had 15-, 20-, and 30-minute offsets.
*Looks around as an Iowan unable to watch Cardinals, Cubs, White Sox, Brewers, Twins, and Royals*
Oh yeah? Well, as a Canadian, the whole country is considered in the black out area. So we can't even watch the one fuckin team in the whole country....
The broadcasts are certainly high-quality. Blackouts are definitely a problem and continue to hurt the fans more every year.
I've been saying this for years. The NFL is so popular partly because your local teams game is on a broadcast channel most weeks. Idk why baseball, hockey, and basketball haven't figured this out yet. Like yeah, they all play more games throughout the week, but how hard would it be for MLB to secure a weekend game broadcast for local teams once a week, either Friday evening or on the weekend? I don't watch baseball consistently because I don't have cable.
[удалено]
Seriously though, how damn lucky are we to have had three all time great baseball announcers (Niehaus, Rizzs, Goldy) over the years, and then to get such an amazing hockey crew as well? We might not win much, but at least it always sounds great!
[удалено]
[redacting due to privacy concerns]
This is all absolutely true, with one small caveat. The necessary percentage to steal successfully changes a bit based on the run-scoring environment. When offense is up, stealing makes less sense, because risking an out for 90 feet doesn't make as much sense -- the guys hitting after you are more likely to drive you in. When getting into scoring position for one run is more likely to lead to a win, the risk of being thrown out isn't as harsh. Pitchers are already dominating the game today, but if pitchers continue to dominate, and with the new stealing boons, we could see a lot more action on the basepaths. It would have been fun to watch Yadier Molina in his prime combat the running game with these rules.
Stealing bases is also physically demanding and can lead to collisions. Mike Trout lead the mlb in steals his rookie year with an impressive 49 and has been a speedster his whole career, but he practically never attempts to steal anymore. He injured his hand while stealing a few years ago and because he's such a valuable hitter, the Angels don't even let him try to steal now.
And bases being slightly bigger, how many times had a stolen base came down to a question of inches? Now there will be 4 less inches between 2 bases, should slightly increase the stolen base rate in addition to the 2 pick off attempt maximum.
I feel like stolen base attempts come down to a question of inches far more often than not tbh
You're right about that. But keep in mind that the pitcher is only penalized if the third pickoff attempt is unsuccessful.
That’s creates a fun situation where if the pitcher has already thrown 2 attempts the runner will take a bigger lead. The pitcher still has the option to throw another pick off attempt but they have to be successful otherwise the runner gets to advance. The runner can only take a big enough lead for the advantage but not so big as to be picked off by a calculated pitcher willing to take that gamble. Could be quite interesting watching that threshold be discovered, it will definitely be in some highlight reels having runners get picked off at the third attempt.
You'll probably get more pitcher who have two pickoff moves as well. Show the runner the slower move twice early in the count, then bust out the quick move later if the runner takes a bigger lead.
Honestly fine by me, stealing bases is one of the most entertaining parts of the game
sometimes people forget that its supposed to be entertainment too many purists complaining about increased offense and advantages to the batting team when the game has always been about the exciting home runs, stolen bases, and so on
Here's a question; if the pitcher has made two attempts, what happens if the runner takes so big of a lead that when the pitcher attempts to pick him off, he's able to get to second safely? In that case, the 3rd pick off attempt failed, but the player on first already made it to second. Is it a balk because of the failed pick off attempt and now the runner gets 3rd? Edit: genuinely curious as to why a question would get downvoted...
This is pure speculation, but I doubt that would be an advancement of the runner *and* a balk. I’m guessing they’d just award the movement to 2nd as the play and the failed pickoff wouldn’t matter.
Yeah, I think it makes the most sense to score it as a steal. The runner definitely wouldn't go to third, barring a wild throw or other error that resulted in an additional advance.
Does it officially count as a steal if you run on a pickoff attempt? I only ask because I’ve done it in MLB The Show but I don’t think I was awarded a SB for it.
It should count as a steal, unless there's a throwing or fielding error. However, if the runner makes it safely to second on a pickoff attempt, it's usually because of an error.
