Talk:Baseball/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Rounders an older game?

Comnplete non-sense. It has been inconclusively proven that baseball predates rounders. In fact there is historical references proving that rounders was formed from baseball after it was brought to England FROM the colonies.

This is why ever day Wiki becomes more and more pointless.

The UK Uni professors need to stop telling their students to rewrite Wiki with the "truth" (read UK revisionist history) and actually leave the facts in place.

Fact: Baseball is older than rounders. Fact: Baseball evolved from Native American ball games —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.203.42.50 (talk) 15:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no basis whatsoever for the above statements. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

From what I know, Baseball and Rounders both share similar origins. It would likely be wrong to say that one definitely came from the other. There -was- an early form of Rounders that was called Base-Ball, but this alone does not prove that Baseball came from Rounders, only that an early version of Rounders shared a name with Baseball. It should be noted, however, that the current rules for Rounders appeared far earlier than the current rules for Baseball.

My theory is that they developed alongside one another, possibly trading rules between each other. I have no references for this though, as this is only my personal theory.

To the original poster - Posts like yours, which state unreferenced things as facts, cause the whole of your post to seem invalid. You appear arrogant, which I'm certain is something you did not intend. I intend this remark to improve your post quality, not to demean you in any way.74.67.17.22 (talk) 04:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Fact: The original poster also was out to lunch when they were teaching proper English. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Misc Questions

Hello, it's been a while since I've came here. I'm the french and fond of baseball guy who got a lot a questions. I'm gonna ask the baseball pros, fans and others to have a look at my new questions, and I promise I will delete each question as soon as its answer will be given - and in the end this topic of the discussion page. (I suscribed to cable television to watch NASN (kind of ESPN's connect) so I'm more than ever concerned about my favorite sport, and that's how I came to these new questions).

- Can someone tell me, or give me a link to a good article, about Catcher's code ? (really hard for a foreigner)

- Can someone tell me, or give me a link to a good article, about the Player's Stats Board, I mean the one which displays all the inings through the game with, under each ining where he batted, some complex indications like F8, SB2, and so on (I forgot the real examples so I'm just kind of guessing).

Can someone tell me, or give me a link to a good article, about bases-coachmen' code ? (sorry, I don't know the term, I mean the guys who shout "run" or "stop" and who give and receives these mysterious signals to and from the main coach, with arms, ankles, nose and so on)

- Can someone tell me why a pitcher who's got a 2.0-like home era can have a 15.0-like road era ?

- Can someone tell me what the stats "0 for 2", "1 for 3" given when a player comes to bat mean ? it means thats how many time he got a hit out every time he at bat.

I think that's all, thank you for reading and maybe answering. Once again, about language, please excuse my... english, let's say ! Goodbye. Hem. (oops, forgot how to sign wiki-ly.

To sign, add ~~~~ at the end. I hope someone here can answer your questions, then we can try to make it easier for other people to find this information without having to ask! If nobody here can help you, you might want to try the reference desk. Skittle 21:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

1. I don't know what you mean by a "catcher's code." Are you talking about the hand signals the catcher gives to the pitcher? The catcher and the pitcher must both know what the next pitch is going to be, so the catcher isn't suprised at where the next pitch is thrown. So before every pitch, the catcher shows the pitcher a number of fingers -- one for a fastball, two for a curveball, etc. If the pitcher doesn't like the catcher's choice, he can shake his head "no," at which point the catcher may select a different pitch. A runner on second base would be able to see the catcher's signals. So when there is a runner on second, the catcher and pitcher will use a pre-arranged secret code. With a runner on second, one finger tapped against the glove might signal a slider rather than a fastball, for instance.
2. This page provides a tutorial on baseball scoring conventions.
3. The people you're talking about are called "base coaches." There's a first-base coach and a third-base coach. Their jobs are to watch where the ball goes so the runners can concentrate just on running. If the base coach thinks the runner can safely advance to the next base, he will rotate his arm in a circle. If he thinks the runner should stop at first or third, he holds out both his hands. If it's going to be a close play, he points his hands downward, meaning "slide!" One of the base coaches also serves as a conduit between the manager (head coach) and the batter or runner. For example, if the manager wants the batter to bunt (hold the bat sideways so the ball stays in the infield), the base coach will pass a secret signal to the batter using body language. Every team will have a different set of secret signals.
4. I don't know why some players perform better at home than on the road. This is perhaps a question for a sports psychologist. One thing to keep in mind is that baseball parks are all different. A pitcher who gives up a lot of fly balls will do better in Comerica Park than at Coors Field, because the same ball that would be a home run in Denver might be an out in Detroit (due to the lower altitude and dimensions of the field).
5. A batter who is 1-for-3 has had three at-bats and one hit (single, double, triple or homerun). Note that walks and sacrifices don't count as at-bats, so a player may be 1-for-3 after four or five plate appearances. -- Mwalcoff 02:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Bias and Racism in Baseball

Bottom line, America is a very racist country, all humans should be treated equally. With that being said, if one wants to quesion say Barry Bond's records, then the manipulation of who played in the MLB can also be questioned. Specifically the records of all whites before Robinson broke the color barrier in 1947. Therefore, the numbers of Gehrig, Cobb, Hornsby, Ruth, part of Ted Williams, etc.. every player that played before does not have relaible or viable numbers because the statistics of blacks who potentially were better, but did not have the opportunity to play, were not credited. Furthermore, as far as stats, Hank Aaron was the greatest, as far as how the game was played Willie Mays was the greatest but with a white majority the white player is still held in highest regard.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.74.11.76 (talk) 04:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Discussions aren't for ripping on America. If you want to talk about the article, then go ahead, but the only thing it says about Bonds is that he sparked the steroid controversy, which is an unbiased, neutral statement.

This section of the edit page should be deleted, because most of what this person is saying has nothing to do with the article.

I say that you edit the part about the negro leagues if you are interested in discrimination. You might also make a part about the recent effect of steroids on the game. Just be sure to use neutral point of view. AlexHillan 04:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

This person's statement is akin to saying that all U.S. presidential elections prior to 1920 and the passage of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution should be invalidated since women weren't allowed to vote. His comments on baseball, statistics and racism are pointless in this regard and should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yougottakickalittle (talk • contribs) 21:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

If you want to talk about who's the best player to ever play that would be Babe ruth.

