davidm@gvls2.vfl.paramax.com (David Madden) writes:  >In article <C5sHE2.LKF@ucdavis.edu>, ez027993@chip.ucdavis.edu (Gary Built Like Villanueva Huckabay) writes: >|> You want to speed up ballgames? >|>   >|> 3.  Mandate a rule permitting only N seconds between pitches (the current                                                                       ^^^^^^^ >|>     rule is too lenient), and then enforce it.  Fifteen seconds is more         ^^^^ Please pardon my ignorance if this is well known, but what is the current  rule?   >|>     than enough time.  If the pitch isn't released in 15, call it a ball, >|>     and restart the clock. >|>  >I remember a post from last year indicating that a "pitch clock" was tried >in one of the minor leagues some time back and did not work.  I don't remember >why they said that it did not work.  Anyone remember this?  >Jody McDonnel on WIP in Phil. has been saying that a pitch clock was >inevitable.  How would a pitch clock work on throws to first?  Maybe we could limit the number of throws to first that the pitcher can make, and award a balk if he exceeds it.  I'd have another question:  who would  operate the pitch clock?  One of the umpires?  Add another one to the crew?  >Another pair of suggestions: >1. Remove the Balk rule.  It is the runners responsibility to stay "safe" >   no matter what the pitcher does.  I'm not sure I like this idea.  I think it would severely diminish the  number of stolen bases and limit the availability of such neat strategic ploys as the hit and run and the squeeze play (one of my personal favorites).  >2. If a pitcher throws to an occupied base more than X time (X = 3 to 5) >   without successfully picking off the runner, the runner advances a base >   as if walked.  Ahhh!  I suppose I should read the whole article before I hit the 'f' key, eh?  Obviously, from what I wrote above, I like this idea.  >The no-balk seems to give the pitcher the advantage.  The base-walk allows >the runner to "challenge" pitcher to throw over to the base.  It may also increase the number of wild throws to the bag, since the  pitcher knows he doesn't have very many chances to pick off the runner, so he may hurry too much.  I'd rather see runs scored as the result of  sound hitting and sound baseball strategy rather than on the sloppiness that could result from this kind of rule.  So, I suppose there are some disadvantages to that idea too.  >|> Baseball games take about 2:51 in the NL, and just a shade under 3 hours >|> in the AL.  That's just too damn long.  I don't like to PLAY in 3 hour >|> games, much less WATCH a game for that long.  My butt falls asleep, and >|> if I'm watching on TV, I'll channel surf between pitches, catching >|> colorized versions of Mr. Ed, Leave it to Beaver, and "Those Wacky >|> Nieporents" on Nick at Nite.  >I too, find myself surfing when I know that it will be enough time between >each pitch to allow the batter to adjust his "jewlery".  I remember in little league, if when up to bat we stepped out of the batter's box, even for a moment, we were automatically out.  That may be a little  harsh for the majors, but seriously, how about putting a limit on the  batters being able to step out, take several dozen practice swings, pound their shoes, scratch their balls, etc.?  Maybe forcing them to stay in the batter's box wouldn't be such a bad idea.  That could save a few minutes.