MLB Off-Topic

[daflyboys]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Cutch out for the year.

Sent from my SM-J337VPP using Tapatalk

**** me, **** me, **** me, **** me, **** me, **** me, **** me, **** me, **** me, **** me, **** me, **** me ..... hard.

[p_rushing]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I literally meant to type two lines, but then my fingers just kept going. I'll spoiler-tag this.

Spoiler

1) Although the obstructed "view" is one of the reasons, that's not the only thing that I state my qualm with. The main thing for me is the separation between fan and field introducing yet another barrier. It devalues that aspect of being at the park for me (yes, including the occasional foul ball coming your way, which IMO is a fascinating aspect of saying: "Wow, that's the closeness that we have to the game!"). You and others are more than welcome to disagree with that level of interactivity (for lack of a better term) that I think makes those seats feel a lot less open and a lot more restricted.



2) I'm still legitimately uncertain as to where people's sudden awareness of this was heightened to the extent that they are now demanding this happen before they take themselves to that next seat in the ballgame. That's why I brought up that previous rules thread. I literally tossed it out there, and not a single soul took the line. It was an absolute moot point, and people were more than happy to sit where they were.



In fact, I'm willing to bet that four years ago if someone on OS took their infant to a game for a great time out at the park as a perfect bonding moment, sharing your past experiences and teaching them the game, giving them cotton candy as they sit with their kicking dangling feet with a hat two sizes too large for them with joyful glee... that if a 105 MPH foul ball whizzed right by your ears, or even hit somebody with half-decent impact (let's assume no death or hospitalization for this hypothetical scenario), there would never have been you and everybody else storming with rage about: "Ooo man, these seats... they are too dangerous and should have netting right in the way to prevent this from happening. I am stewing right now, ooo man!"



Because KSUowls actually made a good point: if I can help it, I'm going to opt for a seat that keeps my level of openness with the field where it used to be prior to the rule, even if it means the outfield, deeper foul ground, one deck higher, or right behind home plate... so then why is it that before two years ago when this conversation had begun by Major League Baseball, that people still took their kids to the game to those seats, well knowing what could happen if it comes your way? You think the park and the players are putting you in harm's way, but you're saying it yourself that it is you who is signing your own death warrant if you place your child where no netting happens to be.



This was not a conscious thought before a higher-up rep made a stink about it. This is just like the intentional walk thing, where people are talking about it because they made a deal about talking about it. I literally tried to talk about it in that one thread, and people were like: "Nah, that's not a concern" simply by glossing right over it. Not one OS individual thought it was a necessity to implement, and they were more than happy to choose to buy those seats in the first place. Me? Now I will consider alternative approaches.



And let's keep the quote in place where I mentioned a player possibly being struck and killed by a foul ball in the dugout for when it actually happens. They are the closest ones to the action, but they don't have full netted protection from line drives. If we shouldn't wait for fans to get hurt, we also especially shouldn't wait for players to either. Heck, I really rue the day that a pitcher is killed by a comebacker to see what Manfred's course of action will become.

My main thing is people need to pay attention. There are warnings on the ticket, in the stadiums, in the sections, etc. If you are a parent, you either need to be sitting between home plate and them or not sitting in that section at all. Any time a pitch is being thrown, you have to be watching and ready. Parents need to make the decision before hand, not relying on others to do it for them. Everything in life doesn't need to be bubble wrapped. Problem is too many people think it is today and forget there are dangers everywhere.

Putting the nets up takes away the chances of a foul ball. That is a huge moment for kids at the games and a lot of them keep the ball for a long time. So like you say, it isn't going to be very inviting to just watch a game through a screen. Just watch it at home then.

One option I would be good with is to ban all kids from 100 sections, extreme but solves the problem. No one seems to care if an adult gets hit, so just ban kids. Plus ticket prices would go down.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk

[Majingir]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Manfred said talks could pick up in offseason about nets. Right now it wouldn't work since some stadiums aren't structured in a way where they could easily install it on the fly.

If I'm an owner of a team who could actually get a net from foul pole to foul pole, I'd do it now,dont wait for MLB approval.

Besides the obvious increase to fan safety part, you also become the early adopter of the full netting. Makes a statement around the league that you "care".

[slickdtc]

MLB Off-Topic

My main thing is people need to pay attention. There are warnings on the ticket, in the stadiums, in the sections, etc. If you are a parent, you either need to be sitting between home plate and them or not sitting in that section at all. Any time a pitch is being thrown, you have to be watching and ready. Parents need to make the decision before hand, not relying on others to do it for them. Everything in life doesn't need to be bubble wrapped. Problem is too many people think it is today and forget there are dangers everywhere.

