 |
Author |
TOPIC: Plus 2 HR Rule |
|
| Jim_the_Ump
July 29, 2006
5:45:32 PM
Entry #: 1588483
| The on-line poll this week deals with the “Plus 2 HR Rule”. I’d be interested in hearing comments on the topic. Most leagues have now adopted some sort of limitation for HR’s, but the penalty varies. The official SPN rule calls for an out; but other leagues (including our own) use a strike as the penalty. Your thoughts?
|
|
| SHR
July 30, 2006
10:28:31 AM
Entry #: 1589021
| Why are we punishing someone for hitting a homerun? An exceptional sensation comes over you when you hit a homerun. Every team has a few of these guys. The penalty should be bare minimum, a single.
|
|
| Fuji
July 31, 2006
11:45:28 AM
Entry #: 1590669
| SHR,
I would agree with you if you are talking about Ashton. The reason the majority voted for this rule is that fielders want a chance to make a play on the ball and Crosby is only 240 feet. SPN calls it an out and most of their top diamonds are 300 ft down the lines.
|
|
| daump
August 14, 2006
12:38:32 AM
Entry #: 1618001
| The question generated some interesting results. It looks like the subject should be reviewed at the end of the year.
|
| Duke
August 14, 2006
7:37:03 AM
Entry #: 1618157
| I agree with SHR. You should never punish someone for doing something good in a sport. No other sport would even consider this !
Hockey for example - Once your up by 2 goals, you can only score on a backhand ?
Golf - Once your up on the field by more than 5 strokes, you have to play the opposite handed ?
C'mon boyz, if you do something good, you should be rewarded, not penalized. Even if it's only a single, as a reward !
|
|
| dobber
August 14, 2006
10:22:14 AM
Entry #: 1618396
| Many sports have modified the rules they follow for safety, changes in equiptment or ability. Isn't having an extreemly short diamond a valid reason to amend a rule?
We are not limiting the scores of the games or the amount of runs you can lead by, we are simply alowing everyone in our "fun league" to enjoy the game equaly
With this rule, teams play each other, without it, an individual plays the park, while the rest of us stand by and watch.
|
|
| Duke
August 14, 2006
10:36:57 AM
Entry #: 1618425
| Dobber,
I respect your opinion. However I don't agree that teams or players compete equally if you punish the better hitters by having home runs (the ultimate offencive hit) with an out ?
Just my opinion. We have a great league!
|
|
| dobber
August 14, 2006
11:03:35 AM
Entry #: 1618489
| I don't agree with an "out". But a stike isn't really a punishment, it's a limitation.
If you put yourself out by hitting three consecutive homerun hits, are you really a good batter? Or simply someone who has a powerful swing but no control.
Don't get me wrong, the feeling of hitting one over is second to none in baseball, but as a fielder...the feeling of watching 20 go over your head is demoralizing and the score of that game is no indication on the ability of the defending team.
|
|
| jimmy
August 14, 2006
3:18:41 PM
Entry #: 1619086
| with todays bats anyone can hit homeruns especially out of crosby and aston, they were built like most parks today before the onslaught of new bat technology. sure, if an unlikely source hits a homerun they should be rewarded but the rule is for everyone equally. do not let flight restricted balls fool you, there is no such thing, new bats and composites eliminate their purpose.
the mark of a good hitter is someone that can face adversity ie humid weather, wind, a shift in fielders and of course a homerun rule. that is why if you hit a bomb then an out is too harsh and a strike is another chance. rewarding with a hit of some sort means that those players are just one demensional ball players and those players have no skill. anyone with the ability can hit a homerun.
the mark of a good team is one that hits the homerun at the appropriate time, with runners on base. homerun after homerun is boring. we play the game because everyone gets a chance to play (i hope), field a ball and hit. spn and nsa have 2 up rules at fenced parks that is why they do not play at them, it takes the fun out of the game.
lets keep it fun, give the guy a chance to hit again but let him earn his base.
|
|
| daump
August 15, 2006
6:44:20 AM
Entry #: 1620394
| Jimmy, what is your point? I am confused by your statement. Which way did you vote?
|
|
| jimmy
August 16, 2006
12:36:22 PM
Entry #: 1623425
| paragraph number two. an out is too harsh, a single should not be a reward.
keep the rule the same, a strike!
|
|
| Duke
August 16, 2006
1:08:51 PM
Entry #: 1623500
| Jimmy,
You were fortunate enough to learn from the best...Jimmy Sr. !!!
Whenever you hit a homerun, remember "I called it !!"
