Because it is very easy to bunt a ball foul, a player presumably could sit up there and bunt pitch after pitch, using up the pitcher’s arm.
I would get rid of the rule that allows a hockey team to ice the puck when they are shorthanded.
Why would you want to reward a team by giving it more points for advancing the ball on offense FEWER yards than a team that advanced the ball farther?
OK, how about a signal the manager can use to ask for the umps to confer and re-consider the decision? Anything but the 10 minute tirade we have to sit through now, which doesn’t always result in an ejection. Turning your hat around and screaming in the umps face won’t get you kicked out if you don’t say the naughty words. Get on with the damn game already. I want to see baseball, not a screaming match.
Okay, this I like. Make it a gamble. Very cool.
This is easily fixed if the umpires actually used that discretion. I mean, if it looks liek the batter suddenly got something in his contact lens or something, fine, call time, but if the pitcher is in his windup, nothing short of a bona fide inability to swing (contact lens, hit by a wayward bird, earthquake) should render the pitch dead.
I can honestly say this is the first time I’ve ever heard anyone suggest this. Not meaning to insult you or anything, it’s just surprising.
But once in a while a pitcher will get lazy and let an intentional ball get too close to the strike zone. I beleive Will Clark put a ball in play on such a pitch. Conversely, if you get a 3-2 count and decide to IW a guy, the catcher can stand up with his arm out, but the pitcher can surprise the batter by throwing strike three, the last thing the batter’s expecting. And if nothing else, if you’re too chickenshit to pitch to a good hitter, at the very least, you better add four pitches to your pitch count.
I honestly think it’s a legitimate strategy only because no one’s figured out a way to outlaw it without opening up tons of loopholes (beaning the batter, throwing four pitches that just happen to be sliders in the dirt). It may follow the letter of the law, but I don’t think it in the spirit of competition or sportsmanship, which should be your best vs. my best.
Because it’s less likely for a kicker to hit a 50 yarder. Sure, it’s about as likely as a 49 yarder, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Also, like I said in the OP, it could make for interesting coaching in close games.
The same way that every rule in baseball is proven, by a judgement call by the umpire based on arbitrary and subjective boundaries. They base the strike zones on a tea-leaf reading currently anyway, I don’t think anyone would mind.
Football:
option 1- Get rid of field goals and extra points; no one except the kicker’s mom watches football for the kicking game. Punts can go or not.
option 2- Move the hash marks out, way out, so restarts are more akin to rugby. In particular I want it to affect the kicking game (it’s bad enough there’s 500+ sq. yards to run the score up in, at least give the defense some chance at strategy), but would also force teams to be more adaptable to playing different parts of the field (but then you might need more players that could rub two brain cells together).
option 3- All players play both ways. It’s 20 minutes of action spread out over four hours, it would be nice if you needed to actually be an athlete to play.
Hockey: Dynamic offside line like soccer. No more stupid holding up the game so everyone can skate out of the zone even though the defense is already set and perfectly able to defend. No, let’s play musical chairs first, then get on with the game. And get rid of the fighting, period. You’re not fooling anyway with the oh-so-important role of enforcers, we know it’s simple bloodsport that it’s allowed to continue. Oh, and bigger rinks.
Baseball: Disband the sport. So many changes to make, why bother. This is somewhat tongue in cheek. Somewhat.
I like this one.
I would get rid of a lot of pedantic NFL rules, like announcing a non-designated receiver for special plays (you can either catch the ball, or not, based on your jersey number and set up position), or the randomly enforced “offensive holding” penalties.
I would give all offensive and defensive lineman bid padded mittens with no fingers, and then let them arm-bar each other to their heart’s content.
Huh. You know, I never thought of it like that. Consider me enlightened!
Also: in tag, “backsies” should be allowed after a fixed 10-second interval, and if one must play with a “base” (of which there should never be more than one), then “electricity” is completely bogus and should never be allowed.
Ugh. You’d have forwards standing on the line at all times which forces the defence to stay back at all times. This would prevent the defense from helping out in the attack, I don’t like it. It was before my time, but I’m pretty sure the NASL (North American Soccer League) tried out something like that.
How would you deal with a pitcher injury?
I would gladly trade away the one exciting play per year from wacky Intentional Walks for ditching the thousands of dead boring IWs baseball fans are subjected to every year. I also don’t think the extra pitches are much of an issue, it’s practically a batting practice pitch.
GargoyleWB, I totally disagree. It’s very rare that an umpire has to establish intent for anyone’s action. It’s mostly just determining the spatial relationship of objects over time. Was the ball here or there? Before or after the runner hits the bag? Inside or outside the line? Why is not usually a question they have to ask. The only time I know they do is with hit batsmen.
WRT pitcher injury, the rules currently allow for unlimited warmup tosses, there shouldn’t be any reason to change that. Get rid of the extra warmup tosses for a guy who just been warming up in the bullpen, and called in strategically.
I don’t know if it was all of NCAA, or just the Southwest Conference, but there were 1-pitch intentional walks in college baseball for a season or two in the 80s. I remember pretty much everyone thought it was silly and the rule was revoked, but I was only a wee lad at the time and don’t remember all the reasons.
See I’ve always thought this was a bullshit thing to do. I’d fix it by making a rule that say that if, at any time during the delivery of the pitch, the catcher stands or exits the box, the batter’s swing is not counted as a strike. So during IWs (or the final pitch in your 3-2 count), the batter can continue to swing on the assumption that the ball will cross the strike zone and not get penalized. It also has the effect of giving the batter a free swing at wild pitches.
Football
Laser-type sensors on the sidelines and end zone, like the ones that chime as you go in a store. Have it detect if the ball goes out of bounds or really crosses the goal line. Also, use it for first down markers.
Mine is cosmetic- get rid of the asinine rule that says baseball managers have to wear a uniform! There is nothing more ridiculous than seeing a 70 year old Don Zimmer or 60 something Joe Torre walking around in a stretch pants an cleats! I know, I know, baseball, tradition, etc. etc. Can you imagine Pat Riley on the sidelines wearing shorts and a tank top, or Tom Landry in a jersery and pads? They would look stupid, right? Well that’s how baseball managers look. Is this some silly holdover from the player-manager days? Who was the last player-manager, Ty Cobb in 1926?
I think in the early days of the CBA they had a stat either quarters won or halves won, that I think figured into the total points a team received, with points
determing who went to the playoffs, etc.
One to help deal with cheating in soccerball…any shirt-pulling = automatic yellow card. It’s impossible to accidentally grab hold of someone’s clothing, and the only reason to do so is to slow them down or otherwise restrict them. So it can only be deliberate foul play, deserving a swift and definite punishment.
If a batter swings at a wild pitch, they should get whatever comes to them.
Another good idea. I suppose there’d have to be some kind of sensor in the football itself as well. Alternatively, they could just put cameras right on the goal line and first down marker. I can’t for the life of me understand why they haven’t done this yet. In fact, I seem to remember that Bill Belichick was pushing for these a few years ago, but everyone else was against it. Anyone know why?