Putting the nets up takes away the chances of a foul ball. That is a huge moment for kids at the games and a lot of them keep the ball for a long time. So like you say, it isn't going to be very inviting to just watch a game through a screen. Just watch it at home then.

One option I would be good with is to ban all kids from 100 sections, extreme but solves the problem. No one seems to care if an adult gets hit, so just ban kids. Plus ticket prices would go down.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk

You can be paying attention and still get drilled by a foul. Especially if you’re a child who doesn’t have the reflexes of an adult. Or the attention span. You’re assigning grown adult attributes to children. I don’t get what’s so hard to understand about “they are children.”

Listen, I don’t like the way people don’t take accountability for their actions or inactions in this world. It is a parent’s job to protect their children if they’re with them within reason, but we’re at a baseball game. It’s supposed to be joyful and fun. You don’t want to be on the edge of your seat every pitch to make sure your son or daughter doesn’t get walloped. That’s not joyful or fun at all. Even then, you take a bullet for them if it’s coming for their head? Isn’t that the whole problem? Someone’s getting hit.

You don’t support nets, but do support banning children from seats along the lines, and use catching fouls as a reason why you don’t want nets. That does not add up.

But tickets prices would go down? Shame on you.

[Master Live 013]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Look, I hear you, I want so bad for the netting to not go up from foul pole to foul pole. I was one of the people that thought that putting the netting till 1st base was going to be enough but it isn't. In today's day and age people are distracted, and once somebody dies in their seats nobody is going to care one bit if the person was paying attention to the game or not.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Didn't the Dodgers already do their own version of extending the nets during the 2017-2018 offseason? I thought most teams responded then, going: "There, that oughta do it!"

And after the incident, did the Dodgers do any net extending/heightening since then, though? If they didn't, then wtf mate; if they did, then what happens if another person is killed by missing their extensions? "Whoops, didn't make it long/high enough. Let's add more." When someone in the outfield bleachers is killed by a sharp low line drive home run, I'm very curious to see how they respond.

And yet again, I'm still not hearing why players don't have full net protection in their dugouts from everybody. People are still ignoring that like they were ignoring when I brought up extended netting nine years ago on these forums in a thread regarding rule changes.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

And yet again, I'm still not hearing why players don't have full net protection in their dugouts from everybody. People are still ignoring that like they were ignoring when I brought up extended netting nine years ago on these forums in a thread regarding rule changes.

What does that have to do with anything? The players control that the same way they decide if they want to wear those protective caps. This is about fan safety.

[p_rushing]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

You can be paying attention and still get drilled by a foul. Especially if you’re a child who doesn’t have the reflexes of an adult. Or the attention span. You’re assigning grown adult attributes to children. I don’t get what’s so hard to understand about “they are children.”

Listen, I don’t like the way people don’t take accountability for their actions or inactions in this world. It is a parent’s job to protect their children if they’re with them within reason, but we’re at a baseball game. It’s supposed to be joyful and fun. You don’t want to be on the edge of your seat every pitch to make sure your son or daughter doesn’t get walloped. That’s not joyful or fun at all. Even then, you take a bullet for them if it’s coming for their head? Isn’t that the whole problem? Someone’s getting hit.

You don’t support nets, but do support banning children from seats along the lines, and use catching fouls as a reason why you don’t want nets. That does not add up.

But tickets prices would go down? Shame on you.

Have you ever taken a small child to a game?

And I guess since we're banning kids from that section because of slow reaction times, then we need to ban the elderly as well? What cutoff age? Should you have to pass an agility and reflex test to be able to sit in the 100's section?

As for no one caring about adults being hit..don't tell that to the family of the adult that died at the Dodgers game after being hit by a foul ball. I bet they cared quite a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

That is my point though. Kids can't protect themselves and they also don't sit there for the full game where a parent could protect them. It's why they should have never been sitting there in the first place. You can't sit that close because it is way to big of a risk and you won't be able to stop something even if you are paying attention. Parents should be able to judge that but a 4 year old definitely isn't ready.

As soon as the netting goes up, people are going to pay less attention than before. So they better put a top netting up so no balls ever enter the stands. Then also should put one up in the outfield because you can get hurt there too.

There's risks everywhere but people still do it. What are the statistics on this because if it was high enough, insurance companies would mandate it.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk

[TripleCrown9]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Everyone should be banned from the 100 level.

Believe it or not, even adults don't have the reaction time to avoid 105 off the bat. That ball is in the stands in less than 2 seconds.

Let's just ignore the fact that fans in the outfield have considerably more time to react. Let's ignore the fact that even a foul that gets popped up gives considerably more time to react.

Ban the pitcher too. There's a ton of pitchers that get hit by comebackers. If they can't pay attention, they shouldn't be there.


