Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-11-10
PLANS TO HELP GAME.
Innovation Suggested to Increase
Action in Baseball.


been steadily growing less for some
years past, untll last season it was too
light for endurance. To increase the
popularity Of the game-nay. to even
keep the hold it has always had upou
the sport-loving people Of the United
States-there must be more batting
The fiat has gone forth 1t is up to the
lawmakers of baseball to bring more
action into the play-to get more men
on bases and to increase the run
getting, and all that enters into that
department of the game.
But how to do it, that's the rub.
The question has already been dis
cussed informally. but seriously, by the
magn9tes. in the hope that sentiment
will crystaliZe decidedly on some plan
for presentation to the several rules
committee i'm ample time to be gener-
ally adopted before The next season be-
gins.
Believing that it is not heavier bat
ting per Sc. 50 mucn as the effects such
heavier Iatting would produce-that is,
increased action on bases and the re-
sultant Increased -getting-the news
b.gs leave to offer the following sug-
ges1ion Cor the consideration of mag
mates and rooters.
To allow base-runneis. who may have
been left on bases when the side was
retired to resume their places on bases
" the one to the man at the bat.
While the proposition to allow run
ners left at the retirement of the side
that,. ,11 a c
when their side returns to the bat may
be the most radical suggestion made
FOR many year. what difference need
that make if it would prove good
fling" And there is Considera BILE room
for the belief that it would prove a
good thing, for it would generally KEEP
ore or more runners on bases from the
start to the finish of the game. TIL
interest deepenS to real anxiety when
runner starts his circuit. The players
themselves are kenner when misplaT
means So many more bases than mere
II hte one to the man at the bat.
That is the principal plea in favor Of
the innovation. but there are other
reasons that might be urged for its
adoption.
1t would attain the desired end with
out the change of a single other rule.
1t would not lengthen the game. ana
might pos sibly shorter it. as double and
even triple plays would oftener be pos
sible 1t would entail no extra hard
shin on the pitcher and no extra rN-
rense upon the club.
There would be nothing more for III"
un,ir. to do than he already does.
1t would give greater opportunity fin
team work. which is III" true test of =
teams calib"r.
And. after all why shouldn't such Il
thing have been taken as matter ol
course when the rules of baseball were
first formulated? 1t would seem hardly
lust that Il team should lose entirely
the ground it gained by certain
amount of skill simply because it dill
not get just over the dead" line. 1t
shows skill on the part of IL batter to
get his base either by hit or wait
ing" and the team which has player
upon whose error allows batter
to become Il baSerunner should be
surely penalized. instead of making
the effect of the error Il gamble, as 1T
present. To continue runners on bases
until they score or are themselves put
out is the only way to get the real
comparison of the abilities of the
teams.
The only possible objection that
could be urged is that in rare instances
it might happen that a runner would
find that his turn had come to bat
aga i'll. That could be easily remedied
by allowing the coaches to take the
places of such runners.
\ decided novelty such as this
scheme presents wouldn't hurt at this
stage ot affairs. and it is we'll worth
trying.