Quote:
Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob
Hmm. We have one team employing tactics designed to hasten the game and the other team using tactics designed to delay the game. Ergo, double forfeit.  |
Yes, but the question is:
Which team was doing which? 
The rules about hastening or delaying the game were written long before time limits came into vogue. They were designed to cover situations where bad weather or darkness threatened to cause an early end to play.
A team with the lead and bad weather approaching just before the game can become regulation might purposely make outs to get another inning completed just to make the game regulation. Or, in the bottom of the last inning with darkness coming on, a team might stall to prevent the home team from making a comeback.
The origin of these rules dates back to the early days of professional baseball. These were common tactics employed by teams to gain an advantage. While this might fly in casual amateur game between to town teams, once paying fans became involved the expectations changed. It didn't sit well with fans in the early days to pay good money to watch professional ballplayers purposely mess up or to not try their hardest. So rules were written to combat the hijinks.
In those situations it's easy to see which team is "hastening or delaying the game". The use of a clock distorts those distinctions. In fact, it can outright flip them around!
Take the example in the first post. Is a team purposely swinging at everything to quickly end the inning hastening the game? If their tactic succeeds, the game will go
longer than it would if they kept playing at a normal pace and the clock ran out on them, because another inning will be played.
If the team that is stalling to sit on the lead is successful, then the game will be
shorter because another inning won't be played!
Just one more reason to hate timed games...