Master Index of Archived Threads


MLB Rule Changes

abogdan Feb 16 2007 09:53 PM

[url]http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070216&content_id=1804831&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb[/url] Highlights include the Kenny Rogers rule: ]• Ball scuffing: Rule 3.02 now calls for an automatic 10-game suspension for any player who intentionally defaces the ball. (Previously, a first offense led to the pitch being called a ball, a warning to the pitcher and an announcement of violation.) • No reason for rosin: The same Rule 3.02 now specifically prohibits placing "soil, rosin, paraffin, licorice, sandpaper, emery paper or other foreign substance" on the ball. The rule's penalty phase dictates, "The umpire shall demand the ball and remove the offender from the game. In addition, the offender shall be suspended automatically for 10 games." The Steve Trachsel Rule: ]• Time between pitches: The allotment for delivering the ball with no one on base has been reduced, from 20 seconds to 12. The price for each violation is a ball. The Nomar Rule: ] Batter's box presence: Conversely, an automatic strike will be assessed each time a batter violates the rule requiring they keep one foot in the batter's box throughout his at-bat, except for certain game-play conditions -- during which he is still not allowed to leave the dirt area surrounding the plate. The Rule that will applicable to my daughter in 20 years: ]• Gender objectivity: The rulebook now includes the disclaimer that references "to 'he,' 'him' or 'his' shall be deemed to be a reference to 'she,' 'her' or 'hers'" where applicable. And a new rain delay rule: ]Potentially most consequential is the manner in which games that end in a tie, due to weather or other uncontrollable elements, will be resolved. While previously such games were considered official and replayed in their entirety from the beginning, hence they will be "suspended" and resumed at the point of stoppage.

metirish Feb 16 2007 10:02 PM

The question is will the umps enforce the Trax and Nomar rules.

Nymr83 Feb 17 2007 12:07 AM

]Potentially most consequential is the manner in which games that end in a tie, due to weather or other uncontrollable elements, will be resolved. While previously such games were considered official and replayed in their entirety from the beginning, hence they will be "suspended" and resumed at the point of stoppage. horrible rule. what happens when an april game gets resumed in july? who is "eligible" to play in this "resumed" game? the guy who you traded a month ago? the guy you called up last week? what do we do about the guy who was standing on 1st base when the game was called and is now on the DL?

Edgy DC Feb 17 2007 12:15 AM

This "horrible rule" has a lot of precedent and such consequences have been considered and dealt with.

SteveJRogers Feb 17 2007 12:21 AM

Its also begging for a Billy Martin-esque protest with a pitcher and infielder roaming the outfield just to finish off the final 5 and a half innings of a game.

Nymr83 Feb 17 2007 12:29 AM

Edgy DC wrote: This "horrible rule" has a lot of precedent and such consequences have been considered and dealt with. how are they dealing with them? the article on espn makes no mention ]Another change is, a batter who hits an apparent game-ending home run with less than two outs would be allowed to circle the bases if a runner ahead of him doesn't continue to home plate, thinking the game is over. If there are two outs when the play begins, however, the runner who abandons trying for home plate would be the third out and the home run would not count. somewhere, Robin Ventura is smiling.

Edgy DC Feb 17 2007 12:45 AM

Rule 4.12(d): A suspended game shall be resumed at the exact point of suspension of the original game. The completion of a suspended game is a continuation of the original game. The lineup and batting order of both teams shall be exactly the same as the lineup and batting order at the moment of suspension, subject to the rules governing substitution. Any player may be replaced by a player who had not been in the game prior to the suspension. No player removed before the suspension may be returned to the lineup. A player who was not with the club when the game was suspended may be used as a substitute, even if he has taken the place of a player no longer with the club who would not have been eligible because he had been removed from the lineup before the game was suspended. If immediately prior to the call of a suspended game, a substitute pitcher has been announced but has not retired the side or pitched until the batter becomes a baserunner, such pitcher, when the suspended game is later resumed may, but is not required to start the resumed portion of the game. However, if he does not start he will be considered as having been substituted for and may not be used in that game.

Nymr83 Feb 17 2007 12:48 AM

in other words, the team with less players remaining from their "original" roster is at a distinct advantage.

Edgy DC Feb 17 2007 12:58 AM

So, you don't like it. The point is that, despite your implication that they haven't thought this through, they've played suspended games under these rules for decades. Ties have their downfall also, and they've gone back and forth over when to call a suspended game a tie or when to continue them.

Nymr83 Feb 17 2007 01:42 AM

i'd be ok with the resumption of a suspended game the next day (which would hopefully be the case in most circumstances) its the idea of it happening weeks later that i find unfair

Frayed Knot Feb 17 2007 09:27 AM

All they're really doing here is adding those tie games stopped by rain (probably less than 1-2 per/yr in all MLB) to the list of what qualifies as a "suspended game". Rain games had previously been treated differently than those stopped for different reasons: curfews, blackouts, etc. Every few years they threaten to up the enforcement of those time rules on pitchers and batters. I'll believe it when I see it.

Nymr83 Feb 17 2007 11:00 AM

i'd love to see those time rules enforced, the length of the game is a big "turnoff" in my opinion to many casual fans, i think its gotten somewhat better the last 3 or 4 years but theres still a long way to go

SteveJRogers Feb 17 2007 11:14 AM

Nymr83 wrote: i'd love to see those time rules enforced, the length of the game is a big "turnoff" in my opinion to many casual fans, i think its gotten somewhat better the last 3 or 4 years but theres still a long way to go Course the irony there is how much lots of offense is a big turn-on to many causal fans, and the increase of game times are really more a product of offense related issues than the length of time inbetween pitches. Issues would be prolonged innings going 6-8 batter deep because pitchers struggle to get outs against big offensive lineups, rise of specialization of the reliever of course has multiple pitching changes, say nothing of multiple trips to the mound in the same frame. Not to mention the issues arising from expansion which means you are now dealing with many pitchers who even 20 years ago would still be in AAA, or at the very least would not be called up untill the organization was sure he was ready to face big league hitting. Mike Hargrove was the original "Human Rain Delay" and this was in the 70's! I'm sure he wasn't alone, and I'm sure there were pitchers ala Traschel back when games would go much more rapidly. And yes, TV is part of the problem as well. I mean if there is a problem with TV broadcasts "missing" pitches or just coming back as a play is occuring, thats probably because the umpire crew chief just had enough of waiting for TV to get back from it's commercials!

Nymr83 Feb 17 2007 01:50 PM

television breaks between innings, time between pitches, batters stepping out of the box, and excessive pitching changes are a much bigger problem (time-wise) than offense. enforce the 12-second rule and the batter can't step out rule strictly and i'd bet game times go down 5-6 minutes on average (which is alot when you're talking about only these 2 factors)

Edgy DC Feb 17 2007 05:51 PM

Excessive pitching changes are largely the byproduct of the offense, though.

Nymr83 Feb 17 2007 05:56 PM

i think the excessive pitching changes started in the late 80's before the offensive boom, though it has certainly accelerated.