Duke
|
|
| doogie howitzer
August 31, 2006
3:02:36 PM
Entry #: 1652621
| I cant agree with you Jimmy. Our team lost a game in the playoffs last year on a two out, two strike, walk off game LOSING 3 run homerun. And you're gonna tell me that a strike is not punishment??? In a tight playoff game, with lots of pressure on, a guy hits a clutch jack and he gets the goat horns?? I believe thats considered a punishment. My vote is for a single.
|
|
| Houghts
September 1, 2006
8:38:30 AM
Entry #: 1653819
| hey Doogie
I agree it is a tough way to loose a game. It would be even harder to stomach if your clutch Jack had been hit at Ashton. I assume that you play for wild wing, if so I remember the play in last years playoffs. The uspl has been trying for years to change the way games are played at Crosby because it is 239ft down the lines(Taller fences, flight restricted ball, +2 home run rule). Fact of the matter is that this park is too small for a men's slo pitch league. The only way that the USPL can continue playing at Crosby is with the +2 hr rule in effect. How many times has the +2 rule come into play at Ashton?
Dave
|
|
| BrettWhalen
September 1, 2006
12:56:41 PM
Entry #: 1654308
| I have only been in the league 5 years but have watched my dad play for the last 30, up until the last ~10 years it took a real good shot to put the ball out of Crosby. You guys are discussing the fence, the ball, a 2-HR rule, the only thing that has changed over the years is the bat. Its the exact same problem golf is having, the technology is allowed to progress much faster than the course. I don't know if the USPL members would agree to something so radical as going back to wooden bats (or equivalent aluminum bats) but I am one that would vote in favour. We'd actually have to start playing real baseball again.
The new bats is the only reason why my dad will probably have to retire shortly, especially since he is a pitcher. I would even go so far to say that if we implemented wooden bats we can forget about the crazy idea of creating a "old-timers division" (I thought the members voted against that anyways but still seems to be progressing).
Food for thought, even though I know people won't be in favour of it. By the way, the 2-HR rule, if we keep it, should stay a strike or an out, is it going to take Johnny Vu to stand up and explain again why its the much better choice!
|
|
| HR leader
June 16, 2007
9:53:36 AM
Entry #: 2208486
| This plus 2 HR rule needs to be changed. It is juvenile.
|
|
| molina
June 17, 2007
10:03:35 PM
Entry #: 2210194
| I agree, change the bats, not the rule. Oh yeah, and can we go back to the white ball while we are at it.
|
|
| U Arms
June 18, 2007
7:48:32 AM
Entry #: 2210598
| The person that came up with this suggestion two years ago can’t even get to First Base most nights let alone hit a home run, amend the rule.
|
|
| Bojack
June 18, 2007
9:41:09 AM
Entry #: 2210764
| There is nothing wrong with the rule. When we start playing at diamonds made for men, then the rule should be looked at.
It wouldn't be an issue if both diamonds were the same size and we played at Ashton all nights.
And realistically, how many times have you guys hit a homerun and it was counted as a strike? I bet you less then the number of fingers on one hand.
|
|
| jimmy
June 18, 2007
9:54:31 AM
Entry #: 2210801
| It is the lights, not the ball people.
As for the home run rule it is the best rule that spn has come up with in years. crosby and ashton are too small. if you think that you are a long ball hitter because you can hit it out of ashton, try smoking something else for a change. in forida and texas they have stopped building parks less than 350, if they even put a fence in at all. standing out in the field watching homerun after homerun is boring for everyone not just the fielders. maybe open it up (unlimited) in the last inning but do not take the skill out of the game by not having a limit. or we could go with a designated homerun hitter assigned at the beginning of the game, he gets unlimited and the two up applies for everyone else. there are many other ideas but with the new bats, new balls and of course a ball being pitched at less that 5 km/hr, for those that can, it is too easy. lets not make this barry bonds boring ball and keep the fun in it.
|
|
| SHR
June 18, 2007
10:49:27 AM
Entry #: 2210924
| We have parlayed this HR rule to championships over the past few years. Give the other team their home runs and we just small ball them to a succeed. We need to preserve this rule.
|
|
| NL
June 18, 2007
11:10:42 PM
Entry #: 2212704
| The HR rule is fine; we have not lost a game so far with it.
|
|
| .adrenaline
July 25, 2007
12:31:42 AM
Entry #: 2280448
| I live very close to Ashton and I attend games regularly. Now the fences may be 275 to left and right and 310 in deep centre but every single game, there's seems to be at least one homer. I haven't been to Crosby's a whole lot but it does seem like a very small park so I can imagine a lot of balls leaving the yard.
Not to reittreate what y'all said but I think aluminum bats are the reason more balls are flyin' outta here on a consistent basis. It's complete ludicrous that there should be a two hHR rule. If a guy can hit, so be it.
