http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AoeAMrS5MoW15gPv0Ba94kgRvLYF?slug=jp-bats052908&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Above is a recent story of a fan who has hit with a broken portion of a maple bat. From this story questions have been asked about how we can make ballparks safer. Should maple bats be banned? Should stadiums go to more precautions to protect fans? I have a real simple solution...
PAY ATTENTION. I am sorry but this sounds like another incident of a fan that was simply not paying attention during a ballgame. Fans have to recognize the risks that they are in with the seats that they select. The closer to the action you choose to sit, the more on your toes you have to be. Baseball gives plenty of time between innings for you to find other things to do. Stadiums are plastered with signs of "beware of objects leaving the field of play" and I assume fans can read, so fans have to recognize that when you are sitting behind the dugout you are putting yourself at risk. The speed at which a broken bat travels should give fans, at the very least, time to shield themselves. Unless of course they were caught up in other things. 90% of fans are normally able to dodge objects, it seems as though if action was taken you'd be punishing either the heavy majority of fans and organizations or the players themselves. Fans need to recognize their position on the field and what could potentially happen... just ask Steve Bartman.
A popular solution to this issue is ban maple bats, it's clear, it's concise, and it's reasonable. Well 2 out of 3 ain't bad. The fact is that players prefer maple bats or else they wouldn't have become as popular as they are. Players are under the impression that maple bats help performance and just that psychological edge could help hitters. It is true that maple will much more likely break than ash causing it to be more of a hazzard, but also they are more durable. While when cracked, maple are almost certain to break, ash bats have a higher probability of cracking. Send in the tree huggers because all more ash bats are going to do is require more wood. Also another advantage to maple to hitters is they don't have to buy so many new bats, which is probably another reason why the game is transitioning to them. It just seems as though you are punishing players for something that fans are adequately warned about.
Another solution may be creating more foul ground or having netting stretch out further. But then all you are accomplishing is forcing teams to put money towards stadium renovations and probably still have fans complaining on how they want to feel "closer to the action".
It would have been nice to see Dodgers have the decency to help her out with her medical bills. While it was not their responsibility, it would have been an act of good will. In light of this whole situation, by avoiding paying the bills the Dodgers have come off as the villians of the situation and I believe have just given more attention to the situation.
In all, I think the best solution is to recognize the risk and keep making fans blantantly aware of the risks they are in.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Trouble's Brewing...
The Milwaukee Brewers have been an utter disappointment thus far this season and the fans are starting to get a bit frustrated. Following the collaspe of last season fans have suddenly been crying for the job of Ned Yost. Despite getting their first winning season in 15 years fans were outraged by the last season fizzle. This season the trend has continued and the team continues to play mediocre ball. Changes are going to have to be made, decisions as well on the future of this team. So I get the chance to play GM and post what I believe the Brewers should do to clean up this rather messy start or at the very least help themselves for the future and it starts off with the bluntest move of all...
1. FIRE NED YOST. His complacent, almost arrogant, demeanor is only effective when the squad is performing well. That natural "things will work themselves out" persona that he gives out has gotten very old and dry. The young squad is simply not rallying around it and it seems to have almost carried over into the field with bone-headed defensive errors and head-scratching base running mistakes. Also many will tell you this team just doesn't look motivated at all in the field. Yost has made his fair share of crippling moves during a game, not bunting with pitchers up to bat in certain situations and then asking your 5th hitter to lie down a bunt. He has over used many of his relievers, throwing Gagne for two consecutive innings only to have him close out the 9th the following night. But the most disheartening thing about Yost is his stubbornness. While the offense was struggling he seems completely unwilling to shake things up. It took Eric Gagne saying he didn't deserve the closer's role anymore to make Yost encouraged to make a move. I am not normally one to put blame on a manager before players, but Yost has simply made numerous mistakes and clings to his beliefs even when things aren't going right.
2. DON'T BE AFRAID TO BE SELLERS AT THE DEADLINE. This one comes under the condition that things are still going sour. After the season the pitching staff is going to need quite a bit of remodeling, which isn't debatable. The Brewers have put themselves into a good situation at the deadline to become sellers at the deadline. They have many expiring contracts of players that you assume are not coming back and could get a decent lot in the way of young pitching for them. It seems as though the harsh truth has come to Brewers fans about Ben Sheets, after the season he will not be a Brewer any longer. Plenty of large market teams that are focused on making a run could give the Brewers a prospect laden deal that would be too good to pass up. Also, the market for RPs does seem to be overpaying for them. The Brewers could get a decent return Mota and Torres, and potentially get ANYTHING of value for Gagne. The offense is going to be the bread and butter of this team in the future, so selling off pitching right now may not be the worst thing in the world. Uprighting the team next year is going to center around the remodeling of the pitching staff anyway, because the formula right now simply isn't working.
3. JIM SKAALEN NEEDS TO BE FIRED. This isn't even a question. Coming into this season this was supposed to be one of the most exciting young offenses in the league. With only one offensive Brewer performing at a typical offensive production for them, the decision is pretty clear.
4. MOTA AND GAGNE NEED TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE. Admittedly, both Gagne and Mota both have good off speed pitches, they can not rely on those pitches 80% of the time or to get them ahead in counts. Each of these relievers have built a career on overpowering hitters to get ahead and then finishing them off with those offspeed pitches. Each of these relievers has fallen in love with their off speed pitches too much. For Gagne the results have been terrible, once he opens with that changeup he can't seem to put a soul away with it, he couldn't even strike out Andruw Jones for Christ Sake despite throwing him SEVERAL changeups.
While two and these four suggestions are out there include firings, that does not dismiss the lack of production from this squad. Mindless errors, base running mistakes, lack of offensive production, and an inability to move lead off baserunners are all problems that players should have on their shoulders. I am sure these changes are far off from happening but each one should be considered, a very defining series vs. the Houston Astros is coming up then another against the struggling Diamondbacks, if the Brewers come out of the rest of this homestand with a losing record I believe changes are inevitable, you can not keep sitting back and settling for mediocracy.
12 Year Old Girl Banned for Being too Good
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/8178466/Girl,-12,-told-she-can't-play-ball-with-boys
Many of you have probably heard the tale by now of the 12 year old girl, Jamie Nared, who happened to be banned from a local league for dominating. If not, I have included a link to the story so you can even enjoy more reading. The league had the audacity to pull out a mixed gender rule to get her to comply and naturally the media has completely run with it and turn this into a story of sexism.
Now, while I in no way condone the league's actions of pulling out a law that had no relation to the actual problem, both sides are equally guilty in this situation.
In plenty of various sports leagues children dominate the competition. I remember in my little league we had plenty children that would dominate their league. Thus the league would give them an opportunity to improve their game and compete at a higher level. I find it hard to believe higher competition leagues are not giving this girl a chance to play, this is indeed an out of school league we are talking about so you would have to believe some league would be jumping at the opportunity to bring this girl in even if just for the press alone. So why doesn't she move up? So her parents can play on her image, get her press, and amplify that she was better than the boys. If she is truly aspiring to improve her game she should be more than willing to take her game to another level, not continue to be a big fish in a little tank. While being banned from the league was unjust this girl should look to further opportunities and almost see this as a compliment that the league feels she should be playing with better competition.
On the other side, I am certain other children have attempted to protect their egos and have continued to dominate in their league while passing up the opportunity to actually get challenged (god forbid). To pull out this rule is indeed rather sexist, you are depriving her of her freedom of choice. Hopefully this girl isn't stymied by her gender from participating in future male basketball leagues.
Also, the argument that the boys play differently when a girl is on the court is really their own problem. Jamie herself has agreed to put herself on the court with boys, if they continue to get embarassed it is hard to believe pride would not kick in to get them to elevate their game. Which brings up the other side of the argument, but having an overpowering player such as this, it is a benefit to the boys to try and improve their game. But this was an enjoyable after school league, so I can maybe let that point slide and understand playing for enjoyment... in which case why would it matter if she was dominating?
My suggestion, set statistical boundaries that require children who are dominating to take their game to a more competitive league. I am sure the league did not want to turn this into an issue of gender and found it rather disheartening when they read headlines of a girl who ruled the boys was forced out of the game simply because she was a dominating female. Regardless this was a necessary move for the league no matter the gender of the player.
Many of you have probably heard the tale by now of the 12 year old girl, Jamie Nared, who happened to be banned from a local league for dominating. If not, I have included a link to the story so you can even enjoy more reading. The league had the audacity to pull out a mixed gender rule to get her to comply and naturally the media has completely run with it and turn this into a story of sexism.
Now, while I in no way condone the league's actions of pulling out a law that had no relation to the actual problem, both sides are equally guilty in this situation.
In plenty of various sports leagues children dominate the competition. I remember in my little league we had plenty children that would dominate their league. Thus the league would give them an opportunity to improve their game and compete at a higher level. I find it hard to believe higher competition leagues are not giving this girl a chance to play, this is indeed an out of school league we are talking about so you would have to believe some league would be jumping at the opportunity to bring this girl in even if just for the press alone. So why doesn't she move up? So her parents can play on her image, get her press, and amplify that she was better than the boys. If she is truly aspiring to improve her game she should be more than willing to take her game to another level, not continue to be a big fish in a little tank. While being banned from the league was unjust this girl should look to further opportunities and almost see this as a compliment that the league feels she should be playing with better competition.
On the other side, I am certain other children have attempted to protect their egos and have continued to dominate in their league while passing up the opportunity to actually get challenged (god forbid). To pull out this rule is indeed rather sexist, you are depriving her of her freedom of choice. Hopefully this girl isn't stymied by her gender from participating in future male basketball leagues.
Also, the argument that the boys play differently when a girl is on the court is really their own problem. Jamie herself has agreed to put herself on the court with boys, if they continue to get embarassed it is hard to believe pride would not kick in to get them to elevate their game. Which brings up the other side of the argument, but having an overpowering player such as this, it is a benefit to the boys to try and improve their game. But this was an enjoyable after school league, so I can maybe let that point slide and understand playing for enjoyment... in which case why would it matter if she was dominating?
My suggestion, set statistical boundaries that require children who are dominating to take their game to a more competitive league. I am sure the league did not want to turn this into an issue of gender and found it rather disheartening when they read headlines of a girl who ruled the boys was forced out of the game simply because she was a dominating female. Regardless this was a necessary move for the league no matter the gender of the player.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)