A double with no-one on base doesn't have the same impact as a double with the bases loaded. Not all at-bats are equal. That's not a conclusive argument
Pinch hitter and runners are sort of the same idea. Such a big difference whether that player subbed is in the game already or sitting on the bench (sarcasm)
we need to come to grips with the fact that the people who come up with these rules actually hate the sport. This is just another form of money grab for them. The most valuable hit in the entire history of baseball was by a relatively-unknown catcher named Hal Smith, who played at a time when there was another catcher named Hal Smith. That's what makes this sport so incredible.
Yes! My first thought about the Golden At-Bat rule was that it deprives us of the opportunity to see a .223 hitter turning a game around in the most unlikely way. As to the reply from @@JustMeELC I agree that Rob Manfred is ruining the game worse than Bud Selig, which was a pretty high bar to clear.
Agree 100%. They are trying to destroy the game of baseball with these crazy rules. Ghost runners in extra innings, three batter minimum when bringing in a reliever, can't take out the second baseman or shortstop when sliding into 2nd base, can't take out the catcher on a play at home, pitch clock and now this golden at bat BS.
I respect your take but a money grab could only happen if the fans watched the sport and if their making more money from the rule that means more eyes have been put on the sport and that’s what you want as a fan to see your sport have a billion fans one day I think this rule could get baseball closer to that think about soccer players and NFL players they get crazy views yet Baseball players get more money than them yet no one outside of diehard fans haven’t even seen their face before but if the sports biggest stars had an opportunity to score big every game the sport could change for the best but I definitely see your point of view but hear me out World Series game two final inning imagine if they could’ve put Soto instead of Trevino we could’ve seen two grand slams in the World Series back to back it would’ve definitely been more thrilling
@@rimurutempest1646 anyone who understands baseball knows the "golden at bat" would be a flop. Even the biggest stars make outs 65-70% of the time. It's just making a joke out of the sport. Why not just have 9 hitters and 9 fielders and no connection between them? Would that be better if it brought in more fans?
@@venalleader2909Everybody did after they came through in the clutch. One of the best parts about baseball is that the person you least expect can be the hero of the game. That’s what makes the sport better than Basketball or Football.
Part of what makes baseball great is that it’s “Americas past time” it’s a very traditional sport that’s been passed down from generation to generation. It’s more than a game, it’s a culture. All these rule changes take away the historical and nostalgic aesthetic that is baseball.
Absolutely, they are destroying one of their biggest selling points. I'm fine with the pitch clock because the amount of time some guys were taking really took the piss, but banning the shift (i.e. mandating where players have to stand), universal DH, potentially messing with the batting order? That's all way too far and destroys what makes baseball so unique in the first place - that you are watching fundamentally the same game today that was played 100 years ago.
Don't ask me what I think...I'm still salty with the NL adding the DH. Part of the strategy of baseball is planning around lineups, and part of the excitement is watching the triple A call-up who's due up nail a walk-off home run. That's what's exciting about baseball. This golden at bat might be fun for the fans of one team, but also is an expletive-filled eye-roll for the fans of the opposing team. Why don't we just go back to the days where the batter could request what type of pitch they wanted? Forcing the pitcher to throw a fastball down the middle might make things more exciting too, right?
@@JackKnoxx that's your opinion. Last I checked there was some Japanese pitcher who apparently is a pretty good hitter too. Game needs more two way players.
@@JackKnoxxThink of all the great moments that happened with a pitcher hitting. The relief pitcher who hit the home run in Atlanta when Jon Sterling was shocked, the Bartolo Colon home run, or Max Scherzer complaining about how lucky his teammates were getting. The NL DH took away so much strategy from baseball, and it took away future hilarious pitchers hitting moments.
This is absolute BS. I'm all for rule changes and evolution -- bring on the robo-umps, make fair-or-foul electronic, hell make it so they have to run clockwise around the bases every other inning just to mix it up. But this is would break one of the fundamental aspects of the game: batting order. Why not allow one roster addition in the middle of the game? Baseball means being stuck with your roster and batting order and having to deal with it. Worst idea I've ever heard.
