Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-02-05
SUGGEST CHANGES
IN SCORING RULES
Several New Ideas Will Be Advanced
at Annual Meeting of the
Committees.
WELL MERITED ATTACK
ON THE SACRIFICE HIT
Injustice Done to Batsmen by Some
of the Existing Measures-Re-
vision Is Difficult. |

NEW YORK, February 4-The major
league committees on playing rules will
be the next base ball bodies to have their
innings. and as their deliberations are al
ways matter of general interest and i'm
portance, the public will eagerly await
any scrap OF information as TO the aitera-
tions. if any. that will be made in the
diamond code for the season OF 1911.
The committees must do their work be-
fore the schedule meetings of the Ma
tional and American leagues arc held IN
February, and even though they decide in
the cad to stand pat and retain un-
changed the rules that were in force last
year. the mere discussion OF Iropos u
shifts and shake-ups is sure To prove in
terestng.
Loud Clamor.
The majority OF the changes i'm the
playing rules that have been suggested
for the coming season are the outgrowth
of the unusually loud and widespread
clamor for more hitting. Many base ball
men and fans of the opinion that the
pitchers have become too effective and
that an increase I'm the number of base
hits is needed TO liven up the game. and
with a view to assisting the batsmen and
bringing about the desired activity In the
swatting department. alterations a. va
ried as they are numerous have been sug
gested to the men whose duty IL is TO put
the playing code in the best possible
shape for the ensuing year.
There is nothing new in this flood of
recommendations from players, fans and
base ball man in general. 1t is an old
story, repeated every winter. but gener-
ally the proposed provision does not go
any farther than talk. the COMMITTEES
nearly always rejecting the suggestions
and deciding that the sport is satisfactory
as it stands.
Rulemakers Wary.
If the rulemakers run true to past form.
therefore, we may expect to see the big
batch of recommendations from the out
side given a resting place in the waste
paper basket, and the game allowed to
continue under the same old rules: but
even though the committees decide to
make none OF the proposed changes for
the purpose of increasing hitting, there
are one or two points in other directions
that might well be given consideration.
The needed reforms in question relate
chiefly to the scoring rules, and in the
opinion of all fair-minded followers OF
the national pastinfe justice demands
changes in at least two regulations now
in force. Attention has been called to
them before. and the fact that they have
been kept on the books in their old state
in spite of the popular demand for shift
has only served to impress more strongly
upon the fans the need of revision.
The scoring regulations referred to are
two sections of the rule covering sacrifice
hits-the one crediting a batsman with u
sacrifice and exempting him from time
at bat when he drives In a run by knock
ing a fly. whereas no credit goes to the
batsman who accomplishes just as much
good with q grounder, and the other with
holding sacrifice credit from batsman
on q bunt unless play Is made on him
instead of the runner whom he sought
90 advance.
Questionable Justice.
The justice OF the sacrifice fly rule
has often been questioned. In the first
place. many base ball students are OPP
posed to giving any sacrifice credit to
a man who happens to drive in a run
while attempting to knock the ball out
Of the lot, but. granting that some
measure Of reward in the score Is due
the player who helps his team by bring
ing in run with fly. why should not
q similar reward go to another player
who helps his team in the same way by
hitting q grounder?
AS the rule stands now, If q batsman
is retired on a fly ball and runner
scores from third on the out, the bats
man is credited with a sacrifice fly and
is exempted from time at bat. But
under the very same conditions. il the
batSman hits a grounder to one OF the
infielders and is thrown out at first. Il
runner scoring on the play, the hitter -
charged with a time at bat and gets no
credit in the sacrifice department. IL
there is any justice in this arrangement
the discoverer would confer general
favor by pointing it out TO a puzzled pop
ulace.
Runners on First.
The other rule in question is even more
unjust. With a runner on first, for in
stance the batsman lays down perfect
bunt: the pitcher or third baseman fields
the tap and throws the hitter out at
first, the other runner, OF course advanc-
ing to second. The batter gets a sacrifice
hit and no time at bat. All well and
good. as it should be-
But give the play different turn. Sup
pose the pitcher or third basemaD who
iields the bunt thinks he las chance
to head off the original runner at sec
ond and hurls the ball TO that station for
a force play, only to discover that his
judgment has been faulty. with the result
that the man whom he tried to head off
beats the throw and both runners are
safe Under the scoring rules now in
force the batsman in this instance would
be charged with a time at bat and would
not get credit for a sacrifice hit just be-
cause 1.-The play was not made on him"
Could anything be more ridiculous?
Why should the batsman suffer In tho
score for another players error Of judS-
ment. when he lays down just as good
q bunt and accomplishes just as much
as the other batsman, who gets sacrl-
flee and no time at bat? In fact. the man
more for his team in the
second instance, because he not only ad-
yances the runner. but himself reaches
first base. Fairness demands a new