The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1920-05-06
records. The principal trouble in the past


in getting an accurate count of the runs
batted was that scorers were not always
jealous about keeping an account of them.
There are some who are inclined to scott
at the idea of records-that is, the idea of
minute and analytical records-until they
happen to wish some information on GER
tain point. Then they are sorry that they
have no records to assist them. Practi-
cally all the comparison which can be
made between baseball of the present and
baseball of the past must be that of
records, as there are comparatively few
scorers today who saw in action the ball
players of the Eighties" Comparison by
record is far from being infallible, but it
is better than nothing for the sake of
reference. Only recently Arson, the bat
ting hero of one of the greatest teams of
history, was accredited with being bat
ter who was hit great deal by the
pitcher. Just the reverse. There was
nothing which he detested more than to be
hit by the pitcher and he would get out
of the way of the ball, if he thought the
pitcher was after him, to try to get a
chance to hit it, and "do something" as
he put it, He does not belong to that
group.
The change, which legislates against
freak deliveries, may bring about great
deal of argument in the ball field in the
first year of its enforcement. There need
be no discussion if the pitcher or any
other player is seen to violate the rule
deliberately. Any ball player who does
violate the rule with deliberation, and
thereby jeopardizes the chances of his
team in a championship race, will surely
blunder beyond even his imagination. The
penalty of ten days automatic suspension
for a pitcher is about as severe as any
penalty ever incorporated into the rules
of baseball. A lazy pitcher might be glad
to pitch game and violate the rule so as
to get ten days rest, but what kind of a
pitcher would he be for championship
organization? A pitcher with his whole
heart in working for his team may vio-
late the rule without thinking. That is
where the greatest hardship is likely to
come.
There is another fact which is to be
taken into consideration. When the ball
is batted into the stands, or against the
rough walls of the stands, it is certain to
come back to the field little the worse
for the contact. There are stands which
roughen ball up not little when it is
batted against them with force. If the
ball thus roughened gets into the hands
of the pitcher without being examined by
the umpire, an argument is likely to fol-
low. 1t is true that the umpire gets first
look at the ball thus returned, but the
cover may have "grained up" just bit
and in the hurry of the game be unnoticed.
When the ball goes into play again, the
pitcher-if he happens to be one who is
expert in one of his freak deliveries
may use the rough spot to advantage and
when the rough spot is detected will be
liable to a penalty for something for
which he is not responsible. Here is
where the umpire will have to temper
justice with mercy and about all that he
will be to throw the ball out of the game.
The stolen bases which were allowed in
the past when no effort was made to
check the runner are really matter of
scoring. On the basis of merit they never
should have been allowed. 1t would be
a downright injustice if one or two bases
thus credited should give base-stealing
championship to the player who had not
earned it.
The rule in regard to home run being
judged on the point where it passes the
boundary fence of the playing field, as
against the point where the ball passes
out of the sight of the umpire, is change
for the better. The original rule was