He has records in hitting and pitching. none exept Ruth can boast that!--71.199.154.49 (talk) 18:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

The suggestion of wiping out all records prior to 1947 makes no sense! Just because some unknown villager in the Australian bush "could" have been the greatest player ever, that doesn't justify negating the records of everyone who did get a chance to play. Besides, baseball recognized the inequity by electing numerous negro league players. Sudaharu Oh never got to play in the majors, either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.40.228 (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Still, and always, there are men (and women for that matter) of ALL nationalities that are potentially great players but will not have the opportunities to play professionally. Does that mean we should not recognize the accomplishemnts of those who ARE awarded such opportunities?71.125.89.45 (talk) 23:34, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Clarification on innings completion

The article says an innings is over when three batsmen are out. Does this mean that they can bat more than once in an innings if less than three men are out by the time all the batters have had a turn? I think this needs to be made clearer in the article. Osomec 22:04, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes. It happens occasionally, less than once per game in MLB.In little league games sometimes once you bat around the order the other team comes up even though they didnt get three outs. (Note that, in Baseball, there are "batters" and "runners", generally not "batsmen"; "inning" is singular.) How does the article look now? Locarno 16:27, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

I had always been told that the whole innings was over when a batsmen was caught, even if less than two were already out, but there is no mention of this in the article - is this information therefore incorrect?--Captdoc 17:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, what you were told was incorrect. Three outs are always required to retire a side for the inning.—DCGeist 17:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, it did seem a strange rule!--Captdoc 21:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Recent vandalism - protect?

Seems to me like this main article gets vandalized like every 4 to 6 hours, nearly always (of course) by anonymous addresses. The article is plenty long and detailed enough as it is, and the legitimate corrections/additions that are being made are pretty minor. Anyone else have an opinion about sticking a Template:Vprotected on it? That way, if someone wants to replace the entire page with the single line "baseball is gay" (such as happened twice yesterday), they'd at least have to ask first. The RC patrol has been great about reverting, but you can tell from the comments they're getting tired of it also. Thoughts? Dakern74 19:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. What about archiving this talk page again also?

I like the way to you talk, Mister. :-) TommyBoy76 01:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Page is now archived. --Woohookitty^(meow) 13:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I feel like bringing up this topic again after watching the last 24 to 48 hours' worth of spam wars about card collecting, interspersed with other "helpful" edits involving a stinky anus and the fact that a "double" is what happens when two runners score at the same time. Anyone? -- dakern74 (talk) 00:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I Just repared the the page after the last attack where the page only had the words

           "I Love Baseball"

as the whole article. I replased using the last edit pre-ILOVE Attack. So it may need editing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.233.49.69 (talk • contribs).

I just typed "baseball" in the search field, and the page with "I love baseball" appeared--not the restored page. There is more work to be done, I think.

Collecting Section: Should there be one?

Hey guys, there was a selection on baseball collecting that had been included and was recently removed, what are your thoughts. Should an external link section for that be included? how about a "see also" if that doesn't work... thoughts/ideas/comments? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wolverinegod (talk • contribs) .

No. Links about collecting specific items aren't even relevant to a general article like this. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a web directory to websites related to the topic (WP:EL). Links should somehow contribute to the encyclopedic content, mere collections of external links should be avoided. Femto 12:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Interesting perspective. I would agree that specific items, such as the t206 wagner, or a ball signed by the 27 yankess should not be linked to. However, collecting baseball cards and other related materials are very popular amongst fans of the game. An entire section of the article could even be dedicated to the hobby in general. I would again think that something should be included. Image Repositories, Checklists, and sites that allow one to further their knowledge of the hobby are as relevant as any stat site or film site IMHO. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wolverinegod (talk • contribs) .

There's already a link to the wikipedia article on baseball cards in the see also section. --SiobhanHansa 14:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

It's less a perspective than the currently accepted guidelines. We're here to create actual content, not to accumulate links. Feel free to start a section about collecting! I think it would be best to begin with taking the link to baseball card out of the seealso. Put it in the popularity section and write a paragraph around it to introduce the hobby (…or business?), then further expand from there. Split it summary style to its own article when there is enough content (though I predict it will be a commercial spam magnet). Until then, there will be enough time to decide which links are appropriate or not. Additions of links on several topics to image repositories, checklists, stat sites, film sites etc. should be coordinated with Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball in any case. (Please sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~). Femto 14:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

History of Baseball

It is my thinking that the 'History of Baseball' section should/could have a short paragraph summarising its history instead of just a link? Also, the 'History of Baseball' link itself currently leads not to an article but a disambiguation page, which needs to be changed. Wwwhhh 14:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Probably couldn't hurt to have a short paragraph, but it would be tricky to put the whole history of the whole sport worldwide into a few sentences. In fact, I don't so much mind the disambiguation page, considering it has about a dozen different countries on it, and you could easily click on the one you're interested in. Not everyone is going to be looking only for the U.S. version, although that also has its own section/link further down (why aren't they together?). I'm also curious as to why perfect game is linked from that DAB page and no other "notable records" are. -- dakern74 (talk) 14:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Why is there a quick detailing of some MLB records (Ripken, Bonds, etc.) that occured in the 1990s and 2000s in the last paragraph of the "history" section yet no mention of any other records in the article? It seems like these are not material to the history of baseball and instead should be included in a section discussing various offensive, defensive and pitching records. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yougottakickalittle (talk • contribs) 21:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I once read that baseball in the only sport in which the defense puts the ball in play. In every other sport (basketball, football, hockey, soccer, tiddly-winks), the offense puts the ball in play.

That's actually true of all bat-and-ball games and their spinoffs, although the term "defense" is not necessarily used in those sports: cricket, rounders, baseball, softball, kickball, etc. are all that way. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Kruk and Kuip

I think perhaps a section should be added for Giants broadcasters, notably Dwayne Kuiper and Mike Krukow. They are a huge part of the modern Giants experience and much beloved by all fans. When Barry Bonds retires, Kuip, Kruk, and John Miller will be the best known members of the Giants family. MonkBirdDuke 03:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

This would belong under San Francisco Giants, not under the article about the worldwide sport as a whole. -- dakern74 (talk) 05:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I meant to post that there, sorry, my mistake. MonkBirdDuke 19:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Football

This article is incorrect that it states that Football is more popular than Baseball in the United States. I think Major League Baseball's 75-million in attendance this past year would beg to differ. The fact is, there are parts of the country where Football is more popular and parts of the country where Baseball is more popular. Anyway, the article needs to either completely delete this point since it just "opinion", or be re-written to reflect the true facts. 71.183.85.140 (talk) 00:27, 14 January 2008 (UTC)AR

Football replaced baseball as the number one spectator sport in the 1960s. However, some would argue that NASCAR is more popular than both. However, maybe some research needs to be done here. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Bugs, the New York Yankees averaged over 52,700 in attendance over 81 home games in 2007. The New York Mets averaged near 46,000 a game. Both The Dodgers and Angels averaged over 40,000 a game. Los Angeles, the largest metropolitan area on the west coast doesn't even have a football team. In the tri-state area (NY, NJ, CT), Baseball is by far more popular than football. Even in New England, Baseball (especially The Red Sox) is followed like a religion and much more popular than football even with how great The Patriots are. Like I said in my previous post, Baseball is more popular in some parts of the country and Football is more popular in other parts. Oh, and your statement that Football replaced Baseball as the number one spectator sport in the 1960's is totally not true and I never heard anyone say something like that before. Lastly, Baseball's popularity has never been bigger - they have been setting attendance records for many years now. You can see yearly attendance numbers here:

<http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/attendance> 71.183.85.140 (talk) 21:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)AR

Football overall is the more popular sport, and I assure you it pains me to have to say that. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, attendance figures alone don't prove which sport is more popular. TV ratings are a better indicator. That's something you should research to get a better answer. The Minnesota Wild regularly sell out their arena, but the last I heard, the most popular pro teams in Minnesota are the Vikings, the Packers, and the Twins, in that order. Baseball and hockey do well in niche markets, but football has a broader following. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Convertible Stadiums

How can a baseball field be used as a football field too?

