Please note: As we compose new blog entries, we will now send each one out to all our subscribers as we post them. Here’s a link to see the entire Blog Archives -GL
THE BASEBALL HISTORY COMES ALIVE BLOG
Please note: As we compose new blog entries, we will now send each one out to all our subscribers as we post them. Here’s a link to see the entire Blog Archives -GL
April 7, 2021
New Blog Topic: WHAT DOES MLB HAVE AGAINST EXTRA-INNING GAMES
When we were kids we always got excited when a ballgame went into extra innings. And why not? You got to see more baseball and every time the home team came up there was a chance the game would end quickly. If the visiting team scored in the top half of the inning then the pressure was on the home team to either tie it again or win it. There was always something special about an extra-inning ballgame. And on those occasions when a game went into the 14th, 15th, or 16th inning, the suspense grew even more.
But today it seems like the extra-inning game has become an anathema. MLB, in its desire to shorten games, has taken a big bite out of the extra-inning game in a most un-baseball-like way. After trying it out in the pandemic shortened season of 2020, MLB has continued with a rule that puts a runner on second base to begin the 10th inning. Just puts the runner there. He doesn’t have to earn his way on with a hit or a walk and a stolen base. Before the inning even begins a player emerges from the dugout and goes out to second base. This will be continued every half-inning until the game ends.
The discussion about this began several years ago, but at that time the concern was the very long game, one that went past the 12th inning. The initial talk was to maybe wait until the 12th before putting the free runner on second. But somehow MLB, in its infinite wisdom, decided to implement the rule immediately and in the 10th inning.
The extra-inning game has been part of baseball since the beginning and, yes, there have been some very long games. The longest ever occurred on May 1, 1920, when the old Brooklyn Robins and Boston Braves played a 26-inning, 1-1 tie, the game called because of darkness. There were 26 total hits and yet the game took just three hours and fifty minutes, the time of some nine-inning games today. Even more amazing is the fact that both pitchers, Leon Cadore of the Dodgers and Joe Oeschger of the Braves, both went the entire distance. Something called Tom Tango’s old pitch count estimator said that Cadore threw 338 pitches and Oeschger 316. It may not be accurate, but both pitchers had to be around or over the 300 pitch mark.
More recently the St. Louis Cardinals defeated the New York Mets, 4-3, in a 25-inning game on September 11, 1974, and the Chicago White Sox topped the Milwaukee Brewers in 25 innings, 7-6, on May 8, 1984. That game was also the longest in time, taking eight hours and six minutes to complete, more than twice the time it took the Robins and Braves to play 26 innings 64 years earlier.
I think these kinds of games – or even games of 17 or 18 innings – are what MLB wants to avoid, apparently at all costs. But how often do they happen? Not very, according to some interesting numbers. From 2011 through 2016 there were 14,577 regular-season games played. Of those, only 1,301 went into extra innings. There were 572 10-inning games, 315 11-inning games, 177 12-inning games, and 109 13-inning games. From there the numbers get even smaller. There were just 17 16-inning games and a total of 20 games lasting between 17 and 20 innings. Out of 14,577 total games. Is that so terrible, something MLB should be concerned about?
Here’s what I think is going on. For several years now, MLB had talked about shortening games, which now run regularly more than three hours. They’re doing little things like making the intentional walk automatic without the pitcher having to throw four wide ones, limiting managers’ trips to the mound, and asking players not to continually step out of the batter’s box. They’re thinking about implementing a pitch clock, requiring pitchers to throw the next pitch within 20 or even 15 seconds of getting the ball back from the catcher. All to save just a few minutes. Yet at the same time, they have the instant replay rule, which can take several minutes each time the umps put on the headphones. And the constant pitching changes, which now often see 10 or even more pitchers enter a game, eat up a heckuva lot of time. The complete game has become something of a rarity.
Yet at the same time, the price of attending a baseball game continues to climb. Ticket prices are sky high in many ballparks, the price of parking, food, and merchandise is at an all-time high. If it costs so much for an individual or a family of four to attend a ballgame, why try to rush them out of the ballpark in two and a half hours? No, I think the real reason is the television audience. MLB feels that with a long game there is more chance of the fans at home turning the channel and losing interest, especially with an extra-inning game going 12 innings or more. Their solution is having a runner at second to begin an extra inning. To me, that’s not baseball and it could foreshadow more non-baseball rules on the horizon. If it continues, baseball will no longer be the best game ever invented, the perfect sport. And for longtime fans like myself, that’s not an easy thought to swallow.
The game is already dragging by the lack of balls in play, the emphasis on the home run which has led to far more strikeouts. In that respect, the game has already slowed down with far less action and strategy until someone hits the ball over the fence. Another possible reason for the extra inning rule is the use of pitchers. In 1920 both Cadore and Oeschgar pitched all 26 innings. As recently as July of 1963 the Giants Juan Marichal and the Braves’ Warren Spahn pitched all 16 innings of a game eventually won on a Willie Mays home run. Spahn, who was 42 years old at the time and would win 23 games that year. Marichal would win 25, so throwing 16 innings and more than 200 pitches each didn’t seem to hurt them.
Today, with teams often using five or six pitchers in a nine-inning game, there’s probably a concern about what can happen if a game goes 17 or 18 innings. What if one or both of the teams ran out of pitchers and the game had to continue with position players on the mound. That would be quite an embarrassment for MLB. If they start each extra inning with a runner on second, the chances of a very long extra-inning game are remote.
So in many ways, it’s the changing game, the modern game, that has led to this rule. I think it’s a rule today’s fans will get used to and accept readily. Some journalists have already written that they like the rule and think it’s a good thing. But it’s something I can’t accept because, to me, it violates everything that makes baseball, baseball. And it worries me about what may come next.
What do you think? I’d love to hear your opinions about this rule and why you like or dislike it. So let me know in your comments and we can discuss.
Bill Gutman
As always, we enjoy reading your comments
Here’s a link to see the entire Blog Archives
