Odd MLB rule and article

[steve B]

Similar to the strange articles I griped about in a different thread.... I saw a strange one today.

Some headline like "MLB to enforce odd rule next season"

And what it was about is apparently the outfield grass is supposed to be a certain distance from the center of the pitchers mound +- a foot. Which is a really wide margin.
That's important in a way that's somehow related to the silly anti- shift rules.
Then the strangeness shoe drops.

They already checked all the fields, and only one was not within the spec. And it will be fixed by spring.

So basically a whole lot of micromanagement of nothing... And some reporter got paid for a nothing article about that nothing.

I think it's going to be a LONG offseason and it hasn't even really started.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by steve B

Similar to the strange articles I griped about in a different thread.... I saw a strange one today.

Some headline like "MLB to enforce odd rule next season"

And what it was about is apparently the outfield grass is supposed to be a certain distance from the center of the pitchers mound +- a foot. Which is a really wide margin.
That's important in a way that's somehow related to the silly anti- shift rules.
Then the strangeness shoe drops.

They already checked all the fields, and only one was not within the spec. And it will be fixed by spring.

So basically a whole lot of micromanagement of nothing... And some reporter got paid for a nothing article about that nothing.

I think it's going to be a LONG offseason and it hasn't even really started.

That is odd, but I wonder if they were just being proactive because of all the other rule changes they're enacting, like the anti-shift rule. Would make sense if they thought some team might change their outfield grass dimensions then to try and at least partially get around that new ant-shift rule. This way they stop that nonsense before it ever happens. We've already seen what some teams will do to try and gain an advantage to win in recent years.

I'm actually a bit surprised there wasn't already a firm MLB rule in place as to what a ML playing field's infield dimensions have to be. And if not, it's actually a very good idea to finally do so.

Have to ask, did the story say which team's field didn't comply? And please tell me it wasn't the Astros.

[mrreality68]

Odd but interesting stuff.

When will they do dimensions of ball parks to be consistent, walls for home runs etc.

Wonder what other odd rules they have or do not have I never really looked at the details beyond the basics

[steve B]

Originally Posted by BobC

That is odd, but I wonder if they were just being proactive because of all the other rule changes they're enacting, like the anti-shift rule. Would make sense if they thought some team might change their outfield grass dimensions then to try and at least partially get around that new ant-shift rule. This way they stop that nonsense before it ever happens. We've already seen what some teams will do to try and gain an advantage to win in recent years.

I'm actually a bit surprised there wasn't already a firm MLB rule in place as to what a ML playing field's infield dimensions have to be. And if not, it's actually a very good idea to finally do so.

Have to ask, did the story say which team's field didn't comply? And please tell me it wasn't the Astros.

It sounded like the rule was already there just mostly ignored until they started the anti shift rule. The difference being as I understand it that the shift rule requires two players with their feet on the infield dirt on either side of second base.

They didn't say which team wasn't in compliance. I suspect it would be a very old field like Fenway, or an oldish field with artificial grass that has the line showing where the outfield begins drawn on.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by steve B

It sounded like the rule was already there just mostly ignored until they started the anti shift rule. The difference being as I understand it that the shift rule requires two players with their feet on the infield dirt on either side of second base.

They didn't say which team wasn't in compliance. I suspect it would be a very old field like Fenway, or an oldish field with artificial grass that has the line showing where the outfield begins drawn on.

Interesting that they'd have such a rule, but then never enforce it. Had heard about the infielder's feet having to be off the grass, and exactly why whether this infield dimensions rule is new or not, they are going to enforce it so no team even thinks about doing anything to get around the new no shift rule.

Will be curious to learn which field is currently breaking the rule then.