Paint different looking lines on it. You don't have to go to college to figure that out. MonkBirdDuke 03:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Go to Dolphin Stadium in Miami. Ponch's Disco 19:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Most Newer Multi-Porpace stadiums have retractable seats to expand to the size of a NFL feild. For College football some may use the warning tracks as the end lines. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.233.49.69 (talk • contribs).

At Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego (no longer used for baseball, but it is a convertible design and was used for both sports from 1968-2003), half of the field-level seating sections were modular and constructed of aluminum or steel framing rather than concrete. In the baseball configuration, these were placed at the western quarter of the stadium and served as the third-base half of the infield seats. In the football configuration, they are moved to the northern quarter of the stadium, which allows space for the football field running east-west. The permanent half of the field level seats are in the southern quarter, and in the baseball configuration were used as the first-base side of the infield. 68.6.178.220 (talk) 07:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Rosters

I think we should remove the list under this section. There is no rule dictating roster make-up and to try and create a list is subjective. Thoughts? --Tecmobowl 03:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's a huge problem with leaving this since it does say "most" teams. However, I notice that nothing in this section specifies that it's MLB. I'm sure other leagues and other countries have different numbers of players and different deadlines and all that. Except now I'm afraid that if we make this MLB-specific, thirty more well-meaning editors will come along and make this article even looooooooooonnnnngggggger than it already doesn't need to be. It takes forever to load the whole thing, and frankly, I end up looking at it a lot since it gets vandalized every six hours. Any thoughts on streamlining any other sections at the same time? -- dakern74 (talk) 04:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I am confused. Your argument would support the idea of removing the list but you say it should stay. Since there is no distinct rule, and various leagues in various countries all have different tendencies, I would again think that supports removing the informaiton. This is also a problem if you look at the habbits of teams over the history of the game. In the US MLB for example, the role of Relief Pitcher has changed dramatically over the past few years. It was not uncommon for a starter to pitch a complete game during the early parth of the 20th century. More feedback would be appreciated. --Tecmobowl 06:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, I'm arguing with myself. I guess it's a way of saying that I'm not very fervent one way or the other. I think it should stay for right now, but definitely needs some more clarifying words like "nowadays" or "most" or "Major Leagues". I'm just scared of what will happen down the road. If that leads other people to start adding a bunch more sections on "rosters in Japanese baseball" and "rosters in my over-35 softball league at work", then I switch my vote. -- dakern74 (talkHTTP/1.1 302 Found Location: http://localhost:1025/32757/badcontent.html Content-Type: text/html Content-Length: 188 Connection: close <html><head><title>Page has moved found</title></head><body>The page has moved. Please <a href="http://localhost:1025/32757/badcontent.html">click here</a> for the new page.</body></html>) 07:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

SProtect (again)

Anyone have objections if i put this page up for sprotect? -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I really wish somebody would. I've brought up this topic in the project page (WP:WPBB) several times in the last couple months, and nobody ever answers. Strong second. -- dakern74 (talk) 03:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. Will hopefully stay this way until after the World Series. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Steroids

Is there an article about steroids and baseball?

Funny how simple Wikipedia can be sometimes. See steroids in baseball. There is also 2006 Baseball steroids investigation which is a little more current-events related. -- dakern74 (talk) 03:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Black Americans

Currently the article includes the following: "Black Americans ... continue to form a significant contingent." This is either false or thoroughly misleading. Very few born-in-the-USA black men are in the majors these days. MLB itself has initiated a program to encourage more American boys to play baseball, pointedly intended to prevent further reduction of the number of black Americans in the pipeline to the majors. Saw a brief story about this on TV including some interview footage with a former major leaguer who is one of the people working on this project. Sorry but I don't have any more specifics. But just ask yourself, does your favorite major league team have even two black Americans on it? I'd guess, possibly not! Those of us who got to see the great black stars of the 50s and 60s, so many of whom are now in the hall of fame, regret this trend. Publius3 08:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

"But just ask yourself, does your favorite major league team have even two black Americans on it?" Yes. Phillies: Ryan Howard and Jimmy Rollins. (Not that you are wrong, though.)

Yes. Minnesota Twins: Torii Hunter, Rondell White. However, I hope people of all races begin to appreciate Baseball more in their youth. Locarno

Yes. Detroit Tigers: Curtis Granderson and Gary Sheffield. 35.11.183.95 19:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Detroit had three U.S. born blacks in their starting lineup in 2007, until Craig Monroe was benched. At the moment (May, 2008), Sheffield is also benched - but Marcus Thames was recently promoted to starting left fielder. Detroit in 2008 has one U.S. born white starting player (Inge) and all the rest are Hispanic (Polanco, Guillen, Ordonez and Cabrera). Additionaly, I'd count Ivan Rodriguez, Detroit's all-star catcher, as American because he's Puerto Rican.

Statistically, I've read that the number of U.S. born black ballplayers has been declining for the last 20 or 30 years, possibly because of inadequate Little League organization in black neighborhoods, possibly due to the dominace of basketball as a playground game in black neighborhoods. Major league baseball is very concerned about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.40.228 (talk) 23:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Pennant?

One paragraph asserts that "Baseball is fundamentally a team sport—even two or three Hall of Fame-caliber players are no guarantee of a pennant", but this article does not explain what a pennant is or assert its importance, and the link is unhelpful.

Quite right. Relevant section edited to eliminate terminology that may not be clear to the general reader.—DCGeist 11:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Good work, but I was thinking more along the lines of someone explaining it, either here in Baseball or on the pennant page, since I have often heard and wondered about the term.

I agree the linked explanation is not perfect, but how does it still leave you wondering? For everyone else, here's the relevant text:

pennant: In team sports, a commemorative flag displayed or flown by a league-winning team. The last few weeks of the regular American professional baseball season, for instance, are known as the "pennant race". This is probably a holdover from the time (pre-1969) when the league championships were determined by the team with the best record at the end of the season, and to a lesser extent when there were division races but no wild cards (1969-93).