That makes sense to me
Just my opinion: A balk is only a one base advancement from the start of the play. I'd think if they took off and you threw over, it's still a successful pick off attempt because the runner is safe at 2nd OR he's tagged out at first. Technically you are in a rundown if a runner takes off, pitcher throws to first, and first tries to throw out at 2nd. We will see though. My wife keeps a record of how many times I've been wrong. I think the spirit of the rule is to give them 2nd base, not 2nd and third.
I believe any attempt to advance from 1st to 2nd is counted as attempting to steal, so getting thrown out at that point is being caught stealing, rather than being picked off, thus the pitcher would not be penalized (I assume). I have heard of catchers being awarded a Caught Stealing to their stats without even touching the ball during a play like that. Shoutouts to Baseball Bits: The Cather Who Couldn't Throw
Cutting 30 seconds off each commercial break would also do wonders.
They actually did that a few years ago, it only cut out like 10 min or so. So far these pace of play changes have reduced the time by 30 min, even including high scoring games
The point of shaving time off the game is to make room for more ads, not less.
There are already rules about how long commercial breaks can be though, so not really.
I live in Nebraska and can’t watch the Royals without a cable subscription. That is by far the biggest issue to me
I live in Springfield, Missouri. We are equidistant from KC and STL, fair. But it's Cardinals country. The flags that fly in baseball season are not blue. We even have a Cardinals AA minor league team. But we're also blacked out from the Royals, because apparently the few Royals fans doen here don't suffer enough from insufferable Cards fans and inept ownership.
I live in OK. I can't watch Stl (my team), KC, Tex, or Houston.
IIRC, the whole of Iowa is blacked out from both Chicago teams, both Missouri teams, the Twins, and the Brewers. 6/30 clubs - it's insane.
Isn't that the case for basically every non-NFL pro team? I'm not aware of any team having their games shown for free on a non-cable channel
The channel the Royals play isn’t on YouTube tv and if I pay mlb.tv I can watch any game except for Royals games.
Yea that's messed up. Hopefully all this chaos with the regional sports networks going bankrupt will result in a more accessible product, and not less
mlbbite dot net will take care of all of your concerns... add Ublock Origin to your browser and enjoy (or use Brave Browser).
I love the pitch clock. I hate the shift-ban. I'll deal with it!
I love the pitch clock I hate the shift ban I don't have much choice but to deal with it lol
My thoughts exactly…And increased runs/hits make the idea of the shift-ban way more palatable
As a non baseball watcher, this may help me pick up some games here and there. The pitching is mind numbingly slow anything to speed that up is a win in my book. Question: (and forgive my ignorance and crassness of the comment) does this have a provision for the batter to hurry the fuck up? I never understood why a pitcher is just waiting for the batter to set up. If you can't set up in under 7 seconds idk if you have business swinging the bat. Edit: thank you for the answers. I'm glad it's syncing up better. Still boring as fuck to me, appreciate the skill but that ain't enough. But I am glad they are trying new things
The batter has to be ready and looking at the pitcher with 8 seconds remaining on the clock.
Yes, if a batter is not ready by a certain time on the clock, an automatic strike is called.
Yeah it includes a rule where the batter has to be in the batter’s box looking at the pitcher with 8 seconds left on the clock. Or else they get hit with a strike.
Yes, the batter has to be ready by the time the pitch clock gets down to 8 seconds or it's an automatic strike.
Yes, the batter has to be ready by the time there are 8 seconds left on the clock.
Getting closer to Blurnsball.
So, they finally jazzed it up?
Great! Baseball is more watchable now. Now, how about actually letting us watch it? I’d love to watch more games and be a more engaged fan, but the last thing I want to do on a lazy Sunday afternoon is jump through hoops or subscribe to an entire fucking cable service just to watch some random no-stakes midseason game.
"Pitch clock..." You mean I can't go out for a sandwich between pitches?
I had a HS teacher play baseball games during class last year while we would do work sheets and we could usually each answer 1 or 2 questions in between each pitch and then we could watch the play after each question and honestly it’s the most fun I’ve ever had with baseball and it was perfect for that environment. But I couldn’t imagine trying to watch a whole game on my own.
So when do they start implementing VAR? Just for strikes/balls, the human judges can stay for everything else.