Lol its EdwardCurrent! Checkmated any Atheists lately? :D P.S. I like watching you dismantle truthers in the comments section of your Building 7 videos.
Teams should have to build rallies! If your best hitter is due up 5th in the inning, you had better get on base!
19 часов назад+11
I hate it. The Bucky Dent HR would not have happened with this horrible rule. Plus, Trout vs. Ohtani would no longer be special if it happened every day.
Michael Kay brought up doing something almost exactly like this towards the end of last season. Not a coincidence the example was a yankees game. This is a straight up gimmick. Freddy and Joe both nailed it with their takes.
Why not just take on all the Savanah Bananas Ball?! WTF? This is Manfred taking a page out of the another horrible commish in the NFL, "We need scoring up" so they do dumb stuff like making incomplete passes illegal so we have more points. Like its exciting to watch the refs tell us why the teams are walking down the field. It ruined the game for fans of the game in order to attract people who are not fans. It makes no sense to change your game that people love, for people who will never like it.
I refuse to watch any thing regarding the Savanna Bananas. What a travesty they make of the game of baseball. If Manfred the Wonder Dork thinks this type of thing is good for the game he has totally lost me. He needs to concentrate on why the Dodgers can get away with deferring the majority of Ohtani’s contract so they can load up now on other overpaid players. Bowie Kuhn would have tossed that contract ASAP, and I was no Bowie Kuhn fan.
Yes, for sure! While we are at it....if you are batting under .200 you get 4 strikes but the second baseman can only throw to first underhanded. And if 6 lefty batters bat in a row the other team gets a run.
Let’s also implement a GOLDEN TEE rule. Every team has ONE golden opportunity to literally put a little league Tee on home plate every game to make it easier to hit a homer. But WATCH OUT - you only get one opportunity per game!
I really don’t like this, because as someone else in the comments section has said it’s exciting when a non superstar gets a crucial hit. For example Jim leyritz hitting a walk-off home run in game 2 of the 1995 ALDS
@@JustMeELCThe Commissioner of MLB has a l w a y s worked for the owners exclusively, but in the past there was the pretext of magnanimity. This rule is full-on assclownery and they are turning the National Pastime into a 10th-rate carnival. The cabal is hell-bent on alienating lifelong fans, the same corporate gangsterism that characterized the Astros’ rise to prominence. On behalf of The Game: BARF.🤮
There are very few rule changes by MLB that I have liked. The rules to protect players from dirty slides (or collisions at home) is about the only change that I have liked. I don't see any need to ban the shift, for a pitch clock, to limit throws to first base, for the designated hitter, for multiple wildcards, etc. They have done a great job making me lose interest in baseball.
No, no, no, no, no. This will ruin baseball. We have enough exciting moments in the game that come back "organically." We don't need to play around with it. PLEASE don't let this happen!
This feeels like NASCAR creating a single race championship format for the "game 7" moment. The specialness of that "game 7" moment wore off after a few years
As far as drama, look at Game 3 of the ALCS. A rookie, Jhonkensy Noel, is sent in to pinch hit with 2 outs and hits a home run to tie the game. Would that moment have been as dramatic and memorable if it had been Jose Ramirez. Sometimes, those moments are remembered because that guy who can't bat his weight comes through with a clutch hit.
That sounds effing lame to me. I’m not against rule changes in general, but this one sucks. What a cheesy gimmick. Let the Savanna Bannanas keep that childishness.
How about starting in the 10th inning, you start with the bases loaded and can bat any players you want, any order you want, but the same batter can’t bat consecutively, unless it’s a Tuesday?
I hear Manfred also wants to have something called the Red Circle. A red circle will be set up on top of the the fence in the deepest part of the outfield in every park. It’ll be 15 feet in diameter and if a batter hits it for a home run, then an extra three runs will be added on top of the home run’s original total. Some are already calling it the 3 Point Circle.
Flat out stupid. First it's one "Golden At-Bat", then its 2, 3... 5. What they need to do is add another 5 seconds to the pitch clock. 1/2 the players coming up to bat look rushed.
