Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: TABLE SETTER 11, hovde; 58 anonymousDiscussion: 1-1 count? Playing Devil's advocate
| Posted | Discussion |
| Oct. 21, 2014 OZ40 549 posts | 1-1 count? Playing Devil's advocate Okay, the best way to eliminate the 1 & 1 count bickering is for pitchers to throw 3 strikes in a row to each and every batter period. Okay, so pitchers want to throw teaser pitches to try and get the hitters to nibble on a questionable pitch. That's what pitchers do, it's their job and you don't want your pitcher throwing cherries to batters so your team puts up with these waste pitches, it's part of the game. Besides, many pitchers can't throw 3 strikes in a row to every batter, even if only because of wind and weather conditions. Why shouldn't the batter,(trying to help his or her team), be afforded the choice of pitch selection? Getting hits is their job. As a hitter,in those same wind and weather conditions wouldn't you like the option of pitch selection when that dancing knuckle ball that looks like a borderline strike comes your way? There are multiple chances to save time during a game. Pre game-time coin flips and rule explanations, actually hustling on and off the field after three outs, knowing when a runner will be needed and having that pinch runner ready to go, previous teams exiting the dugout quickly when their game is over AND, if you're going to tell players to take some BP and get better at the plate bear in mind that maybe those innings wouldn't be as long without the fielding errors, so take some ground ball practice. It will all come out in the wash folks. |
| Oct. 21, 2014 ChiPrimeMarty Men's 60 104 posts | OZ40 asked: "Why shouldn't the batter,(trying to help his or her team), be afforded the choice of pitch selection?" The batter is afforded that choice whether the count starts at 1-1 or 0-0. You have the choice to swing or not swing, and that is based on the hitter's judgment of the pitch. This is already such a hitter's game with a strike mat (eliminates a big variable of what is or isn't a strike), senior bats that turn warning-track outs into homers, and senior defenders who aren't as fast as they used to be. On top of all that you want extra opportunities to wait for a big fat meatball to hit? I like the 1-1 count because that's what I've been playing in all my local leagues for decades, because I think it's a more competitive dynamic between pitcher & hitter which makes the game better, because there is too much downtime for all the other defenders watching batters take pitches, and also because the 1-1 count reduces the number of time-shortened games. All the other ways to speed up the game are separate issues that may or may not be acted upon regardless of whether the 1-1 count is adopted for the Senior game (which I've played for 8 years now). I understand that hitters want every opportunity to swing at the perfect pitch with the hottest bat, and that's why we still have extra pitches in Senior slowpitch softball. But that doesn't make it good for the game. |
| Oct. 21, 2014 OZ40 549 posts | It's certainly true, hitters want every opportunity to hit "their" pitch. But, it's certainly not as if every player in every game in every tournament is extending the count down to the last pitch in every at-bat. I know many players who are first or second pitch swingers and that's their choice so as stated before, it all comes out in the wash. Softball games are like fingerprints in that there are no 2 games alike. One on field disscussion or arguement uses up more time than using a full count. This 1-1 count disscussion that has gone on ad-nauseum for years is not the reason that a percentage of the games are not being completed. |
| Oct. 21, 2014 ChiPrimeMarty Men's 60 104 posts | I don't think anyone has asserted or implied that "every player in every game in every tournament is extending the count down to the last pitch in every at-bat." That's an all-or-nothing argument that misses the bottom line, which is that overall more time is spent watching batters take more pitches with a 0-0 count as opposed to 1-1. I don't think anyone can honestly dispute that. All other factors being equal, the 0-0 count slows down the game and results in fewer 7-iining games. As I said before, all other potential means to speed up the game are separate issues that may or may not be acted upon. Are you proposing a new rule in which players/coaches are not allowed to have discussions and argue a call, or do you think players/coaches will voluntarily desist in order to speed up the game? Also, as I said before, regardless of whether the game goes 7 innings or not I think the dynamic between hitter & pitcher and the game itself is better with a 1-1 count. I've been a pitcher but I'm an outfielder these days and it's my experience the rhythm of the game suffers when defenders stand around watching batters take more pitches. And it tips the balance even more in favor of the offense. Of course, that's my opinion, but I'm hoping it will be food for thought. Not opinion, but fact: The game is slowed down with a 1-1 count. |
| Oct. 21, 2014 ChiPrimeMarty Men's 60 104 posts | oops ... that should read: The game is slowed down with a 0-0 count. |
| Oct. 22, 2014 OZ40 549 posts | No, I'm not proposing any rule changes at all, especially a managers ability to question a call. I'm illustrating that many things "slow down" a game including injuries. If I mentioned injuries before I wouldn't want it taken that I am proposing a rule to ban injuries.....As players, we are all paying the same entry fees, bat prices, equipment costs, travel and lodging expenses, etc. When we take to the diamond it would be nice to take a step back and enjoy playing a game whatever the outcome without being under the gun with playing a full 7 as the tantamount goal. I think we all have played less than 7 inning games that we more fulfulling than some "complete" games. |
| Oct. 22, 2014 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Although I like 1-1 myself, it's not going to change soon. But, going where the thread has gone, one easy way to add some time is rarely taken advantage of. As soon as the flip is completed, the umpire starts the clock, WITH 2 EXTRA MINUTES ON IT. I almost never see teams on the field and ready to go in that 2 minutes and time is lost, sometimes up to 3-5 minutes. Courtesy runners consume way too much time. Someone should be designated to have a runner ready when a batter you know needs one comes to the plate. BTW, I like your idea of a ban on injuries, OZ40. That would save us a lot of pain! |
| Oct. 22, 2014 rh25 Men's 70 29 posts | The main thing that slows games down is courtesy runners. If you really want to speed games up that is the first issue that should be looked at. I played on a team in the past that ran like crazy even for guys who didn't need it and seldom played a 7 inning game. |
| Oct. 22, 2014 Garocket Men's 55 259 posts | The one one count is better for the batter than you might think. I pitch and I can almost gaurantee you that I am going to throw 1 waste pitch per batter with 4 balls to work with and sometimes 2 |
| Oct. 22, 2014 OZ40 549 posts | Lots of good points. Whether you like the full count or not and even if you rarely take a count to full, it's like having that 9mm tucked in your waistband (I visit downtown Detroit) it's nice to know it's there if you need it. |
| Oct. 22, 2014 stick8 1991 posts | OZ you bad boy you!! lol Welcome to the board. |
| Oct. 23, 2014 OZ40 549 posts | I know I've arrived when a hall of famer posts a greeting. Get up Stickman! |
| Oct. 23, 2014 DCPete 409 posts | Would like to see a rule that Courtesy Runners can only be inserted before the 1st pitch to the next batter. |
| Oct. 24, 2014 stick8 1991 posts | Get up one time OZ!! I'm no one special, just a remarkably sub-average senior softball player. Ahhhhhhhh!! |
