There ought to be a rule

Rules, rules, rules. Every game, every function, every aspect of life has rules and governing principles. Even the planet has to deal with gravity.

Somehow, when you start discussing altering rules, baseball fans go batty. They act as though Mother Earth has just been granted permission to cast us all off its surface like Lassie shaking off a bath.

Tejada gets a flying lesson courtesy a jerk in Dodger Blue (redundant)

Two potential rules changes have been in the baseball news recently: take-out slides and the designated hitter. In each case there are the “traditionalists”, baseball conservatives who think everything is fine just the way it is; and “progressives”, the liberal-minded group that just loves to tinker with things.

At SSFGF, we’re always willing to split the difference. In our opinion: Protecting players, good. Designated Hitters, bad.

The idea of protecting a middle infielder from a take-out slide has merit, and those who claim it cuts into the heart of the game are probably the same people who thought catchers shouldn’t be protected. Of course, the people making the most noise don’t have to stand in while Chase Utley is bearing down on them.

Do you think Marco Scutaro is asking where all this concern was in 2012?

 

Scutaro upended, gets ring anyway

We saw serious injuries from slides in 2015. Utley (in)famously blasted Ruben Tejada, fracturing his leg. Chris Coghlan buried Jung Ho Kang and ended his season. 

You had to know something was coming, just as change at the plate was inevitable after the Marlins'  Scott $%*@! Cousins turned Buster Posey’s ankle into a bag of marbles in 2011. That was supposed to ruin the game too, and although the rule is still dealing with growing pains it certainly hasn’t hurt baseball's popularity.

Owners may sometimes view players as product as opposed to people, but a product has no value if it doesnt perform as advertised. Much like the NFL, you may have doubts about the sincerity of the player protection argument, but keeping players on the field and selling tickets (jerseys, caps, beer, garlic friends, etc.) is just good business.

Just shout your favorite curse word and move on

Posey is a star. You don't see many Eli Whiteside jerseys adorning the AT&T faithful.

There’s no move to eliminate the take-out slide, but MLB is expected to try to modify it. You can break up a double play but targeting an infielder is a no-no. That’s the potential issue.  

College football has made ”targeting” a four-letter word (t-a-r-g—ah, forget it), and the result has been a disaster because you have as many interpretations as you have officials. Pro football still can't decide what a "defenseless" receiver is. 

Baseball at least had the sense to make collisions at the plate black and white: one area belongs to the catcher, another to the runner.

It should be the same thing on the bases. Keep the part about being able to reach the base on a slide. Cool fish (not you, Cousins). But add this: if a runner comes across the bag and collides (collides, not touches) with an infielder. Adios. If the infielder comes on the first base side, well, if the contact isn’t egregious said fielder was someplace he shouldn’t have been.

We’ll make the same argument we made for plays at the plate. We didn’t allow runners to bulldoze First Basemen. At third, there’s no earthly reason to launch a guy into the club level. Why should other stations allow open season?

The DH is another matter. This is strictly about personal preference. Advocates like more offense and say no one wants to see pitchers hit, or not hit. Detractors hate it, citing the additional strategy required to manage that spot in a batting order. Players are split depending upon ability. Edgar Martinez only had a career because of the DH and its use extended Jim Thome’s. On the other hand, the guy who tells Madison Bumgarner he can’t swing the bat is likely to get an F-150 lodged in a tender place.

Do I want a DH? "Axe" me again.

We want a chance to see Bumgarner hit. We want a bad-hitting pitcher to have to do something to help himself. We want a pitcher who goes headhunting (insert obligatory Roger Clemens reference here) to have to face the music. We want Thome and Martinez and Rob Deer and whomever else to learn a position.

Most of all, we want MLB to decide once and for all which way it’s gonna be. The leagues now play by different rules, and asking one team to adjust its method of play based solely on that day’s game location is the one thing we can say with certainly is just plain stupid.

Okay, that home field thing sucks, too.

Baseball arguments are the best/worst because only in the rarest of occasions to you get a definitive “I was right!” or “I blew it!” We think inter-league play is an abomination; games still draw fans (although I’m dubious about ticket sales for that much-anticipated Tampa Bay-San Diego match-up). World Series home field is decided by the All-Star Game? Preposterous (it’s still the best showcase among the Big Four). You can’t plow the catcher? It’s the end of baseball as we know it.

Jason Vorhees, mammas' boy

Ballparks sell out. TV rights are sold for big bucks, and everyone wants in on the action. Radio, especially AM radio, is dead – except when Jon and Dave relay the action – then it’s essential. Steroids, illegal betting, Charlie Finley flipping light switches: no matter what stupid thing they do to The Game or anything associated with it, The Game ends up being its own penicillin. It's just that good.

It’s like every day is Friday the 13^th and Baseball is Jason Vorhees; an entity that will not die no matter how hard those closest to it may try to do it injury.

Rules change. The NFL changes rules like people (hopefully) change socks. The NHL and NBA tweak rules annually. Even when the rules don't change there are "points of emphasis" that accomplish the same thing. And the band plays on.

So the ire and angst being raised in some parts by the latest suggestions makes no sense. The game will survive regardless.