Absolutely not!! If you want that kind of garbage, go watch banana ball. Manfred is a disgrace as a commish and will go down in the history of the game as the absolute worst!
@@ronaldwayne7092 I didn't say it was the exact same thing. it's the same concept. just slightly different players. guys off the bench can pinch hit. But it's completely different if it's guys on the lineup?
I think we are all getting punk'd. Nobody is considering this. I suggest to Manfred...let's say, your in a a bit of a pinch, a batter is up who doesn't do well against the current pitcher, you can have a different guy bat for that guy, but only if they haven't played in the game yet. How's that for a new rule? Not sure what you would call that batter. I'd call him a relief batter. The other team could replace the pitcher, too. I'd call that a "pinch" pitcher. I think this would be great for the sport.
That would be the end of baseball for me. Just make every game a HR hitting contest. Get a commissioner that actually likes the game not just trying to attract 20 somethings to watch.
Not a fan at all. It prevents a player from having a "clutch" moment which could change their career. If Juan Soto gets a game winning hit no surprise. But if the rookie gets that hit it changes history
Hello Jesse Cole? How's that Golden At-Bat working for you? It's just awesome! Banana Ball possibly impacts MLB....very cool! Let's add in foul balls caught by a fan is an out. LOL
It is hard to think of a worse idea. Madden's critique was spot on, point by point. And no, nobody cares if Steph Curry takes the last shot in a game in Sacramento in December.
I gave up on the MLB "improvements" with the designated hitter! Now you have bigger bases, runners on second in extra innings, robo balls and strikes coming? I'll stay home and give up on the MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA. Results are fixed to the benefit the ownership mobs! Maybe the opposition can pick the next hitter?
I've got a different rule I'd like to see, one that would give good hitters better at bats. It's a fix for intentional walks. It would, I think, be better than the automatic intentional walk, although it could be combined with it... make pitchers pitch to batters by making it so any 4 pitch walk puts the batter on 2nd instead of 1st. The logic for it is basically it forces the pitcher to get at least one strike. That means the hitter gets at least one decent pitch in most situations. Runner on second and a great hitter up? You don't intentionally walk him because it pushes the runner to third and it doesn't set up the double play. If you do get that one strike? Well, now you are just two strikes away, so maybe you go after them. It also puts more pressure on a pitcher who is struggling. If you fall behind 3-0 it's always a hitters count, but if the batter will get at least two bases with another ball? That creates new strategy. I don't even like the golden at bat for all star games. Think about it... you've got a bench full of all star hitters and you tell someone that you are sending up Ohtani or Judge instead of giving them an at bat. I agree that it kills the idea of team. Now, spring training... the games don't count and it's not a prestige situation. Maybe there it works. Sure, if you want to win you send up a Soto or a Judge, but maybe you want to see how your rookie responds in a high leverage situation. In spring training it actually creates some actual utility. Heck, in spring training do it once an inning. That lets you get more at bats for hitters you either want to evaluate or for hitters you think need a few more swings to get locked in.
Easy no from me, a cheap gimmick that threatens the integrity of the game. Another example: Golden Out Rule change: a team has the option once in a game to extend an inning by 1 out to 4 outs. 😂
I would like to see a rule that once you get to the 10th inning, possibly later, batters and defensive replacements can return once you run out, especially in the All Star game. Maybe you would have to put in players in the same order they exited. I really like this for catchers since the position is so specific and teams sometimes like to use the other catcher as the DH.
This might be the worst idea for a rule change I've personally ever heard floated out there for MLB. I wouldn't even want to see this in an ASG... HOWEVER, this sounds like a really fun idea for a slowpitch beer league, or the annual military softball tourney I play in that's solely for bragging rights (and also drinking beer) lol
Chasing short attentions with record nullifying changes to the game upsets everything. Being jealous of Banana-ball and its popularity, respectable and expected. The entertainment industry known as MLB needs a pick-me-up in the softer markets, but changes like this seem like good conversation more than a functional adjustment. Also, the ripple effect into the lower levels. Little League would be broken.