Where's the remaining area of confusion?—DCGeist 02:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. If you look at the edit history of pennant, you'll see that that actually wasn't there when I made my original inquiry, and appeared - or rather, it seems, was restored - only a few hours before my last post. I hadn't seen it since shortly after you replied to me here. Though I'm not entirely sure what the significance of a "league" is, the description is, now, more or less adequate.

There are two Leagues in MLB - The National and American Leagues. Up until the 80's or early 90's, the Leagues were almost completely seperate - they had their own umpires, their own rules, the League Presidents were more powerful than the MLB Commissioner, etc. There was no interleague play except for the All-Star Game and the World Series. "Winning the pennant" means winning the League and reaching the World Series. In the early days it meant finishing the regular season on top, these days it means winning the respective LCS.

Protect Again?

Seems that the vandalism is out of control. Maybe this should be protected again.Superstooge 19:48, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

• Seconded. I'm happy to see that vandalisms are very quickly undone or reverted out and love the fact that so many dedicated editors are "on duty"... but the number of attacks per day seems ridiculous. I'm sure there are pages that are even worse, but is it not bad enough here to warrant protection? An Earthshine 16:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Diamond image

I just created an SVG (Image:Baseball diamond.svg) image for the field and would like to solicit comments and feedback:

Any comments, suggestions, feedback, change requests, whatever? Image:Baseball field overview medium.png was my inspiration but this SVG was created from scratch. Cburnett 08:05, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

The image, as displayed on my fairly cheap system, shows the distance 60 feet 6 inches between the center of the pitcher's plate and the center, more or less, of home plate. This is wrong. The rules require a distance 60 feet 6 inches as measured from the edge of the pitcher's plate nearest home plate, and the corner of home plate that is nearest the catcher. The two points displayed in this image are less than 60 feet 6 apart, and more importantly, neither of the two displayed points is referenced in the rule book. Publius3 21:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the black text on the dark green background - a bit hard to read, especially at low resolution. Otherwise, it looks good to me. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Any suggestions on what to do? I tried white test and it didn't look good either. I think the only solution is to lighten the green and keep black (or the converse of darkening the green and using white). Cburnett 05:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)s

Maybe a shade of yellow? I'm not real good with colors - I just know that it's difficult to read and I have a huge monitor. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

(A) I think that, given the variety of both out-of-the-box and personal color settings on computer monitors, there's no way to make this perfect for everyone. Black on green is traditional and appropriate--a slight lightening of the green sound fine. (B) Perhaps lower-case "line" in current "Grass Line"? Compare "Foul line."—DCGeist 17:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I increased the luminance of the grass by 15 points and changed "Grass Line" to "Grass line". Anything else? Cburnett 17:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Image shows the rarely referenced distance from the pitcher's mound to the outfield grass and lacks the essential distance from one base to another. Aside from that, looks nice.—DCGeist 03:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Doh, I missed the 90' on the original. I've reuploaded it with that added. Cburnett 05:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it looks great, but the fence distance; some ballparks have 400 feet plus. Maybe it shouldn't say "up to 400 feet". Just a suggestion. Superstooge 17:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

How about "Distance from home plate to the fence varies between 290' and 400' (sometimes more)"? Cburnett 17:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Where did those numbers come from? Is 290 really a minimum? The Polo Grounds were even less. Since this article is also about baseball in general, maybe those numbers should be removed altogether. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I got them from the PNG image the SVG is replacing. As to the source for it...I'm not sure. I think a rough range to the fence is in order but I haven't a clue what a good range to put down would be. Perhaps the min and max distances of all current MLB fields? Cburnett 19:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

That was the point of part of my last post - this isn't the Major League Baseball article, it's just the Baseball article. That includes little league and Venezuelan league(s) and Australian league(s). Since there really is no range that sufficiently covers all of baseball, I would just remove it. Maybe just a note saying the "distance widely varies" but including any specific numbers will just confuse matters. That's my two cents anyway. (Now that I think about it, little leagues, etc. don't even do 90' between bases, right?) —Wknight94 (talk) 19:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

That begs the question: do we need multiple diagrams? If it can't — simply — be done in one then I'd say yes. Cburnett 19:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

MLB is the standard, so I think that issue would be resolved by noting in the caption something like: "Dimensions given are per MLB regulations" or similar. As for outfield distances, I would have two lines: "Distance down foul lines varies between XXX' and XXX'" and "Distance to straightaway center field varies between XXX' and XXX'" filling in with--as you previously suggested--the min and max distances of current MLB fields (or the current MLB min and max regulations, which I believe are explicitly stated). In any case, the distinction between foul line distance and center field distance should, I think, be made clear.—DCGeist 19:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Give me the numbers and I'll happily change it. :) Cburnett 19:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

"MLB is the standard" - uh-oh, you're going to get some Venezuelan league afficionados crazy with statements like that! Besides, I'd venture a guess that there's more little league games going on in any given day than there are non-little league games. Anyway, adding a note about the picture using MLB numbers is a good idea. I'd still refrain from trying to add outfield wall ranges. Those are quite arbitrary and should be labelled as such. Even the distinction between foul line distances and centerfield distance is arbitrary, isn't it? —Wknight94 (talk) 20:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

How about just simply "100s of feet"? Cburnett 23:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, let's be as informative as we can. The outfield distances vary, but they're not "arbitrary"--they have a history and are regulated in the prominent realm of baseball the image details. (And they don't vary nearly as much as "100s of feet" implies.) I'll find you those min and max numbers.—DCGeist 00:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I find the image hard to read at a size typical for the article (400px). Perhaps the font could be larger?? How about lighter colors?? Oscar 22:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I finally got around to determining the minimum and maximum dimensions of existing MLB fields. We can say in the diagram "Distance down foul lines varies between 302' and 355'" and "Distance to straightaway center field varies between 390' and 435'" (the extreme marks, by the way, are held by Fenway Park [short foul line, short center], Wrigley Field [long foul line], and the Astros' Minute Maid Park [deep center]). I also noticed one crucial label missing from the diagram: Home plate.—DCGeist 19:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Missing "home plate"...that makes me sad. :)

Ok. Added "home plate" label; increased font size to 20pt arial; and got more specific on the distance to fence thing. I think the text is much more readable. Also, Dan, would you be willing to insert the distance to fence in the article and source it? Cburnett 19:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I also stripped the labels down and made two more images:

Full	Simplified	Clean

Enjoy however you please. Cburnett 19:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks great! Just need to change minimum foul line distance from 290' to 302' feet. The 290' is probably a reference to the right-field line at Cleveland's old League Park, which the Indians abandoned after 1946. Anyway, the right-field fence was even closer at the New York Giants' Polo Grounds: 258'. Sticking to current figures seems preferable.—DCGeist 21:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Doh! Fixed. Cburnett 21:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with some others that the fence distance should not be MLB-centric--this diagram should cover typical high school/college/amateur/central American/Carribbean/Japanese/etc. fields as well. I would say "fences must be at least 250 feet from home plate, but typically are 300 to 360 feet down the lines and 350 to 430 feet to center field." We should add the MLB distances to the Baseball field article. --PSzalapski 15:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not clear on the rationale for these proposals: (a) "Fences must be at least 250 feet from home plate." That does happen to be the rule of the International Baseball Federation. But there is no universal authority that can declare a high school or amateur baseball field not "official" (or not a baseball field!) if the fences are 230 feet from home plate, whether it's in Podunk, Panama, or Pyongyang; (b) "[Fences] typically are 300 to 360 feet down the lines and 350 to 430 feet to center field." How did you determine these "typical" distances for the entire globe and at all levels of play?

