Welcome to DBSTalk
Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
- Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
- Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
- Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
- Customize your profile page and make new friends
Guest Message by DevFuse
DH vs. Pitchers Batting
1 reply to this topic
Posted 22 February 2002 - 11:25 PM
I personally don’t know why people make a fuss over this rule. I like the variety and believe that it keeps baseball exciting in both leagues.
Buy if I had a preference, without a doubt, I would easily take the DH. I find that it is an embarrassment to have the pitcher up at bat. The pitcher is paid to pitch, hence the word pitcher. He is too valuable to have at the plate trying to hit the ball and running the bases. Wouldn’t it be a sin for your best pitcher to hurt himself while trying to run the bases or up at bat?
Plus looking at some of the pitchers trying to bat is just plain horrible! It is an automatic out in baseball where the pitchers don’t even try to get a hit if no one is on base with two outs. Randy Johnson is a prime example of how bad this looks! It seems as though the pitchers don’t even want to be up when it is their turn.
Well you can argue this both ways but the way that I look at this is to imagine it this way.
Pretend that baseball when it first started long ago used the DH rule instead of having the pitcher at bat. And also pretend that the pitcher having to bat rule just came about within the last 20 years (Kind of reversing the history). It would be absolutely crazy to have the DH rule for the first 100 years and then all of a sudden having the pitchers come in to hit. People would start to say that the game has lost its appeal and has turned into a boring strategy. It makes sense to have pitchers and batters.
Now I feel that most of the people who are opposed to the DH rule are coming from two perspectives. Either they are National league fan or they are traditionalist. They can’t stand the rules changing and believe it disrupts the game. Once a new way of playing baseball occurs, they start to freak out.
If you really think about it, you have pitchers and batters. Not pitchers, batters, batter/pitchers and pitcher/batters. There really isn’t any purpose in having a pitcher at bat. Just my thoughts.
||...Ads Help To Support This Site...||
Posted 23 February 2002 - 06:55 PM
I'm not sure if you want a reply or not!
I only know MLB one way - and that's with a DH in one of the leagues. I know the history and the why's and why not's. On TV, I don't think it makes a difference to me (maybe because I watch lots of games at once?). I've spent many more days at a AL park then a NL park, but I also spent time and lots of days at NL AAA parks in Norfolk and Phoenix when the minor league pitchers still batted at the home ballparks (not sure if that is still the rule or not). I find at the games, that it's more exciting to watch the pitchers bat and the stragedies around it with pinch-hitting and moving people in the lineup then seeing a DH batting. If your DH sucks in the middle of the lineup then you are in t-r-o-u-b-l-e (see Angels press guides since Reggie). DH adds more power, but I like the pitchers batting. It cuts down on the brawls these days. Some of my favorite baseball memories are with the BIG D brushing people back and the stories he used to tell.