All of that is way easier and much more logical than extending the nets. You guys are right, you win.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

What does that have to do with anything? The players control that the same way they decide if they want to wear those protective caps. This is about fan safety.

I was talking about the dugout. Plus, the dugouts have more than just players in there. Tons of other personnel, including hatless ones.

Heh, maybe fans might want to start wearing helmets too. Base coaches are required to wear them, and they stood farther away than some fans who didn't have netting at one point in time, plus they get a bunch of room to react and get out of the way.

Clearly, I am taking a devil's advocate position here, but it is still an important one.

[Majingir]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Happy Pat Venditte day. A true trailblazer. Breaking down barriers for his own kind. Showing everyone around the world that even Amphibians can play baseball.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

All of that is way easier and much more logical than extending the nets. You guys are right, you win.

You're making my point for me.

Which part became the deciding factor in saying: "These people in this area from this kind of foul ball are worth protecting over others" when considering the extension during that past offseason? Why didn't the Dodgers do enough for the decedent... and did they do anything in this past offseason to remedy that exact incident from reoccurring?

Look, I get that I'm not only in the minority, but that my opinion on the matter makes me sound self-absorbed and absolutely absurd at the same time. I don't take great pleasure in attempting to play the defensive role in doing so. I would however like to be declared as sane in my posts as I go through this. When I go to a ballgame, I'd prefer to not be obstructed (unless low and directly behind home plate), so I would opt to be elsewhere. I'm just disappointed that I no longer get that excellent, open experience behind the dugouts, or like 100 feet more toward the outfield from there, and I never will be able to ever again. Obviously we can't ever go backwards from this.

I also still don't understand where the attitude came from that this is an absolute must, yet this wasn't ever even worth the discussion at any point in anyone's life prior to the time Manfred opened it up. I don't want to repost the hypothetical scenario, but as people keep dodging points that I make better than they can dodge a line drive foul ball in the stands, I don't really know where to go from here since those points aren't being addressed. I guess I'll just watch the games on TV or something.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Happy Pat Venditte day. A true trailblazer. Breaking down barriers for his own kind. Showing everyone around the world that even Amphibians can play baseball.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I don't even know what point you're trying to make.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I don't even know what point you're trying to make.

Spoiled for length (though the first paragraph is the direct response).

Spoiler

Personally, that it should be where it was and has been for decades, and that if they're trying to make an effort to protect some people and not others then it not only seems unruly, but it also hasn't completely worked when they tried (hence the previous two incidents). What makes the next attempt guarantee safety of fans, players, and personnel afterward? Which death can occur where they finally say: "Yeah, but that's an anomaly and they should have been more aware," or do they literally add each time another occurs?

I think the only saving grace that I do appreciate about this whole thing is that it was not a requirement for organizations to do this, but merely a suggestion. I think base coach helmets should be an optional suggestion as well, even if they all choose to continue wearing them (which I believe they would). I don't like that it's a mandate. If you can't understand why, then amidst everything else I have mentioned to far, there is no way I'm able to later.

I'm not trying to "win" any argument here or get people to agree with me, I already know that I lost because those valued seats of mine are unlikely to ever absorb my bottom again, and I am fully accepting of that truth; I am trying to make sure that when I speak of this, it doesn't make me sound like a sadist. I don't need people to agree, but I would like for people to understand.

When I'm asking questions on the other end (devil's advocate or not), I'm coming from a position of not understanding, whether or not I agree with it. I don't understand why this topic of conversation didn't carry nine years ago when I brought it up in a thread about MLB rules. I don't understand why the Dodgers organization has yet to rectify their netting extension after the death of a fan (or why their previous extension didn't work to protect her). I don't understand why players, coaches, and personnel in the dugouts are not fully protected from line drives while being closer. I also don't understand what will come of any of this if a fatal incident from an impacted baseball comes from somewhere that seems otherwise unorthodox (outfield, upper deck, etc.).

And from the most egregiously bizarre position, I don't get why when I prefer not to sit behind netting, people can be okay with just saying: "Fine, then don't sit there" (which I choose not to anyway, so no worries on that), but I can't be the person who, if netting went down somewhere for any reason, that if you preferred to not sit somewhere with risky foul ball play, that I can't also just saying: "Fine, then don't sit there." There are two sides to a heavily weighted coin here.

I likely don't have anything else to contribute to the matter until/unless any of my misunderstandings are addressed. I'm sure many of you are more than happy to remove themselves from the discussion anyway (as one user already has), in which case that is completely fine as well. You can choose which discussions to enter, exit, or create. I like to think of this as a healthy topic of discussion, though. Others who see me as being ridiculous, hopefully, can turn the other cheek and make a little more sense of my position. If not, then I'm just crazy ol' Blzer here I guess.