If you're going to change the rules, change the ground rules for Crosby's only because i can tell you, balls in Ashton are barely crawling over, and an absolute bomb is still a rarity.
|
|
| cO
July 25, 2007
9:10:46 AM
Entry #: 2280708
| Critics of the HR rule allege that, with this rule, the quality of play increases because the ball is put in play. These players or teams are weak and do not have the ability to hit home runs. The premier teams in the USPL automatically receive a significant penalty for their abilities. Abolish this rule.
|
|
| Coco_Crisp
July 25, 2007
12:57:35 PM
Entry #: 2281269
| Co you obviously don't know what baseball talent is!! Hitting a ball 241 feet over a 14 foot fence is not talent. Can those same players hit it to the opposite side out of the infield? I bet 75% of them can't. The home run rule has to stay at Crosby unless you change the balls and/or bats.
|
|
| crupi
July 25, 2007
2:39:05 PM
Entry #: 2281512
| Let’s put in a Paul Hicks HR rule or walk him when he come to the plate.
|
|
| StevieMac
July 25, 2007
9:36:46 PM
Entry #: 2282464
| you guys should be worrying about the bats that these guys are swinging not the fact that there has been more than two hrs hits.... Bats in question will be removed at end of 2007 so all these hrs you guys are seeing is going to come to an end... I for one is not swinging a soon to be cheater bat
|
|
| StevieMac
July 25, 2007
9:59:51 PM
Entry #: 2282493
| Here is a link so you can all start looking at what you are swinging now.... and start looking for a replacement for next year ...the original FREAK days are over and yes I did swing one http://downloads.asasoftball.com/about/pdf/08grandfatherbats.pdf
|
| ima
July 26, 2007
4:31:45 PM
Entry #: 2284099
| Mac, you are my idol not using the currently legal bats.
|
|
| ima
August 12, 2007
11:39:59 PM
Entry #: 2313821
| Can we get some wooden bats for this Stinky guy?
|
|
| YouKnow
August 13, 2007
2:11:01 PM
Entry #: 2314713
| This rule has to change. It is silly.
|
|
| Big6
August 23, 2007
8:24:52 AM
Entry #: 2332352
| I agree with what is written above. This is a rule to discourage the minority of players from hitting the ball. Why?
|
| Hicksy
August 28, 2007
11:57:47 AM
Entry #: 2342298
| Last night we had a player hit his first homerun out of Crosby in 5 years and it was calld back because we were +2. This is why this rule sucks.
|
|
| hatz
August 28, 2007
1:35:36 PM
Entry #: 2342500
| Hicksy
If KO hit his first homerun , I will quit playing at crosby
|
|
| JUDEPUDE
August 28, 2007
2:11:26 PM
Entry #: 2342573
| We should vote on this rule at the next meeting. It is time for a change.
|
|
| Hicksy
August 28, 2007
3:12:06 PM
Entry #: 2342721
| Hatz, no need to worry, the only fence Johnny KO is hitting is the backstop.
Luv ya KO!
|
|
| .adrenaline
August 28, 2007
5:20:28 PM
Entry #: 2343048
| Wow, my buddy Phil's fav (blonde kid) player is KO. Apparently his infatuation with Palmer has ended.
But on the serious side, it's not fair that this rule exists either to invoke socialism or keep a competitive balance. If you're going to has this rule instituted, why not have a mercy rule?
|
|
| .adrenaline
August 28, 2007
5:20:58 PM
Entry #: 2343052
| Wow, my buddy Phil's fav (blonde kid) player is KO. Apparently his infatuation with Palmer has ended.
But on the serious side, it's not fair that this rule exists either to invoke socialism or keep a competitive balance. If you're going to has this rule instituted, why not have a mercy rule?
|
|
| MOE
August 28, 2007
7:23:35 PM
Entry #: 2343282
| What about the idea that after getting to +2 a homerun is a strike, but it can't be a 3rd strike any more. That way you can't get yourself out for hitting a home, and you will still get another chance to put the ball in play.
|
|
| .adrenaline
August 28, 2007
7:31:17 PM
Entry #: 2343290
| And along with that, foul balls don't count as third strikes because I thought the point of underhanding the ball was to decrease strikeouts and increase balls put in play.
|
|
| Houghts
August 28, 2007
8:01:09 PM
Entry #: 2343315
| Why don't we just find a diamond that is more suitable for men's slow pitch. Clearly Crosby is not. It is 239 ft down the line. Most men's slo pitch diamonds are 275 ft. If we were able to get a new diamond then we could get rid of the +2 hr rule.
Dave
|
|
| Bojack
August 29, 2007
9:18:55 AM
Entry #: 2344009
| I agree with Dave. The rule isn't the issue, it's the diamond. There would be no HR rule if we played on a Men's diamond.
