In football, after each play 22 players need to return to their starting positions, some of them are lying on the ground in a pile, some of them are 30+ yards from where they need to be. Players are asked to enter and exit the field, a specific play needs to be communicated to the offense, who then need to take their positions.
In baseball, after each pitch, the catcher needs to throw the ball back to the pitcher, and signal for a pitch.
Baseball was a lovely, pastoral, calmly moving day in the sunshine when games were 2 hours long.
We’ve had the pitch clock in MiLB for the whole year before COVID. Maybe even 2 whole years. I attended a lot of those gmaes in person. The game plays faster, the quality seems undiminished, and all is well.
IMO adding the same to MLB would be a total win for the fan. MLBPA is being a dick here, trying to use their opposition to this as leverage to get something unrelated from management in return. It’s legit union tactics, but it isn’t pretty to watch play out.
I said this would be a win for the fan. Unless, a la NFL, MLB management takes the time saved with a pitch clock and simply allows a longer commercial break at each half-inning for the same total game length. That would be a net loss for the fan.
IMO NFL is completely unwatchable in person or real-time on TV. Because of the interminable commercial breaks for the broadcasters. I can only stand NFL when it’s pre-recorded and I can jump through the commercials. Given the vagaries of how the DVR’s jump works, I often miss most of the first play after the jump. Tough; it’s more important (to me) to keep the game moving than to fiddle with rewinding 15-ish seconds to catch the first snap after the endlessly tedious commercials happen to finish.
Having watched NFL games in-person it is totally different than watching on TV. There are no commercial breaks. There’s always something happening on the field. Even if a play isn’t in progress, you have players dancing, interacting with the crowd, etc. Except for halftime, once the game starts it keeps going until the end. It is soooo much better in-person. There is always something to look at.
Compare that to baseball. I don’t hate baseball but the long periods of nothing happening are the same in-person as on TV. I don’t mind going to a game but you better hope there’s something else to occupy you, like chatting with friends or enjoying the food and drink. You’re spending a lot of time watching people stand around doing nothing most of the time.
It’s a totally different vibe. That’s not to say one is better than the other. Baseball is a lot more relaxed, especially on a nice day, and I have very much enjoyed going to games. Football is an energized experience all the way through, even between plays.
At the risk of derailing the topic, I’ve found that attending a game in person sometimes ruins the experience. You realize that it’s a bit farcical that 22 players are down there, tiny, on a field far below, with 90,000 people in the stands cheering them on. It puts the sport into perspective, in a bad way.
Whereas on television, the game fills the screen, and it seems bigger than life and the drama seems appropriate.
But I digress.
Back to the OP: yes, anything that speeds up baseball is good, and anything that puts those prima donna pitchers and batters in their place (literally) is good too.
I’m not sure what you mean. Players are always on the field taking warmup throws during commercial breaks. Often there’s some sort of sideshow like a mascot race going on. At minor league parks they usually make a point of having some sort of fan contest or slapstick comedy routine going on pretty much nonstop between half-innings. There’s a LOT of effort put into keeping the crowd at the live ballgame entertained during commercial breaks. It’s a great value for the trivial cost of minor league tickets and should be pushed more as a family activity.
They used a 20 second pitch clock in the Arizona Fall League games in 2019* and it did make for (the mostly evening) games getting out at a reasonable time
It’s part of the reason I dislike football as well. The games seem really badly paced.
But that said, the fact is many people love football, so whatever they’re doing it has worked well enough to make the NFL the richest professional sports league in the history of the world.
That said, what matters is not specifically how long a given sport lasts. After all, professional lacrosse games don’t last all that long but most people cannot name a single team in pro lacrosse, while even non sports fans usually know who the New York Yankees or Pittsburgh Steelers are.
The relevant thing, again, is the CHANGE in game length. MLB games crept up in length most years after WW2 but has settled at around 2:30 during the 1970s. (It was in the 1970s that the game exploded in attendance, jumping over 40%.) Then game length suddenly hopped over 2:40 in the late 80s, was around 2:45-2:50 until 2006, and then started going up over three hours… again, without any explanation you can find in the way the game was played, because 1999-2000 was the high water mark in terms of scoring and baserunners.
The shift in game length to over three hours coincided with attendance flatlining; 2007 was the all time attendance high water mark at 32,696 per game. It’s slipped ever since. Now, I’m not saying that is entirely due to game length. In fact, I’m not even saying it’s mostly due to that; the 2008 fiscal crisis has a lot to do with it, youth baseball isn’t doing well, so on and so forth. But if MLB wants people interested in baseball they need to do anything they can.