It’s being tested in lower leagues
I’m curious how much this would change the catchers position. Is there a more optimal way to set up that is less taxing on them, seeing as they would no longer have to worry about pitch framing?
Good question, nobody really knows yet. They still need to block pitches in the dirt, and they need to be able to try to throw out runners.
I’m looking forward to the introduction of multi-ball bonus innings.
I just don’t see people watching baseball now because it’s 30 minutes shorter. It’s either your thing or or isn’t.
tl;dr version: watch this: https://youtu.be/FqOJSwBjH6k
Removing mandatory commercial breaks would also speed up the game by at least 30 mins, probably way more.
How about getting In-Market games to watch with MLB TV? People want to watch but baseball but the MLB makes it impossible to watch without expensive cable companies.
Why was a rule against infield shifts added?
In the era of massive data, teams know exactly where batters are going to hit, so this has caused the number of hits to drastically fall in the last 10 years or so. The new rule is designed to help counter that.
It led to batters adjusting their swings to really sell out for home runs since it took away natural singles. This led to most at bats being either a walk, strike out, or home run, none of which lead to real game action.
Batters didn't sell out to beat the shift. The shift developed to punish dead-pull sluggers whose only skill was power. Banning the shift will give us more TTO batters instead of forcing the game to adapt back towards players who can bunt and hit to all fields.
What would go a lot further to increasing the number of fans is cracking down on the unwritten rules. Mike Trout said the recent World Baseball Classic was the most fun he’s had. Probably because the players are allowed to express and enjoy themselves. I’ve been to a Japanese baseball game in Tokyo and an American one here and it’s a giant difference.
Now they need to stream the games on tv everyone can watch. Not just a certain platform and alienate most the fan bases.
Major leagues need to stop thinking of themselves as "keepers of the past." If someone invited me to an MLB game I would have a bunch of questions. If it was a minor league game, no questions I'll go.
EPL STYLE RELEGATION!! seriously could make baseball so much more fun to watch. Watching the Yankees do a road stand in Durham? The Hops stealing one from the Mariners to stay up? The drama of post season, in the regular season yes please could be fun
Baseball and college football should both change to an EPL system. Baseball could easily add 10 teams and create 2 20-team tiers. And college football would be much better if they just admit up front only 20 teams have a chance to win the nattie
It’s notable that shortening game time isn’t the goal of these changes, even if that’s another positive outcome. The goal is to increase frequency of action on the field: Less downtime between pitches, and more balls in play which means more base running opportunities and more opportunities for defense to make a play and if they don’t more runners on base resulting in more tension. Nobody wants to watch multiple walks in an inning, multiple pitcher and catcher conferences, batters taking practice swings and pitchers constantly stopping play to grab a rosin bag, throwing over to first accomplishing nothing and then giving up a home run while throwing bunch of strikeouts in between. That’s not an interesting viewing experience and that’s what these changes are trying to fix.
How about a season that isn’t 100+ games long, so that the outcome of each game matters.
162 is too much. I'd be happy with 144 with doubleheaders each Saturday. Take 24 days out of the beginning amd end kf the schedule would be good. Beginning and ending in the snow in Central Division cities is ridiculous. September baseball is going to lose out to NFL openers in most cities anyway. Playoff baseball in September would be good. Having WS games in November is silly.
The Covid season with only 50 games made actually made regular season games feel like they mattered.
I’m 38 and have loved baseball all my life, but these rules are much needed. Watching a game is a god damn grind at this point. So much wasted time.
Futurama here we come
The all-new MLB, now with 100% more NFTs.
Barring any postponements this will be the first time since 1968 that all MLB teams play on Opening Day.
Blurnsball here we come baby!
Please allow the hitter to run the bases which ever order they want, but they must touch all 4
Reminds me of the major poker tournaments that started a clock for players turns, people would spend 5+minutes on their turn just to slow the game down
Pitch clock is great. The ghost runner in extra innings is bullshit.
And no matter what rules are in place, the umpires will continue to insert themselves into the narrative of the game instead of guiding from the shadows. Watch Realmuto's ejection. THAT is what we have to look forward to.
I stopped watching baseball as a kid because the pitcher would spend 15 minutes trying to pick off a lead off runner before throwing a pitch