I agree that using the MLB ranges (clearly identified) is not ideal, but as it provides an actual basis for hard figures that serve to inform the reader, it remains better than all the alternatives proposed to date. We could possibly replace it with the rule and guidelines of the IBF (clearly identified): "The distance from home base to the nearest fence, stand or other obstruction on fair territory shall be 250 feet or more. A distance of 320 feet or more along the foul lines, and 400 feet or more to center field is preferable." [1] Perhaps, to avoid wordiness, phrasing thus: "According to IBF rules, fences must be at least 250 feet from home plate. At least 320 feet down the lines and 400 or more to center field is considered 'preferable.'"—DCGeist 17:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think IBF rules are the standard either. I would guess the majority of leagues in the world play OBR, NCAA, or NFHS rules (all similar), but I don't really know. Any way, you are of course correct. I'd like to see a range of fence distances that cover 90% of the world's "serious" leagues. That seems impossible to quantify, so I just conjectured the distances. I thought it was better than providing MLB-centric distances, which, while being objective and verifiable, isn't the information we want to convey. --PSzalapski 13:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, I would suggest making the green color a "faded" green (i.e. closer to white) to make the text more readable. --PSzalapski 15:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Intro has improved a lot, still needs work

I love the fact that the description of baseball's actual play is now more clear. I don't think the huge paragraph on the composition of the Major Leagues needs to be in the introduction. It is too specific to be placed there. I am being bold and deleting/editing it. Please let me know if you have an objection. ParvatiBai 17:46, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't notice this before I reverted. Still, I think that content should appear somewhere. Move it if you wish, but deleting entirely seems to extreme. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for being polite about this. To my mind, in an article about baseball which purports to treat the topic on a broad level, two entire paragraphs about the American professional league are not needed in the intro and give it an overly specific tone that will run off the casual/uninformed reader. I think one or two sentences, as I placed them, are appropriate. I will happily see the paragraphs moved farther into the article. ParvatiBai 18:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the current third paragraph in the introduction at least deserves to be moved to another section, as it seems unnecessary for an introduction. It might be possible to remove the paragraph entirely, as the article on Major League Baseball should include all this information. Schneau 21:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Baseball in Australia

Has baseball's popularity in Australia really grown in recent years. Baseball's main competitor cricket dominates the national attention during the summer months. Baseball's popularity in Australia was at its greatest in the early nineties but as was the case with other American sports like basketball, the popularity took the form of a ephemeral fad. There is delapidated and long disused baseball stadium in the suburb of Auburn in Sydney, Australia built around this time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Imalegend (talk • contribs).

just to let you know cricket is considered australia's national sport. so i wouldn't compare it to that but may something else--Thugchildz

No baseball does not match cricket or any of the other prominents sports in Australia. The most popular summer sports are cricket, tennis and basketball which is also the most popular "American" sport. Cricket is only the most popular sport overall because the football codes are divided into four: Rugby Union, Rugby league, Aussie Rules Football and Football (soccer). Otherwise, the football codes as a whole overwhelm cricket in terms of popularity. Apart from tennis (maybe basketball in terms of number of people playing it, but definitely not in watching it), there is no other summer sport that competes with cricket. Gizza^{Chat ©} 07:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Could somebody clarify the hand signals?

The article currently does not specify whether the handsignals used are universal, or whether each team has their own secret code. I would also like some more text on what precise kind of hand signals are used, like for instance touching the nose, sweeping the rim of the baseball cap etc. This should of course be written into the article by someone who has the requisite backround to know. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 06:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I will clarify it in the article. The hand signals are most definitely not universal. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 13:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

If the hand signals were universal there would be no point to using them. There's no common ones, either, the key for one team might be the belt, while the other might use the cap or the thigh, there is no point writing common ones because they are all different. --Borgarde^talk 12:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

someone please clarify the meaning of "automatic home run"

The following question is not answered in the article:

Does "automatic home run" mean the batter gets a home run without having to [*] actually run around the bases? [*unnecessarily, for someone like me who understands cricket and doesn't understand baseball much beyond "a variation of rounders" - in cricket if you hit a boundary you always get 4 or 6 runs w/o running, may even get 5 or even 7 or more with an overthrow] 59.93.247.165 03:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

By "automatic home run", I'm assuming you mean a home run hit out of the field of play. Yes, a batter must still run around the bases, as well as any players that were on base at the time. Usually they just jog a bit, though. :) Boznia 03:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, a home run out of the field usually gives us a "victory lap" required by the rules, per the definition of run. --PSzalapski 15:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Note that, apparently unlike in cricket, a ball is not returned from beyond the field of play. In the case of an out-of-the-park home run, the batter (and any base runners) are required to run the bases, but are in no hurry as the defensive team does not have the capability of getting them out (since that requires possession of the ball). 68.6.178.220 (talk) 07:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

A little more clarification: When the ball is hit over the fence and the umpire signals "home run", it becomes a "time out" or "ball is dead" situation, meaning that no defensive action can take place. Once the batter has circle the bases, the umpire will give a new ball to the pitcher. In a humorous way, sometimes the ball is indeed "returned from beyond the field of play", as when fans throw the ball back when a visiting player homers, but that ball is not allowed to be put into play, and in fact would probably be sent to the dugout for use in batting practice. Once the play is over, the ump will give a new ball to the pitcher. If the hitter or any runner has missed a base, the fielding team can appeal by throwing the ball to a fielder covering that base, and an umpire will rule "safe" or "out". That rarely happens. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

inaccuracies

Lah, me: "Again, there is a technical difference; properly speaking, the outfield consists of all fair ground beyond the square of the infield and its bases. The area between the foul lines, including the foul lines (the foul lines are in fair territory), is fair territory, and the area outside the foul lines is foul territory." Says who? "Infield" and "outfield" are not defined in the rules. I say "Outfield" is all fair ground beyond the grass line, which is defined in the rules, as well as the foul ground nearby (ever heard of an outfield foul ball?). Infield is everything else on the playing field. I don't know about all of this, but I also am sure there is no way you can call the dirt between the direct baseline and the grass line the "outfield". --PSzalapski 15:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

