baseball nets foul pole to foul pole

[brandx]

Survived the beach today...the risk of the water, sand, sharks, riptide, etc.  Maybe because we were paying attention.

What does that have to do with a line shot over the dugout giving you less than 1 second to react.

Yor cowardly little a$$ wouldn't get within 50 miles of the ocean if you had less than 1 second to react to any life threatening danger in the water or on the beach.

But as usual, you act like a 5-year old and carry every argument to an idiotic extreme.

[brandx]

I take a baseball trip every year and try to sit behind the dugout on the shade side of the field.  My wife tags along (in return for her owning the itinerary for most of the vacation).  I tell her she has to be alert whenever a right hander is hitting when we are on the first base side and a lefty on the third base side.

And if a shot was hit directly at your wife's head, she would have less than one second to react. Hopefully you have good insurance.

[buckchuckler]

People on their phones is half the problem here as well I think. 

[CTWarrior]

And if a shot was hit directly at your wife's head, she would have less than one second to react. Hopefully you have good insurance.

I'm starting to think Chico's is right.  I do not have the slightest worry about this while attending baseball games.  Pay attention and you lower your odds of getting hit from 1 in million to 1 in a billion.  Of course I am making those numbers up, but the odds of getting hit and hurt are infintessimal and not worth worrying about beyond watching the game.

[brandx]

I'm starting to think Chico's is right.  I do not have the slightest worry about this while attending baseball games.  Pay attention and you lower your odds of getting hit from 1 in million to 1 in a billion.  Of course I am making those numbers up, but the odds of getting hit and hurt are infintessimal and not worth worrying about beyond watching the game.

I don't worry about it either. But then I played ball all of my life. I would have no trouble reacting.

But if a shot was hit at your wife or your child, they would not be able to react as you or I would - even if they were paying attention.

[Pakuni]

I'm starting to think Chico's is right.  I do not have the slightest worry about this while attending baseball games.  Pay attention and you lower your odds of getting hit from 1 in million to 1 in a billion.  Of course I am making those numbers up, but the odds of getting hit and hurt are infintessimal and not worth worrying about beyond watching the game.

Do we have any evidence that the people who have been hit/injured weren't paying attention?

Also, it's more like a 1 in 42,000 chance, according to a Bloomberg analysis.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-09/baseball-caught-looking-as-fouls-injure-1750-fans-a-year

[brandx]

Do we have any evidence that the people who have been hit/injured weren't paying attention?

Also, it's more like a 1 in 42,000 chance, according to a Bloomberg analysis.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-09/baseball-caught-looking-as-fouls-injure-1750-fans-a-year

And there are more and better fastball pitchers throwing at 95 mph+ than at any time in baseball history. Which means more foul balls of this type.

[tower912]

Witnessed a small child get hit in the head.  Midwest League game, foul ball down the left field line, behind the visiting team's bullpen, grass covered hill, father saw the ball, jumped up for it, missed it, it hit his young child in the head and ricocheted 30 ft in the opposite direction.    Nets are coming.

[reinko]

Witnessed a small child get hit in the head.  Midwest League game, foul ball down the left field line, behind the visiting team's bullpen, grass covered hill, father saw the ball, jumped up for it, missed it, it hit his young child in the head and ricocheted 30 ft in the opposite direction.    Nets are coming.

That small child either A: was not paying attention, so it's his fault. B: His dad was too slow to react, and it's his fault.  Wussification of America.  Man I wish it was 1960 all over again, life was so much better back then.

[GGGG]

I'm starting to think Chico's is right.  I do not have the slightest worry about this while attending baseball games.  Pay attention and you lower your odds of getting hit from 1 in million to 1 in a billion.  Of course I am making those numbers up, but the odds of getting hit and hurt are infintessimal and not worth worrying about beyond watching the game.

I am trying to think of an entertainment event in today's society that requires you to pay attention for 200-250 separate instances, over the course of three hours, at the risk of serious injury.  (Even though that risk is relatively minimal.)  Especially when the venue engages in a bunch of activity to ensure that you aren't always paying attention. 

[real chili 83]

But if you eliminated the young, attractive women not paying attention to the game from Wrigley Field, then what would the Cubs broadcast show between pitches, between batters, during warmup pitches, before cutting to commercial, coming back from commercial, in the bumpers, visits to the mound, during the stretch, after the stretch, while a foul ball slices out of play, while there's a streaker on the field, while there's a squirrel on the field, while the pope is on the field, during replays, during rain delays, during brawls, and randomly while the ball is in play?  Cubs fans would actually have to watch a baseball game, and that's just cruel.

I miss Arnie Harris.

A *few* years ago, Barry Foote busted a window in an apartment on Waveland.  What if a young mother was in that room nursing her 7 week old baby at that exact time? Huh, huh?

Dave Kingman almost took out Ronnie Woo Woo in the 3rd inning against the Phillies.  Huh, huh?

They should put Wrigley in a bubble to protect Chicago. 

[Vander Blue Man Group]

I miss Arnie Harris.

A *few* years ago, Barry Foote busted a window in an apartment on Waveland.  What if a young mother was in that room nursing her 7 week old baby at that exact time? Huh, huh?

Dave Kingman almost took out Ronnie Woo Woo in the 3rd inning against the Phillies.  Huh, huh?

They should put Wrigley in a bubble to protect Chicago.

Too bad Kingman missed.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'm starting to think Chico's is right.  I do not have the slightest worry about this while attending baseball games.  Pay attention and you lower your odds of getting hit from 1 in million to 1 in a billion.  Of course I am making those numbers up, but the odds of getting hit and hurt are infintessimal and not worth worrying about beyond watching the game.

Exactly.  Besides, my wife would use her beer to snag the ball.  She's a bad ass, high school athlete....unfortunately has gone through some longer term illnesses the last decade, but she'd do just fine. 

Pay attention is the key.   I'd bet a ton of money if there was video of the people being hit, I'd bet 95% of them were not paying attention.  Looking the other way, talking to a friend, looking at the phone, or just spacing out.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

I am trying to think of an entertainment event in today's society that requires you to pay attention for 200-250 separate instances, over the course of three hours, at the risk of serious injury.  (Even though that risk is relatively minimal.)  Especially when the venue engages in a bunch of activity to ensure that you aren't always paying attention.

Sultan, in all honesty next time you go to a game look at what is going on between pitches.  There are audible sounds like the sound effects, but no pyrotechnics, nothing moving on the scoreboard, etc.  This is on purpose.  Sure, there's stuff on the scoreboard to read, but that doesn't change during the same batter except the count. 

We are able to go to the movies just fine, watch all of it while paying attention.  Or watch our kids in the ocean or pool.

You want to know the problem, it isn't the 200 to 250 instances, it is that baseball is very boring to many people who don't understand the game.  That's ok, I don't blame them, but so many casual fans that get bored easily.  If there were high speed car chases going on, or whatever people get honed in on, they would have no problem. It's the nature of the game, but that doesn't make it right to change 100+ years of baseball over the remote chance you could get hit because you can't pay attention.  That's on the customer.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I think this is going to happen.  They will probably extend from dugout to dugout (I really don't think there is need to go any farther than that) people will be pissed at first, then realize it doesn't make much difference or they will get acclimated to it and it won't be a big deal.

If they go dugout to dugout, it wouldn't be horrible but certainly not ideal.  Still overkill, but I suspect some people could get behind it.  It's the bedwetters that want it foul pole to foul pole.   I wouldn't love it dugout to dugout, but it would be palatable.  Only downside is the fan interaction with the players right now when they toss balls into the crowd, which has been going on forever.  That would be lost, and a shame.

[MUsoxfan]

Exactly.  Besides, my wife would use her beer to snag the ball.  She's a bad ass, high school athlete....unfortunately has gone through some longer term illnesses the last decade, but she'd do just fine. 

Pay attention is the key.   I'd bet a ton of money if there was video of the people being hit, I'd bet 95% of them were not paying attention.  Looking the other way, talking to a friend, looking at the phone, or just spacing out.

I agree with you for the most part on the way it should be and it will sadden me when  the nets are extended just as I was saddened when the nets went up in the NHL

Unfortunately, baseball isn't an overly exciting game and we live in a society where children that are barely able to talk are pacified by being given smartphones to play with.

Swing and a miss for technology in this regard

[ChicosBailBonds]

I agree with you for the most part on the way it should be and it will sadden me when  the nets are extended just as I was saddened when the nets went up in the NHL

Unfortunately, baseball isn't an overly exciting game and we live in a society where children that are barely able to talk are pacified by being given smartphones to play with.

Swing and a miss for technology in this regard

According to Tower and Brandx, you must be anti-safety....clearly I am.   

[Pakuni]

I agree with you for the most part on the way it should be and it will sadden me when  the nets are extended just as I was saddened when the nets went up in the NHL

Weird.
I was saddened when a little girl died because there were no nets despite an all-too-obvious (to anyone who's actually attended an NHL game) safety hazard.

[GGGG]

Weird.
I was saddened when a little girl died because there were no nets despite an all-too-obvious (to anyone who's actually attended an NHL game) safety hazard.

One death in the league's history and they put up a net.  No one was whining about history, tradition or the pussification of America.  Now most people accept it for what it is.

But of course with baseball there is this need to worry about tradition somehow being more important than fan safety.  Very odd.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Weird.
I was saddened when a little girl died because there were no nets despite an all-too-obvious (to anyone who's actually attended an NHL game) safety hazard.

I was saddened by the little girl dying also....just as I'm saddened by all the little girls and boys dying every day that aren't protected by a net, but just sitting there sucking their thumb, chillin, waiting for the big day.

[MUsoxfan]

Weird.
I was saddened when a little girl died because there were no nets despite an all-too-obvious (to anyone who's actually attended an NHL game) safety hazard.

I'm with you on this. I was really bummed out when the nets went up, but it took me all of like 2 games to get used to it and forget they were there

[ChicosBailBonds]

One death in the league's history and they put up a net.  No one was whining about history, tradition or the pussification of America.  Now most people accept it for what it is.

But of course with baseball there is this need to worry about tradition somehow being more important than fan safety.  Very odd.

Very poor analogy.  Extremely poor.

There wasn't an massive onslaught against the nets in NHL, despite what a few of you here want to state.  In hockey, the puck moves very fast from one player to another, can be deflected, and it is black (hard to see).  The puck also has sharp edges.  A puck is also extremely hard.  Hockey is played with the lights down in many arenas (ice is lit, fans have lights lowered...making it harder to see).  In fact, the young girl who died in Columbus died when a slapshot was deflected by a defenseman and changed the trajectory of the shot.

Baseball is a S L O W game.  Despite that, nets have been up since the 1890's in baseball.  The nets are ALREADY THERE.  In baseball, the foul ball can only come from one place...the batter.  Watch the batter, you know where the ball is coming from.  It is also white.  It is also round, with no edges.  It is also softer than a puck.  You still have day games, and night games the stands are lit every bit as much as the field (not the case for hockey).  On average there are 48 foul balls per game that reach the stands.  Despite that number multiplied by all the games played (162) by all the teams, over 100+ years there has been ONE person killed at the MLB level by a foul ball.  ONE.

In hockey, there are only 80 games, and on average only 12 pucks are used per NHL game.  Did you know there have been games that used one puck? It's been awhile, 1979....check it out at the NHL Hall of Fame.  There were many fewer teams playing in the NHL the last 100 years than the MLB, and many many many fewer games.   Yet the injuries were higher for fans in hockey.

It comes down to rates of injury.  No one is against safety, but at what cost to the experience and the game?  When is it overkill?  Statistically speaking, foul pole to foul pole is a bedwetter pussification example if I have ever seen one.  Beyond ridiculous and the comparison to the NHL nets, equally ridiculous.  MLB already has nets behind the batter which is equivalent high level action that are placed for the NHL games. 

Very poor comparison, on all levels.  The ball, the puck, how the game is played, the action, and the incidents.

[GGGG]

LOL.

When your defense of nets in the NHL versus MLB contains the phrase "It is also softer than a puck," it is a poor comparison.  The fact is those white, edgeless, "softer" baseballs can do great bodily harm.  And I would rather have people be safer and not really worry about "the cost to the experience of the game."

And I have never said I want nets foul pole to foul pole.  I would like them to be reasonably extended to prevent injuries where the most serious instances have occurred.  And I think that will happen.

[MUsoxfan]

Apparently two different projectiles being jettisoned into crowds off of sticks by world-class athletes is an apples to oranges comparison. Who knew...

[ChicosBailBonds]

LOL.

When your defense of nets in the NHL versus MLB contains the phrase "It is also softer than a puck," it is a poor comparison.  The fact is those white, edgeless, "softer" baseballs can do great bodily harm.  And I would rather have people be safer and not really worry about "the cost to the experience of the game."

And I have never said I want nets foul pole to foul pole.  I would like them to be reasonably extended to prevent injuries where the most serious instances have occurred.  And I think that will happen.

Ignore all the facts you wish.  The hardness of the object absolutely matters, but feel free to throw that one out.  Comparing a puck to a baseball is a joke.  Comparing the game of hockey to baseball, is a joke.  The way the game is lit.  Where the action is coming from.  Etc, etc.  Enormous fallacy on your part and Pakuni's and easily taken apart.  A ten year old could do it.

And I never said I wasn't against extending the nets slightly, but the topic of this thread was about extending the nets from foul pole to foul pole, which is what a lot of bedwetters want to do.  It is RIDICULOUS to do that.  We haven't even gotten into the aspect how it changes the game itself by not allowing players to catch foul balls.