(11-27-2022 08:50 AM)AimHigher Wrote: (11-26-2022 08:59 PM)ODU2017 Wrote: MLB has ruined baseball and turned it into a mindless home run - strike out parade with no other skills valued. Pitch clock, dual DH, banning the shift, extra innings free base runner. All but guaranteed ads are coming on jerseys within 3 seasons. Only NASCAR has watered down its base product as much and MLB probably will be as nationally irrelevant as NASCAR within a generation.
I’m a short track fan. NASCAR is realizing it now with the success Dale Earnhardt Jr. with North Wilkesboro Speedway's revival and Tony Stewart with SRX racing. Dale Jr Downland is an awesome podcast for the casual fan.
Speaking of changes in sports.....NASCAR finally corrected a major problem (IMO) this past year. With growing emphasis on aerodynamics, the fenders on the cars grew over the tire (compared to the 80's). The problem was that if there was any side-by-side contact, the fender collapsed down on the tire causing a flat. In the 80's, the wheel wells were cut well outside the perimeter of the tire and flats didn't happen because of minor contact. The change was to move to a composite body that was much stronger than the thin sheet metal that was used in the recent decades.
Regarding the DH, as a big baseball fan my entire life, I have struggled with the DH rule, but only from a traditional standpoint. If you understand baseball, you know that it is difficult to be a good hitter if you only get 2 or 3 at bats every 5 days. Sure you lose the strategy of whether to pinch hit or let the pitcher hit in the middle of the game, but as a fan, I'm not involved in the decision making. It just leads to criticism when the decision backfires. I will say that I embraced the DH once I saw another benefit. Hank Aaron joined the Milwaukee Brewers when they were still in the American League late in his career and played as a DH mostly. It gave fans a chance to see the Home Run King and future HOFer play for 2 extra years. I think that is good for the sport.
I think one of the best major rule changes in sports was the addition of the three point line in basketball. For me, the biggest benefit is that smaller players with a skill set that is different from 7-foot centers can be influential in the game. Baseball is going in the opposite direction with the love of the home run through juiced baseballs. Smaller players with low power but with good contact ability are being overlooked today for hitters with power. That led to the defensive shift and now the banning of the shift. One problem created another problem, and so on.
Now for the soccer offsides rule. While watching many, many high school and club soccer games in recent years, I saw many questionable offsides calls, or lack thereof, by officials. The problem is that you have to see/hear two different things (ball kicked and player positioning) that could be as much as 30 yards apart from each other. But spending years discussing it with experienced soccer players, I realize there is no real good solution to the bad calls and that the strategy of offsides is a major part of the game. So I have come to live with it.
Now the restrictive arc under the basket is a similar dilemma for officials. The eyes must be on the feet as well as the body and hands of the defender at the same time. That's a tough call to make. And for the life of me, I don't understand the need for it. Player safety? Don't drive. And just because the arc is there doesn't mean a defender isn't there that could put the offensive player in jeopardy. Maybe he is willing to take the foul. Maybe the arc is reducing the number of defensive challenges to a drive and thus reducing potential injuries. But maybe there are now more drives and more fouls called because of the perceived arc protection. Could be a near wash for what is a difficult call for an official to make.
/
In case anyone is watching....USA v ENG
