Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

What if Defenders Could Still Hit a Baserunner for an Out?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What if Defenders Could Still Hit a Baserunner for an Out?

    A mid-19th c. rival of baseball (then NY style) had a rival - the "Massachusetts Game." The Massachusetts game allowed defensive players to hit the runner for an out. They also allowed overhand pitching and no catching one hoppers for an out, which didn't make it to pro ball until after the first pro league - the NA.

    So, what would baseball be like if you always could hit the runner for an out (to this day)? More equipment? Injuries? Change in strategy?

    Crazy hypothetical, I know.
    "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

  • #2
    Might have fewer disqualifications of pitchers. Then any fielder can get their "revenge" on the other team - within the rules - without leaving it up to the pitcher to throw at other hitters.

    Barry Bonds used to say that he never wore a cup during a game. He didn't want to play 1B since he'd have to wear a cup. My guess is that Barry would wear one if he knew the other team could fire the ball at him when he was on the bases....unless he was relying on 'roids to sufficiently shrink his target to such an extent that it no longer posed an injury risk to him.

    Comment


    • #3
      >>>unless he was relying on 'roids to sufficiently shrink his target to such an extent that it no longer posed an injury risk to him.<<<

      "Use the Force Luke, let go...use the Force..."
      Take a good look (at Jim Tracy), you won't see him for long! (my play on Drew Goodman's homerun call...)

      Comment


      • #4
        The question leads to some questions off the top of my head:

        Would the ball have stayed soft or would it have firmed up similar to the modern baseball?

        Would baserunners eventually have to use body armor to protect themselves from injuries?

        Would the ball be live once it hit runner number 1?

        How do you stop stolen bases?

        What rule changes would have to happen to make this version of baseball the dominant brand?
        "He's tougher than a railroad sandwich."
        "You'se Got The Eye Of An Eagle."

        Comment


        • #5
          1. It would hurt pretty bad to get hit with the tightly wound modern ball.
          2. Probably
          3. I'd assume so, making it risky strategy and used rarely.
          4. The same way they do now and always did. You can still tag a man or tag a base. Hitting the runner is just added as a way of making outs.
          5. Not sure. The hypothetical was operating under the assumption that this part of the Massachusetts Game made it to the NA in 1871 and was in the rules since.
          "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

          Comment


          • #6
            The bit about one hoppers is not quite right. This was the "bound game," as contrasted with the "fly game". The amateur NABBP adopted the fly game for the 1865 season, after talking about it since 1857. This was for fair balls. Foul bounds were outs until the 1880s. This mostly has to do with the catcher playing further back than today, with balls hit backwards into the dirt being potentially caught.

            As for throwing the ball at the runner (which went by various names such as "burning" or "plugging" the runner), this was the norm in pre-modern baseball, not merely in the Massachusetts game. There is a story that Rube Waddell in his first professional game threw the ball at the runner, since this was still how it was played where he came from. Replacing it with tagging was the great innovation of the New York game. The problem with the counterfactual is that a decent argument can be made that tagging was a big part of why the NY game was generally adopted throughout the country. But accepting the counterfactual at face value, this would have necessitated a softer ball. This in turn would change the entire tenor of the game, since a soft ball would rule out all those towering home runs.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rrhersh View Post
              The bit about one hoppers is not quite right. This was the "bound game," as contrasted with the "fly game". The amateur NABBP adopted the fly game for the 1865 season, after talking about it since 1857. This was for fair balls. Foul bounds were outs until the 1880s. This mostly has to do with the catcher playing further back than today, with balls hit backwards into the dirt being potentially caught.

              As for throwing the ball at the runner (which went by various names such as "burning" or "plugging" the runner), this was the norm in pre-modern baseball, not merely in the Massachusetts game. 1. There is a story that Rube Waddell in his first professional game threw the ball at the runner, since this was still how it was played where he came from. 2. Replacing it with tagging was the great innovation of the New York game. 3. The problem with the counterfactual is that a decent argument can be made that tagging was a big part of why the NY game was generally adopted throughout the country. But accepting the counterfactual at face value, this would have necessitated a softer ball. This in turn would change the entire tenor of the game, since a soft ball would rule out all those towering home runs.
              1. Wow, I never heard that before. He was in north-central and western PA and the NL was around his entire life. Amazing they still played like in places just 4-5 years before "modern" baseball. It may just be lore tho.

