Unnecessary or Useless rules

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Mountaineer

Not sure what you are smoking but pass it over here! It would also eliminate a lot of this forum!

Ah, a silver lining!

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, I believe it is left over from Rounders. In the game which precedes baseball, the striker ran after so many tosses whether they hit the ball or not.

Ahhhhh...a chance to be a history teacher.

In various games including cricket, rounders, variations of o' cat and town ball, runners can (and do) run after a certain amount of bowls/throws/pitches. Won't tarry too long on that point.

What we today call "balls" and strikes" evolved in the 1800s. You can look up more of this online (I'm sure Google would provide you all you want to know), but "ball" is an abbreviation of an order by the umpire to deliver the ball to the batter's preference. A "strike" was the order by an umpire for the batter to hit a properly thrown/pitched ball, usually called "strike the ball" in earlier days.

For the majority of the 1800s, the catcher did not stand directly behind the batter. They would have been killed. Hence, it was advantageous for a batter with one strike left to swing at a ball they could not hit because they could usually reach first base - especially back when it took as many as nine "balls" to be awarded first base (or, even earlier, an infinite number of pitches deemed unhittable).

As equipment evolved, the rule allowing a batter to advance on an uncaught third strike remained, even though the catchers were playing much closer to the batter.

(Note - the catcher's position is still very much evolving. You can look at photos from the 30s and 40s and see catchers in nothing more than a crouch, not a squat.)

This is very much a Reader's Digest version of all this, but don't want to bore everyone completely.

[BretMan]

Going back a few posts...

The "force play slide rule" from baseball (most notibly NFHS baseball) is not a "force play MUST slide rule", which I think removes the litigious connotations of the rule.

The rule simply says that on a force play, IF the runner slides, the slide must a legal one and be directly at the forced bag, not in a direction that heads for a fielder making the play beside or behind the bag (ie: the rule prevents going away from the bag to "break-up" a play).

The rule allows the runner to stop, slow down, veer off or take any other evasive action to avoid the fielder. There is no requirement within the rule that a runner MUST slide.

In short, the rule is just like the softball rule, but with an added measure of safety to protect the fielder.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Going back a few posts...

The "force play slide rule" from baseball (most notibly NFHS baseball) is not a "force play MUST slide rule", which I think removes the litigious connotations of the rule.

The rule simply says that on a force play, IF the runner slides, the slide must a legal one and be directly at the forced bag, not in a direction that heads for a fielder making the play beside or behind the bag (ie: the rule prevents going away from the bag to "break-up" a play).

The rule allows the runner to stop, slow down, veer off or take any other evasive action to avoid the fielder. There is no requirement within the rule that a runner MUST slide.

In short, the rule is just like the softball rule, but with an added measure of safety to protect the fielder.

Is "directly at the forced bag, not in a direction that heads for a fielder" what you mean by "added measure of safety"?

[ASA/NYSSOBLUE]

Interesting you should bring this up! I have JUST picked up from my local library an interesting book called A GAME OF INCHES, which chronicles the evolution of that 'other game' step by step, telling the REAL stories behind the evolution of basebll rules and practices.....VERY interesting stuff!

Originally Posted by bkbjones

Ahhhhh...a chance to be a history teacher.

In various games including cricket, rounders, variations of o' cat and town ball, runners can (and do) run after a certain amount of bowls/throws/pitches. Won't tarry too long on that point.

What we today call "balls" and strikes" evolved in the 1800s. You can look up more of this online (I'm sure Google would provide you all you want to know), but "ball" is an abbreviation of an order by the umpire to deliver the ball to the batter's preference. A "strike" was the order by an umpire for the batter to hit a properly thrown/pitched ball, usually called "strike the ball" in earlier days.

For the majority of the 1800s, the catcher did not stand directly behind the batter. They would have been killed. Hence, it was advantageous for a batter with one strike left to swing at a ball they could not hit because they could usually reach first base - especially back when it took as many as nine "balls" to be awarded first base (or, even earlier, an infinite number of pitches deemed unhittable).

As equipment evolved, the rule allowing a batter to advance on an uncaught third strike remained, even though the catchers were playing much closer to the batter.

(Note - the catcher's position is still very much evolving. You can look at photos from the 30s and 40s and see catchers in nothing more than a crouch, not a squat.)

This is very much a Reader's Digest version of all this, but don't want to bore everyone completely.