Most teams don't have an issue with the rule at Ashton. Feeling good about hitting a HR out of Crosby and having it fly 240 feet, isn't an accomplishment...It is an out at most fields!
|
|
| .adrenaline
August 29, 2007
9:44:55 AM
Entry #: 2344068
| Well, deepening demensions is the way that golf courses combat technology, so the same can be used here. If Ashton's fences were moved ten feet back, only five home runs would be hit all year.
|
|
| Kate
August 29, 2007
1:49:47 PM
Entry #: 2344601
| Can we make the fence at Crosby higher?
|
|
| molina
August 30, 2007
12:54:36 AM
Entry #: 2345771
| My vote is with Houghts and Bojack. A larger diamond is the answer. Playing a game at Ashton is always more rewarding, win or lose, more balls in play, everyone swinging hard on every pitch. Any suggestions for diamonds in the area??
|
|
| Hicksy
August 30, 2007
10:58:43 AM
Entry #: 2346262
| There is a new diamond at Bur Oak and The Bridal Walk (East of Kennedy). Not sure how big it is but it looks closer to Ashton (maybe a bit bigger). Also the lights are at a good height.
|
|
| jimmy
August 30, 2007
12:25:39 PM
Entry #: 2346490
| Getting rid of the soon to be illegal bats next season make the 2+ at ashton a non issue. At Crosby it does not make a difference. However, Crosby is a character park just like Fenway and Wrigley. If we lose Crosby we will not get it back, hey just like the umps, lets not make history repeat itself. Don't bow down to stuck up yuppies that move to this town, that is why traditions die. Change is good if it has a logical purpose. Accurate pitching can take the beefcakes out of the game and homeruns is not an issue. If you can't keep it in Crosby try a longest drive contest because this sport is not for you. Some teams cannot win or score runs at Crosby if they get 2 homeruns and will lose most likely. The game is not one dimensional, lets not forget that.
|
|
| player
August 30, 2007
4:54:04 PM
Entry #: 2347150
| Everyone enjoys playing at Crosby because of the ambiance and location. Ashton is a better diamond but it is not a place to bring your family to enjoy a game. The suggestion above to heighten the fences would be the solution.
|
|
| .adrenaline
August 30, 2007
7:26:32 PM
Entry #: 2347420
| Then please explain to me, "player", why Ashton is not a good place to bring your family? To me it's a terrific setting. The bleachers are short, there are usually not that many people which gives it an intimate feel, there's a slope in the right field foul area where you can set up lawn chairs, etc.
If you want ambiance, there's a giant water park 30 yards behind home plate where kids like to play "turn on the water and run like a bitch." When one person from the neighbouring community comes to watch the game, they bring their kids or kids bring their friends who bring other friends and it can get loud in a real hurry there. Hell, there's even bushes where you can walk in and take a leak...let's call it nature's toilets.
If I may make a suggestion, there's a baseball diamond behind Miliken Community Centre. It's got a mound which will make ground balls a little tricky but if you can book it, you've got dimensions of 315ft. down the lines and 348ft. to deep centre. The heights of the fences are the same as Ashton while the seats and team benches are like Crosby's. It's just up the road on Kennedy.
|
|
| jimmy
August 30, 2007
10:09:25 PM
Entry #: 2347636
| Do not for a second think that the town will raise the fences. They won't raise the lights or even cut the grass so how will they ever pay for the heightening of the fence. In a perfect world, again a perfect world, you could take down the existing fence and light poles and move the fence back 15 or 30 ft and keep the fence at its height now. but i think the light issue is more for the infield ones though. outfielders, are the outfield ones an issue or just the infield ones? again this will cost money and the town will for sure not go for it. It would be up to us because the other leagues I am sure do not think the fence is an issue. we would have to raise the money ourselves. hey, we saved money on the umps again so there is a start seeing the league wont give us that money back. it is up to us to do something if we want to keep crosby.
signed save crosby
|
|
| Jim_the_Ump
August 31, 2007
8:36:57 AM
Entry #: 2348013
| There’s no chance of the fences being raised. It’s a safety issue with Parkview P.S next door because they worry that kids will climb the fence and fall. (They were pretty pissed a few years ago when the original fence was raised.)
Another alternative is mesh screening added as an extension to the top of the fence, but that still might have safety problems.
I agree with jimmy that, if we’re going to stay at Crosby (and you can’t beat the ambiance at Crosby, can you!), it’s going to be up to our league to fund most of any changes.
Good luck to all in the playoffs!
|
|
| .adrenaline
August 31, 2007
11:33:01 AM
Entry #: 2348302
| Well the problem with moving the fences is that there's not a whole lot of space behind the fences as it is. You're going to have to remove one of the smaller diamonds, raise the land and flatten it, etc. In total this could cost over a thousand bucks and you most likely going to have to do it in phases.
|