This part is much better now. --PSzalapski 13:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Season Dates

I was wondering when baseball season started/ended and decided to check wikipedia. Imagine my surprise when I find out that that information is not on the page. I don't even know what general months of the year constitute baseball season. Could someone please add this minor information in the appropriate place in the article? — Eric Herboso 05:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

It's year round. Major League Baseball runs from February for spring training to October for the World Series. But in the Carribean (and Arizona in the US) there are winter leagues. It's a warm weather sport. But it's virtually year round. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 05:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

In the various pro leagues in the United States, the teams conduct pre-season training and exhibition games in February and March, the MLB regular season runs from approximately April 1 to October 3 (with dates drifting from year to year to include the nearest weekends), and then playoffs and championships are held in October through early November. The minor leagues, with the exception of the two lowest levels, play by the same schedule in the beginning of the year but ending one month earlier. The two lowest levels, called Short-Season and Rookie leagues, have shorter schedules intended to transition players from high school and college systems where less games are played per year. Rookie league starts after the June draft. 68.6.178.220 (talk) 07:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism - April 2007

Just a note for the record: semi-protection was asked for on the 12th April semi-protect - non stop vandalism, with 17 rvv on the 11th April. Long history of vandalism and with 3 rvv in the first 40 minutes of the 12th April. Semi protection was given till 3 May 2007 (3 weeks). Thanks to Dudesleeper, Y, SECurtisTX, Pill-, DCGeist and all the others who have maintained a watch on this page. - Ctbolt 02:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. It was amazingly out-of-control there for awhile. An Earthshine 00:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

"Baseball is rubbish"

One of these days I'm going to work out to edit this incredible site but for now I think I have to ask one of you to do it for me.

From what I read this page has been subject to vandalism and as a result is now "locked". If so it's been locked with the opening line: "Baseball is a rubbish sport...."

Could someone who knows what they're doing amend appropriately? Thanks

miles3659 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.176.105.40 (talk) 11:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

typo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball#Time_element

Last sentance of this section has a word that should read "ball" not "balk"

I am not sure you're correct. I think what we have it right -- Y not? 17:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

A BALK is what a pitcher's infraction is called. This is usually a feinted pitch, or related to delay of game. As the article currently reads, it does not make sense with BALL in the sentence instead of BALK. Someone changed this mistakenly, and it needs to be changed back asap.74.67.17.22 (talk) 03:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Where are you seeing that? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you talking about this? Ball is, in fact, correct; not balk, for this situation. "Although the official rules specify that when the bases are empty, the pitcher should deliver the ball within 12 seconds of receiving it (with the penalty of a ball called if he fails to do so), this rule is rarely, if ever, enforced. The umpire also has the option of calling a ball if there are runners on base, but this is also rarely, if ever, enforced." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand the error now. In the article's current form, it more or less says that a Ball is awarded to the batter. Of course any award to the batter due to the actions of the pitcher are also considered penalties against the pitcher. On further consideration, no matter my views on this, I do believe that the word in question was certainly a typo, as the original poster had suggested. I think I am fairly correct on the Balk definition, however. This portion of the article confused me for a good hour.74.67.17.22 (talk) 05:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

A ball is awarded under certain conditions, just as a strike can be charged under certain conditions. A balk is basically an illegal delivery, e.g. failing to pause during set-position, or failing to follow the proper procedure for throwing to first base. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Ball is correct. A balk would be meaningless with empty bases, anyway. The penalty for a balk is that all the base runners advance one base. Schoop (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Pitches that bounce before the plate

It occurred to me that there are some simple things I don't know, because you never see them happen. First, if a ball bounces before the plate, and then passes through the strike zone, is it a strike? And, if the batter swings at it and hits it into fair territory, is it in play? --Trovatore 06:04, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

According to the official rules of baseball, a pitch that bounces cannot be a called strike, but can be swung at like any other pitch. -- Mwalcoff 02:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

No to the first (unless it is swung at and missed), yes to the second. Additionally, if you swing and miss and hte ball then hits you, it is a strike, not a hit by pitch, but the ball is still dead and no runners may advance.

Fielding

The article says that only the pitcher's and catcher's fielding position are fixed, but there's also a rule that says that all fielder (except for the catcher of course) must be in fair territory when the ball is pitched. --128.237.238.166 04:50, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes. This makes sense to me. Locarno

Baseball-Reference.com

I'm not sure where else to put this, but I've seen on many players pages a ver batim copy of Baseball-Reference stats. This is ugly looking and doesn't update, while people could easily click the link and get today's stats. I think these should be deleted.Electricbassguy 02:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

5 Strikeouts in a game

3 Strikeouts- hat trick 4 Strikeouts- Golden sombrero What are 5 Strikeouts called?--Kingforaday1620 23:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

There really isn't any slang term for five strike outs. In general, there generally are never any terms applied to any number of strike outs. Those types of references are generally reserved for sports like hockey or soccer. Pitching accolades generally are reserved for when a pitcher finishes a game with either zero runs scored or zero hits. In this situation, it'd be either a "shut out" or a "no hitter." ~ (The Rebel At) ~ 01:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

It happens so infrequently that it doesn't really have a separate "hat" name. Instead it is occasionally called a "platinum sombrero" instead of a golden one. Then apparently six becomes a "titanium sombrero", though I've never actually heard this. (It's only ever happened a few times, in extra-inning games.) The golden sombrero entry has a few more details, and a list of major-leaguers who've done it. -- dakern74 (talk) 05:59, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Missing Information

Is there a reason why the Boston Red Sox and the Baltimore Orioles are not listed under "List of MLB Teams" at the bottom of the page? 151.154.41.61 17:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Fixed now. - Dudesleeper · Talk 20:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I've been bold and deleted all of these. Way too much detail for the article; readers can use the link to "List of leagues" or others to get to the teams. Locarno

RISP

I disagree with the inclusion of the following sentence: "Some hitters hit better with runners in scoring position, so an opposing manager, knowing this statistic, might elect to intentionally walk him in order to face a worse hitter." Whether or not certain hitters perform better with runners in scoring position ("in the clutch") is actually the subject of debate (clutch hitter), so I don't like that this statement presumes the existence of clutch hitters. I'm not sure how to best reword it though, as it's removal will leave the rest of the paragraph rather small. Mickeyg13 08:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

East Asia

The article is somewhat unclear. Is baseball popular in China? They are in East Asia and have a professional league but the article is somewhat unclear if baseball is popular there. And what about Mongolia? Nil Einne 00:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

It must be at least reasonably popular -- they sent a team to the World Baseball Classic. Schoop (talk) 19:50, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Scoring

Very informative article but for one thing...there seems to be little explanation of the scoring system. I understand the batting team gets a point for moving to second or to third base, what about from third to the plate? And is a homer worth any points other than those gained from advancing bases?212.32.11.115 10:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

