New rules for 2022

[ChiTownTrojan]

3 new rules are being implemented this year:

• 28-man rosters through April
• Runner on 2nd to start extra innings (this year only)
• The "Shohei Ohtani rule": a pitcher that is removed from the game can stay in as DH

https://twitter.com/Alden_Gonzalez/s...0wcvIoLQbJFUxA

[shingo10]

Why is the runner on 2nd back and why is it only this year? They should either keep it or get rid of it.

[ChiTownTrojan]

Why is the runner on 2nd back and why is it only this year? They should either keep it or get rid of it.

They’re worried about long games leading to injuries without the normal Spring ramp-up. I know a lot of fans hate the rule, but players, owners, and especially managers like it.

The rule has never bothered me. You still have to execute fundamental baseball in order to win. It’s much less arbitrary than a shootout in hockey, and fans have embraced that rule. Baseball fans for the most part are just set in their ways and consider any type of change to be sacrilege.

[Nellie Fox]

They’re worried about long games leading to injuries without the normal Spring ramp-up. I know a lot of fans hate the rule, but players, owners, and especially managers like it.

The rule has never bothered me. You still have to execute fundamental baseball in order to win. It’s much less arbitrary than a shootout in hockey, and fans have embraced that rule. Baseball fans for the most part are just set in their ways and consider any type of change to be sacrilege.

All the hockey fans I know still don't like it. It's entertaining to watch, but it's not hockey. It's no way to decide a game.

Starting an inning with a runner on second changes the entire approach of the pitcher and defense. You shouldn't be able to get a runner in scoring position who didn't earn his way there. I believe you'll find that the rule has significantly favored the visiting team. They get first bite at the apple. If they score, they can bring in their closer and shut it down, whereas the home team didn't want to burn their closer in the top of the inning.

But again, I know that MLB (and advertisers) don't care in the least about my demographic.

[Lipman 1]

3 new rules are being implemented this year:

• 28-man rosters through April
• Runner on 2nd to start extra innings (this year only)
• The "Shohei Ohtani rule": a pitcher that is removed from the game can stay in as DH

https://twitter.com/Alden_Gonzalez/s...0wcvIoLQbJFUxA

Runner on second is making a mockery of the game. Friggin' garbage.

[voodoochile]

Runner on second is making a mockery of the game. Friggin' garbage.

A lot of sports use similar gimmicks to decide regular season games that go into overtime. It's not a HR derby or a shootout to decide the World Cup. Honestly Sox will play what, 10 extra inning games this year? All the angst just isn't worth it. Still gotta execute.

[ChiTownTrojan]

All the hockey fans I know still don't like it. It's entertaining to watch, but it's not hockey. It's no way to decide a game.

Well, this hockey fan is fine with it and enjoys it. Like you said, it's entertaining, and that's enough for me. The alternative is a tie, and I like this system better, especially because the team that loses the shootout doesn't leave empty handed, they still get a point.

No, it's not hockey, but it has become part of hockey. Teams practice shootouts, and even bring in players that are shootout specialists because it gives them a competitive advantage to do so. Not unlike a kick returner in football. The difference with the rule in baseball is that executing pitching and defense when there's a runner on second with nobody out is already part of baseball. It's not like you're asking the players to do something that doesn't come up hundreds of times throughout the regular season at other points in the game. I just don't get what the big deal is. If there really are teams/pitchers out there that "specialize" in bases empty situations, and fall apart when one measly runner gets on base in scoring position, well then that team deserves to lose.

Every sports league needs a way to determine the outcome of a game that ends in "regulation" in a tie. Basketball has unlimited overtimes, but because scoring is so much more frequent they can get away with just have short overtime periods. Hockey has much less scoring, so they resort to a gimmick to promote a quicker resolution. Baseball is probably more akin to football in terms of the frequency of scoring. On the one hand you have college football, which uses a gimmick, that everyone loves. On the other you have pro football, which has a timed overtime that lots of people complain about. An analogous approach to the latter would be to have 3 extra innings, and if nobody scores they call it a tie. That would seem like a bigger change to the game (for the negative) than the runner on second rule.

Importantly, each of these leagues (including MLB) gets rid of any of these rules for the playoffs, when wins/losses matter the most. Except maybe college football - I'm not exactly sure what they do.

I believe you'll find that the rule has significantly favored the visiting team. They get first bite at the apple. If they score, they can bring in their closer and shut it down, whereas the home team didn't want to burn their closer in the top of the inning.

I'd be interested to look at the numbers as to which team won more extra innings games last year. But one correction - the home team probably already used their closer in the 9th, because otherwise what are they saving him for? So they already got that competitive advantage - this is really just evening it out somewhat. Also, since every team plays the same number of home games as away games, it doesn't really matter to me in the end.

[JazzyCyclist]

Runner on second is making a mockery of the game. Friggin' garbage.

I’m usually with the “get off my lawn” crowd on things like this, but I don’t mind this rule. A team still has to execute within usual flow of the game, unlike hockey or soccer. I’m also concerned with extra inning games wearing out pitching staffs, especially with virtually every pitcher these days trying to throw pitches through a brick wall (another issue for another discussion). Bottom line, the rule still requires a team to play baseball to win.

[Lipman 1]

I’m usually with the “get off my lawn” crowd on things like this, but I don’t mind this rule. A team still has to execute within usual flow of the game, unlike hockey or soccer. I’m also concerned with extra inning games wearing out pitching staffs, especially with virtually every pitcher these days trying to throw pitches through a brick wall (another issue for another discussion). Bottom line, the rule still requires a team to play baseball to win.

Worried about 16 inning games? Fine...then do what they do in Japan...tie game after X amount of innings. Each team gets half of a win.

Problem solved.

[JazzyCyclist]

Worried about 16 inning games? Fine...then do what they do in Japan...tie game after X amount of innings. Each team gets half of a win.

Problem solved.

I’d be ok that, too.

[34rancher]

I’m usually with the “get off my lawn” crowd on things like this, but I don’t mind this rule. A team still has to execute within usual flow of the game, unlike hockey or soccer. I’m also concerned with extra inning games wearing out pitching staffs, especially with virtually every pitcher these days trying to throw pitches through a brick wall (another issue for another discussion). Bottom line, the rule still requires a team to play baseball to win.

I am in the air. I think it gives the home team a competitive advantage IMO which is why I lean towards not liking it. I am wondering if it is better in the bottom of the 9th and 2 outs bases empty for the home team to pinch hit their fastest runner and then not care if he makes an out in the 9th...

[Frater Perdurabo]