Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    non-essential Chris's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Post Count
    39,908
    http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/s...manfred-052116

    According to an ESPN report, the MLB's compe ion committee has approved a motion that would raise the strike zone to the top of the hitter's knees (from its current position at "the hollow beneath the kneecap").

    In addition, the committee voted to do away with the need for teams to throw four balls when it wants to intentionally walk a batter. Instead, the batter would simply be awarded first base.

  2. #2
    ex Hornets78 Pelicans78's Avatar
    My Team
    New Orleans Pelicans
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Post Count
    15,822
    This is only gonna reward big market/high spending teams in long-run.

  3. #3
    Manu Mania lefty20's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Post Count
    4,040
    Don't really like the strike zone change. But the change in intentional walks is about 5 decades late.

  4. #4
    ex Hornets78 Pelicans78's Avatar
    My Team
    New Orleans Pelicans
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Post Count
    15,822
    Don't really like the strike zone change. But the change in intentional walks is about 5 decades late.
    yeah I like the automatic intentional walk. Don't care for the strike zone change.

  5. #5
    Believe. Chawaman's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Post Count
    95
    I'm against the intentional walk, especially during the playoffs when the pressure is on. Makes a great game when runners on 2nd and 3rd and you have the pitcher throw a pitch too high. Glad about the strike zone change though.

  6. #6
    Believe. MultiTroll's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Post Count
    22,806
    Don't really like the strike zone change. But the change in intentional walks is about 5 decades late.
    +1.

    Not sure if you are aware of this, but initial *MLB* was 9 balls and 3 strikes. The games were too long even for boring drunk beisball phan, so they came up with 4 balls.

    Now why the not make it 3 and 3?
    Can you imagine how much more action / how much quicker games would be? Significant in a lot of games. Certainly a lot of pitches as now so many are just waste pitches. Same with the unlimited number of throws over to 1st to hold the runner on. GUAFB.

    Simpsons episode where Homer gave up beer for a while. At baseball game. "I had no idea how boring this was."

  7. #7
    bandwagoner fans suck ducks's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Post Count
    71,514
    Need fox tract to call strikes

  8. #8
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    27,061
    This is only gonna reward big market/high spending teams in long-run.
    A smaller strike zone would turn your team into a cheat code

    I'm in favor of it, though, since pitching has become stupidly dominant, and I say this as a Dodger fan, whose historical philosophy is to have the strongest pitching.

  9. #9
    notthewordsofonewhokneels Thread's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Post Count
    81,202
    Need fox tract to call strikes
    Absolutely.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •