Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
See, this is where I do not necessarily agree. With the pitchers at 40', the pitchers were dominant and kept the ball out of play. Now, at least, the ball has been put into play forcing the defense to actually make the play.
The short game was developed as a response to the dominating pitcher. Since moving the PP back, we are now seeing more HR (fences different subject), line drives and ground base hits.
And I'm not saying that is bad, just that it might be time to take the next step and give the defense a chance to actually make some plays. These girls are more athletic and the equipment much more advantageous to the offense than ever before.
This has been done a couple times in SP and it wasn't just because there was room. Just as the quality of the pitcher's ability outgrew the pitching distance, I believe the players with the equipment have done the same with the bases.
And because there is an additional 625 sq ft for the infielders to cover, I don't believe the "short" game will suffer as much as many believe. For that matter, I believe it may actually help the short game.
|
I think we should move the bases out further to make the calls easier for the umpires
and because I love 10 inning scoreless ties.
I guess it does not matter from an umpiring point of view, we still
call what happens, 60 ft or 65 ft, 38 ft or 40 ft or 43 ft, new bats or old bats, new game balls or old game balls (white or yellow), any rule book, lighted or unlighted fields, fences or imaginary lines, etc.
I do think some umps would not make it inside in time at 65 ft (those barely doing it now); and of course many fields would not bother to expand the skin; but I could live with it. Just think, more infield flies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
Okay, I'll shut up now.
|
Yeah, sure.
