|
why should the offense be deprived from advancing at will?
They are not! They can advance all they want. They are deprived of stopping, dancing around, taunting the pitcher, playing games. The LBR is in effect as soon as they stop and they must move directly to a base.
If F1 fields a batted ball and chooses not to make any further play, then thats the end of it and the LBR will eventually come into effect. That is the identical action to when a fielder chooses not to make any further play and throws the ball to the pitcher in the circle. That is the identical action to when the catcher chooses not to make any further play and throws the ball to the pitcher in the circle. At that time the defense has chosen to end the play and the LBR is now available to end the taunting and game playing of the runners.
It is such a simple concept and I fail to understand why so many have a problem with the LBR.
1. In FP the ball is always live
2. The defense determines when to end playing on runner
3. The LBR then forces the runners to a base so that the next play (a pitch) can begin.
In SP the umpire arbitrarily kills the ball and forces all runners to a base in preparation of the next play. In FP the ball stays live and it is the choice of the defense to end the play.
has been stated here repeatedly by all parties, nothing is supposed to happen between plays. So what is the big deal, other than the inflated FP egos, if we just kill the ball between plays.
It is not inflated egos, Mike. There is a basic conceptual difference between the FP and SP games that you dont seem to be able to comprehend.
SP, as Tom noted previously, is a start n stop game. Ball is live when pitched, and dead at the end of the pitch. If the ball is hit, then the deadball point is extended to when the ball is secure in the infield and no player is attempting a play anymore. Then you reset send runners to a base, get the batter ready, and start the next play with a pitch. Start, stop. Start, stop, Start, stop until you finally reach the end of the game. Note also that runs are scored by hitting the ball. Pitch, hit, get on base kill play. Pitch, hit the ball, score kill play.
In FP the ball is always in play (other than obvious exceptions such as foul ball, times out, etc.) You dont call time when a runner is off the base. Because of that, FP added the LBR to force runners back to a base and quit taunting the defense. Note also that runs are manufactured in FP. Many runs are scored without the benefit of a hit. As I said before, start killing the ball all the time, and you kill the game.
In normal SP the ball can become dead when runners are off the base. When you added stealing to SP you had to keep the ball live at the end of a pitch. Now you kill it when the pitcher has it, AND the runner is stopped. Wow there is that word stop! Lifted from the FP LBR? Instead of a circle, you have vicinity. Lifted from the FP LBR? But if a play is being made on a runner, you dont kill the ball. Lifted from the FP LBR?
So why didnt you just bring the LBR over to SP? BECAUSE SP is based on killing the play. So you have your version of the LBR modified to fit the SP game. When the runner is off the base after a pitch, and the pitcher has the ball in the vicinity of the plate, and the runner has stopped kill the play and send the runner back to the base.
Under the LBR in FP we dont kill the play, we allow the runners to return. If they dont, we call them out.
Different games, different philosophies. Legitimately - different rules.
SP has created a potential future morass of problems by adding stealing to its rules. Their initial rules were adopted from the FP LBR and modified to fit the SP concept. As runners and defenders get to know the new game they will stretch the rules, and require new interpretations, and eventually tweaking of the rules to stay ahead of the players.
FP has already been down this road; we have tweaked and modified our LBR. It is fine lets leave it alone while SP figures out its problems.
WMB
|