Actions

BLOG: Automatic runner in extra innings? MLB continues to change before our eyes

Posted at 5:05 PM, Feb 09, 2017
and last updated 2017-02-09 19:47:40-05

I'll start by stating--once again--I'm a baseball traditionalist. It's a beautiful game that's been around for over a century. I don't like change unless it's absolutely necessary. I do not think this possible rule change is absolutely necessary.

In a nutshell, it's designed to shorten extra inning games by automatically placing a runner on second base after nine innings. Automatically put a runner in scoring position? That's huge.

I'm all for speeding up the game. Sure, put timers on mound visits, pitching changes, in between innings, etc. Cleaning up some of the downtime is fine. But this is the only team sport in America that does not have a game clock. It's one of the reasons baseball's so unique. Let's be honest, those 18-inning games don't happen very often. Is this really a problem?

Fans... You can leave the stadium, or change the channel. Players... I understand flying through your bullpen can be a detriment-- but again, how often do those games really happen? Is it worth messing with the astounding majority of normal extra inning games that would be affected?

How about last year's world series? Quite possibly the greatest Game 7 in the history of sports. Think back to that epic 10th inning... What if we threw an automatic runner on second? Same result?

I don't know... And personally, I don't ever want to find out.

Follow Jason Snavely on Twitter.