              2. It is really hard to find out prevailing attitudes on things like this from back then. The Massachusetts game also placed the batter between home and first. Did people hate getting hit so much that taking plugging the runner out of the game was the clincher in NY-style v. MA-style.

              3. Very interesting.
              "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post
                Did people hate getting hit so much that taking plugging the runner out of the game was the clincher in NY-style v. MA-style.
                How the NY game came to displace all other forms is a Big Question. The answer is not settled, and in any case doesn't lend itself to a board post format. One note, though, is that it wasn't really a NY vs. MA game question. The Massachusetts game was the normal game in the eastern third of Massachusetts by 1860, and was played occasionally as far away as Pennsylvania. The NY game, by way of comparison, in 1860 was played throughout the country, with clubs in places like Portland Maine, San Francisco, St. Louis, New Orleans, and even Macon Georgia. The notion that the Mass game was equally widespread is a myth created by modern writers who don't understand what they are looking at. (For example, the frequent claim that the Mass game was played in New Orleans comes from a writer who misunderstood a box score of what was actually the NY game.)

                The competition was actually the innumerable indigenous local variants, some of which were developing into organized adult games but most of which were schoolyard boys' games. In some cases existing clubs playing the local form switched to the NY game, but in most cases we are talking about new clubs. There was a general trend in the late 1850s to organized athletic activity: the question was what form this would take. One element was that tagging rather than plugging was held to be more suitable for adult play, if only because adults could throw the ball harder than boys, making plugging dangerous. So the NY game was peculiarly suitable for men looking to form some sort of athletic club.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by rrhersh View Post
                  How the NY game came to displace all other forms is a Big Question. The answer is not settled, and in any case doesn't lend itself to a board post format. One note, though, is that it wasn't really a NY vs. MA game question. The Massachusetts game was the normal game in the eastern third of Massachusetts by 1860, and was played occasionally as far away as Pennsylvania. The NY game, by way of comparison, in 1860 was played throughout the country, with clubs in places like Portland Maine, San Francisco, St. Louis, New Orleans, and even Macon Georgia. The notion that the Mass game was equally widespread is a myth created by modern writers who don't understand what they are looking at. (For example, the frequent claim that the Mass game was played in New Orleans comes from a writer who misunderstood a box score of what was actually the NY game.)

                  The competition was actually the innumerable indigenous local variants, some of which were developing into organized adult games but most of which were schoolyard boys' games. In some cases existing clubs playing the local form switched to the NY game, but in most cases we are talking about new clubs. There was a general trend in the late 1850s to organized athletic activity: the question was what form this would take. One element was that tagging rather than plugging was held to be more suitable for adult play, if only because adults could throw the ball harder than boys, making plugging dangerous. So the NY game was peculiarly suitable for men looking to form some sort of athletic club.
                  Interesting.

                  Makes sense.
                  "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post

                    So, what would baseball be like if you always could hit the runner for an out (to this day)? More equipment? Injuries? Change in strategy?
                    Hitting the runner for an out reminds me of kickball, where it is still allowed. The obvious difference is that a kickball will generally not hurt, especially because you don't get credit for an out in kickball if you hit someone above the shoulders.

                    (I'm curious if the MA game allowed a player to be hit in the head or if that was a restriction)

                    In kickball, the better teams rarely try to hit runners with the ball. It is less reliable and the ball can go anywhere. A baseball is less likely to take a big bounce after hitting someone, but I also imagine it would be difficult to actually hit someone moving, and the risk of missing someone would outweigh the benefits - I'd imagine professional teams would rarely try to hit someone as opposed to the current rules of tagging and keeping control of the ball.

                    I can see catchers hitting a runner in the back on the way to first if the runner if he in his way, particularly if there are no one else on base or already two outs, but I really don't think it would be used much intentionally. There would be changes to plays at the plate, for example, like when a runner kicks the ball out of the glove of the batter or the cather drops it in a collision - I'd imagine the catcher wouldn't have to maintain control if the ball hitting the player suffices.

                    I think if the rule stayed in place when the professional leagues that we now know formed that it would have been taken out before modern day anyway, but your question is what would happen if it were still here today - I don't think the game would be that different since I really don't think defenses would use it that often, although they may have had to use a softer ball which of course would change everything

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X