Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mbyron
Oh, well if the difference between a diamond with an 89.9* angle and one with a 90* angle makes such a huge difference to the "kids," let's open it up to, what, 95*? Why stop there? We could widen the field to 120* - just think how many triples kids could hit with such a wide field!
|
If the baseball rules gave the latitude of 90-120 then I'm all for it, as it is the rules say 90 not 89.9 and not 95. By taking 2 feet of fair territory away at the fence and 1 foot away 40 paces from the infield you will be significantly changing many games.
I put it in terms of how many hits would be taken away by changing the foul line because I believe the game is about the players, ususally kids, and I don't think it's necessary to take away many hits to protect the ump on one call a year.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mbyron
I had no idea that the objective was to maximize the number of extra bases.
|
What is the objective of the 89.9 angle? To eliminate a possible argument that may happen twice on that field all year?
Is your motivation to make it easy for you or to be a fair arbiter of the game?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mbyron
Heck, we could bring the fence in to do that.
|
Many MLB parks have done just that