I understand that the many doubleheaders in 2020 to cram in the "full" schedule of 60 games after MLB and the players jerked around before starting the season in late July are being played for 7 innings, not 9. 9+9 would be mind numbing at the pace of play in recent years, especially with so little action: more walks, more strike outs, more home runs; fewer batted balls being fielded.
Should MLB consider having all games be 7 innings? Would that only lead to even slower pace of play? It probably would mean fewer commercials. How would that factor into a decision?
If 9 is not needed for innings, why is it needed for batters? I have long advocated designated fielders:
Designated FIELDER, 8 batters! Now that's entertainment! Sunday, December 27, 2015
The DH establishes precedent that not all fielders must bat. Nine fielders does not dictate nine batters any more than nine innings. Since the Major Baseball League (MBL) is the highest entertainment form of baseball, it should be trying to increase its entertainment value. Eight batters is obviously more entertaining than nine. Removing the weakest batter hurts nothing and helps entertain us better.
Allow teams to designate one fielder per game who does not bat. It will probably be the pitcher but does not have to be. This allows for Babe Ruth.
______________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment