0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
I can see why there would be hesitation since the Jays and Nats will have no more games against each other after today (unlike the Yankees and Orioles who can move a future matchup around), but nothing is going according to plan anyways this season.Playing the Phillies this weekend and switching a future Phillies date around with the Marlins would work, but yeah... I don't know if you want to expose Nats players to that risk. At least until you are certain that the infection was only to those 3 staff members (including visitor locker room attendant from before).
Yeah I understand it would mess with the scheduling, but I think it is unrealistic at this point to think any team is going to play exactly the 60 games it has scheduled. Everyone should focus on just trying to get to 60 however they can while staying healthy.
I'd say move Tor @ PHI here, but it is Toronto's home park so the Phillies might object.As for the two staffers who were positive, wanna guess if they are clubhouse attendants who were working in the visiting clubhouse when Miami was in town?
To address the concern about coaches, who are more vulnerable because of age, it seems simple to me: eliminate them from the game. Players can coach first and third, and for that matter, manage the team.
I think the extra inning rule is ok. Brings a lot more strategy into it than I would have thought. It's probably a more legitimate tie breaker than position players pitching in the 17th inning.I do really hate the DH as much as I thought I did. Bench players are now almost pointless, and it's all about the home runs.
I really failed at keeping up with the off-season, what is the new extra innings rule? And am I correct in assuming that the new baseball-wide DH is permanent?
they don't say the dh is permanent, but there's suspicion they want it to be. Whoever "they" are.
players coaching 1st and 3d might work. As for manager / bench coach / pitching coach, maybe they could work via tablets, cell phones, etc..., except in Houston.
I hated the runner on second at first but I'm starting to really like it. Like you, nfotiu, I'm surprised at how much strategy it adds (at least at first). Big advantage to being home team, also.
I'd start the 10th with a runner on 1st. Then start any subsequent innings with a runner on 2nd. With the three batter minimums it just seems like too much change.Although, it did make last night much more exciting.
Wait. They are trying to make the probable double headers each 7 innings only?https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/1288987551638970368?s=20ThreadSee new TweetsTweetJeff Passan@JeffPassan·9mMajor League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have agreed to stage seven-inning doubleheaders starting Aug. 1, sources familiar with the situation tell ESPN.
FFS. This isn’t even baseball anymore.
So do you start the 8th inning in a tied 7 inning game with a runner on second, or do you call it a tie?
The next Passan tweet says runner on second starting in the 8th.