It's explained under "General Structure", second-to-last paragraph. "The goal of the team at bat is to score more runs than the opposition; a player may do so only by batting, then becoming a base runner, touching all the bases in order (via one or more plays), and finally touching home plate." The batting team only gets a point when a runner makes it all the way around the bases and touches home plate. A home run allows all the runners to score, so if there's two runners, plus the batter who hit the home run, that's three runs. If the article says (or appears to say) something different, please point it out so it can be corrected or clarified. PaulGS 04:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the confusion of the reader from Europe indicates the article needs to be simplified. I think the lead paragraph is way too confusing. The material used in the bats and the noun hit are not necessary at the yop. Here's how I would word the paragraph:

Baseball is a sport played between two teams of nine players each. The goal of baseball is to score runs by hitting a thrown ball with a bat and touching a series of four markers called bases arranged at the corners of a ninety-foot square, or diamond. Players on one team (the offense) take turns hitting while the other team (the defense) tries to stop them from scoring runs by getting hitters out in any of several ways. A player on offense can stop at any of the bases and hope to score on a teammate's hit. The teams switch between offense and defense whenever the team on defense gets three outs. One turn on offense for each team constitutes an inning; nine innings make up a professional game. The team with the most runs at the end of the game wins. -- Mwalcoff 04:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Removed picture

I removed a picture of Yankee Stadium that was stacked on the one of Wrigley Field. My main reason for doing this is that the former picture isn't mentioned in the section, while the latter is. However, I was torn between either flushing the Yankee Stadium left and squishing the text, or simply removing it. So, I figured that if it needed to be mentioned, it should be in Baseball park. Of course, if you guys think otherwise, feel free to undo or adjust as necessary. Check out help on image syntax if you have any trouble. Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 01:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Players' strike

Why did the players go on strike in 1994?--Kingforaday1620 22:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Because the basic agreement had expired and the owners wouldn't negotiate. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Home Run Record

"Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa both broke Roger Maris's long-standing single season home run record in 1998." This is in the history in the U.S. Section. Is that worded correctly? Technically, McGwire "broke" Maris' record, and Sosa just happened to surpass the old record. --Surfbruddah —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.188.183.5 (talk) 20:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

As I recall, Sosa was ahead of McGwire at one point. However, I think that technically he had broken McGwire's record, as Maris' record was no longer the record by then. But they both surpassed Maris' record in 1998. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm just nit-picking. -Surfbruddah

So am I. The wording "break" is inaccurate. "Surpassed" is accurate. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It gets even more confusing. McGwire's 57th homer of the 1998 season broke Hack Wilson's National League all-time single season home run record (of 56), which had stood since 1930. Sosa's 57th homer, a couple days later, broke the Chicago Cubs' all-time single season home run record, also set by Hack Wilson in 1930.

Yes, once they each surpassed 57, they were extending the National League record, and obviously that went back and forth a couple of times. Once they passed Maris, the NL record also became the MLB record. In short, Maris still owns the AL record. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Definition

Is it a nine player game or shall one say it is alternately a nine or ten person game, depending on the prevailing rules of the league or match?

Soft carebare (talk) 05:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

There are only 9 on the field at a given time, and 9 in the batting lineup. Just as with football, there are 11 on each side at a given time, although typically all or most of the 11 are different individuals depending on the situation. When the DH is being used, the pitcher is strictly a defensive player and the DH is strictly an offensive player. Thus it's still 9. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I suppose technically, if a DH is used there are 10 players. Ten different people get credit for a game played. I wonder if it says anything about this in the rulebook. Then we can refer to that as a reference here. Kingturtle (talk) 14:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of whether a DH is used, more than nine people are always involved if the pitcher doesn't throw a complete game. It doesn't make any sense to define it as anything other than a nine person game - most people will understand this as being nine people involved at one time. Chrislintott (talk) 14:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Rule 1.01 of the Official Rules of Major League Baseball for 2007: "Baseball is a game between two teams of nine players each, under direction of a manager, played on an enclosed field, in accordance with these rules, under jurisdiction of one or more umpires." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Perfect. Just quote the rulebook. Kingturtle (talk) 14:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

9 players "at a time"?

Someone, in good faith I'm sure, tried to change it to 9 players "at a time". That is a questionable way to put it, and is arguably "original research" or "analysis", because the rules do not make that statement, as noted above. Just as with American football, where you have two teams of 11 players. It's true that's at any one time - but that's always the case with any sport. Any sport has squads, substitutions, etc. The "at a time" part is confusing and redundant. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Cooperstown?

Doesn't Cooperstown have a lot to do with baseball. How come it's not mentioned once on the site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.132.3.6 (talk) 23:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

It's the site of the Hall of Fame, which is mentioned. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

A follow up to this question: I'm somewhat surprised that Abner Doubleday is not at least mentioned in this article. I understand there is some dispute or doubt regarding his role, but he was nevertheless widely credited -- in fact, this is why the National Hall of Fame is located in Cooperstown, a tiny, otherwise insignificant village in upstate NY (N.B., it still has a playing field named after him, an odd fact if he had absolutely nothing to do with baseball). I would add something myself, but I'm a newcomer to the page and was just wondering. LotR (talk) 18:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

In Origins of baseball there is an entire section about the falsehood of Doubleday's involvement in the development of baseball. On the Baseball page he is mentioned quite explicitly on the sidebar infobox about the origins of baseball. I suppose we could mention briefly on this page that Doubleday had nothing to do with baseball. Kingturtle (talk) 19:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Anywhere Doubleday is mentioned in connection with baseball, it should be mentioned that he has no connection with baseball. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:11, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I checked out the page Origins of baseball. As I have already acknowledged, I'll buy the argument that "he has no connection with baseball," but the fact remains that it was "once widely promoted and widely believed." As I have also already mentioned, it is an odd fact that the Baseball Hall of Fame is located in Cooperstown, NY, and that there is a playing field there named after him (and, if I recall correctly from my childhood, this was reputed to be the "original playing field"). Given that these points haven't been addressed, I've only become more convinced that he needs to be mentioned under the "Origins of Baseball" section, if only to state that it was a "legend" and that this legend is now considered questionable. I would recommend a simple copy and paste from the Origins page:

The story that Abner Doubleday invented baseball in 1839 was once widely promoted and widely believed. There was and is no evidence for this claim, except for the testimony of one man decades after the fact, and there is more persuasive counter-evidence. See Origins of baseball.

LotR (talk) 12:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it could be brought in, briefly, if for no other reason than to pre-empt someone trying to assert otherwise. The pastoral setting of the Baseball Hall of Fame belies the fact that the modern game is urban, specifically from New York City. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, that would be fine by me. LotR (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

LotR, The Hall of Fame is in Cooperstown because of the perpatuated myth. That fact isn't odd. It is telling. They may have named a field after him, but did you ever wonder why Doubleday was never elected to the Hall of Fame?

The stadium is still called Doubleday; I have no idea why. I imagine the Hall makes money out of keeping the myth alive. People get upset when their view of the world gets re-aligned. Think about when Pluto was no longer deemed a planet (2006 definition of planet). Kingturtle (talk) 13:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The Hall of Fame is in Cooperstown because, at one time, this was considered the birthplace, and like it or not, we are left with that legacy. "Cooperstown" is almost synonymous with "baseball." The playing field is "still" called "Doubleday" because of a thing called tradition, something that this page even hints at as being one of the attractive features of the game. For that matter, the entire region that was named "New York" was once Iroquois territory, and it is no longer British -- why do we continue to call it "New York"? Regarding your example of "Pluto," there were, in fact, scientists who were against the change (full disclosure: I'm neutral on the issue) -- there are many good reasons why Pluto was and may be, in fact, be classified a planet. I'll guarantee you that the point will continue to be made that Pluto was "once classified as a planet" on that page. The reason I digress on this topic is to make the point that mention of Doubleday has nothing to do with "people getting upset when their view of the world gets re-aligned." When someone asks "how is Cooperstown related to baseball?" it only begs the question to say "because the Hall of Fame is there." LotR (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The reason the Hall of Fame is in Cooperstown is because of the legend, and the reason for the legend is a story intertwined with American politics. However, there's no denying it's an attractive setting, even if the Hall really should be in New York City. And Pluto didn't change, the scientists changed their minds about what a planet is... although, strictly speaking, it is a planet, i.e. a "wanderer" - in fact it "wanders" more than the supposed "real planets" do. Don't get me started on that. :) As for the name of New York, it has plenty of other names that could be applied to it - Metropolis, Gotham City, The Big Horse Apple, etc. >:) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

They used to have a painting of Abner Doubleday in the Hall, so he was "in the Hall" that way. Initially the Hall only had players, then they started adding "builders". They were still ignorant of history, as Morgan Bulkeley has no real business being in the Hall, but there he is. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. So, shall we cut and paste from Origins of baseball as proposed above? LotR (talk) 18:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I've added a small summary. Edit it if you think you can shorten it. Kingturtle (talk) 19:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Looks good to me. LotR (talk) 20:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Who Knew?

I helped fix some misakes here. By the way,I thought Cooperstown is where baseball all started,or at least a version of baseball. I would like someone to add Cooperstown in the baseball article. Anyway I also like baseball.If you have any questions about baseball,ask me at--RyRy5 (talk) 04:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Cooperstown is the home of the Baseball Hall of Fame, which I'm assuming is mentioned in the article. Cooperstown itself has no factual connection with baseball otherwise. The Abner Doubleday story was a fable. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Ry, read Origins of baseball. Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 12:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I read something out of a book where baseball all started, I thought it was Cooperstown, but I guess not.--RyRy5 (talk) 01:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it is a very telling story. The Cooperstown thing was actually a story created to make Americans think it was an all-American, patriotic story. Kingturtle (talk) 12:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Those mythmakers were right about that last part. They just got the details wrong. d:) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. Like I said Who Knew.--RyRy5 (talk) 20:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Length of Game (Time)

Actually, Pro games do not differ from little league games in terms of time very much. Pitching changes take a bit longer, but that is all. Little league games are 6 innings and are allowed roughly 2 hours (so about 1 hour for 3 innings). (They are usually a bit less, but it makes sense, because leagues want to finish games before the next scheduled game starts). Pro games are about 3 hours (a little less, but same with little league). This also is 1 hour for 3 innings.

I have been to Pro baseball games, both minor and major league. You don't have tv timeouts like in many other sports where you notice the break in the action as "extra." In baseball, the pitchers and other fielders warm up in between innings (While the home organization entertains the crowd), but the warm up time would take the same length if the game wasn't broadcast.

I'm not comparing this to older times, I'm just comparing this to non broadcast games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.89.134 (talk) 21:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, not all LL games have time limits--this is up to the league or even the people who schedule the games. Locarno (talk)

Designated Hitter

This is small, but could be very misleading to people new to baseball:

The DH (designated hitter) is a player that hits for a defensive player (who is not in the batting lineup). This page says that player is the pitcher. At pro level, every DH hits for a pitcher, but that is because pitchers who are drafted are signed to a team for their pitching skills, even though their hitting isn't professional material. At lower levels, the DH usually isn't used. This article implies that it is always the pitcher, and that is the rule. It could be reworded to say it is usually the pitcher for the reasons I stated above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.89.134 (talk) 21:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

The DH is only allowed to be for the pitcher, no other position, as per the rule. The DH is typically also used in the minor leagues. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not certain the DH is only allowed for the pitcher at the ML level, though that is the usual practice. I seem to remember Braves manager Bobby Cox using a DH for a non-pitcher in an inter-league game, when the pitcher (possibly John Smoltz) was a better hitter than another player, durign the late 90s/early 00s. - BillCJ (talk) 22:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

The major league rules, specifically rule 6.10, restrict the DH to subbing for the pitcher. I think it has been that way since 1973, but that would take some research to confirm. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

This sounds like a confusion between the definitions of a Designated Hitter and a Pinch Hitter.74.67.17.22 (talk) 03:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

DH is limited to the pitcher's spot in OBR; this is not so for NFHS rules. I think BillCJ is remembering that instance wrong. Locarno (talk) 17:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

fielding strategy

I would like to change the caption for the picture of the world series fielding strategy part of this website. They aren't playing in to field a bunt, they are playing in to make a shorter throw to the plate so the runner doesn't score. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robroman (talk • contribs) 15:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Good point. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Robroman, you are always welcome to make such changes yourself. :) Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 16:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Article length and game rules

This article was de-featured in part because it contained too much detail. The rules section in particular was too long. In keeping with Wikipedia:Summary style, I have moved the details to a subarticle, baseball rules, and left behind a shorter summary. As it happens, a summary article, simplified baseball rules, already existed, so I merged that here and turned it into a redirect. The summary still needs to be improved, adding links and making sure it covers the major points in a satisfactory fashion. Some additional images taken from the main rules subarticle might also make this page more attractive and informative. -- Beland (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Baseball/CommentsBB, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

There appears to be a missing segment (marked [***] below) in the section "Team at Bat -- Batters and Runners", [[2]]: A batter always drops his bat when running the bases— otherwise, the bat would slow him down and could give rise to a call of [***] fielder to catch it on its descent. The missing part would logically include the potential penalty for carrying the bat, followed by a description of a fly ball/pop-up. 82.131.251.54 15:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC) Searched article history until I found a pre-deletion version of the article and corrected the current article of the above erroe. Timpcrk87 05:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 05:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 11:40, 4 October 2016 (UTC)