I agree with Freeman, Maddon, and Antonelli. That said, I can come up with one version of the rule that might be acceptable to me. There has to be more of a cost to a team to exercise their golden at-bat opportunity. So, I would possibly find it acceptable if the player chosen for the golden at-bat has to sit out the next game. That extra wrinkle would make it so that teams likely wouldn't use the opportunity every game. When they would use the opportunity it would likely be scenarios where they're playing a division rival in the next game is perhaps against a less challenging opponent. At least in the version I'm proposing, the star player wouldn't get an extra 162 at-bats for the season, relievers wouldn't always be facing the star batters from the opposing teams, and there might be a few more opportunities for fans to get to see the star players batting in crucial end of game moments. I could still do without the rule. But I might be able to tolerate the version I just described.
⚾️ NBO... New . BATTING Order...!!! Something we yell out once per game to shuffle best batters to top of lineup late in games back in my school yard days 😂😊.....
I have a much simpler/better suggestion: add the option that the team can have a "Pinch-Hitter" from off the bench replace the batter in the lineup. /s
They’ve already ruined it by having a DH in both leagues. This Golden At Bat thing is totally a gimmick and doesn’t even come close to be a natural thing in a game.
What about if they do this you can do it for your pitcher, even if you used that pitcher earlier in the game and it doesn't count towards the 3 batter rule. Example you bring back your starting pitcher for the one at bat, then after bring back the reliever that you were just using for the following at bat.
If they're going to implement this, they should allow the other team to reverse it. Once per game the other team can replace any opposing hitter with a random fan of their choosing from the stands.
Let's also make a golden pitch. One at bat where the fielding team can choose to strike out a batter with one pitch. Next we'll come up with a way for a base runner to steal third base from first and some runners are wort two runs when they score instead of just one run.
They basically had this with pitching but then they implemented batter minimums. If you can’t have golden relievers why have this? Manfred wants to golden shower all over baseball. Also would we have a Big Sexy homer with this rule? What about Koo Dae-Sung vs Randy Johnson? How much harder will this make it for a young player to get playing time. Forget a cup of coffee, guys are going to have to settle for an espresso. Manfred can start his own league and play Calvinball in his back yard. I want to watch regular baseball because after over a century and hundreds of thousands of professional games you still see weird and wild new things happen because of the players. They are really what makes baseball great. Not gimmicky rules.
One of the things that makes baseball such a beautiful game is the fact that it's a TRUE team sport. In order to have a consistently winning team, you need offensive production up and down the lineup. Everyone doesn't have to be a 90-RBI guy, but they need to be productive in some manner. Taking your best hitter and just inserting him into the lineup once a game takes away from that. I vote no.
I have previously heard the idea of bringing starters back for the last innings of the all star game. In that kind of environment, there would be so much extra hype. But the all star game is an event to showcase the best players in the game and to have fun, rather than conforming to the strict rules or strategies of baseball. That's the same reason I like the home run derby so much, because I can watch the top hitters do the thing that's most exciting during a game. But for the regular season, there is a decorum to the game which must be preserved. Part of that is having a batting order where every player takes their turn batting. This is also why I was so against the universal DH. So to let someone go out of turn just to make the relievers work harder than they already do? Absolutely not. Pitchers are overworked as it is
I'm 37, and I'm a new baseball fan (have known baseball since I was 9, but only fan for 2 years), and I HATE the idea of Golden At-Bat. I love game of strategizing your line-up, love Trout-Ohtani moment, but I also so love that sometimes your best hitter will miss the opportunity to come up and seal the game. That is what makes baseball interesting. So the executive that loves the idea is WRONG about new fans like me. We love baseball as it is. If this rule is implemented, a lot of new fans like me will leave, and I'm a Shohei fan as well, but HATE the idea.
I can remember complaining about baseball adding nets everywhere and my friends saying “it’s just nets, it’s not that different”. No one seems to consider that these dumb changes never stop.
The idea sounded cool at first, but could inflate the stats of some players to the point where you have to (at least to put it in context) put an asterisk next to any record they achieve, something like *achieved after Golden Bat Rule. Idk. You don't have to put the asterisk but might create a tier-system of baseball records. There are some good reasons for the Bat Rule. I wouldn't consider it the end of baseball if it got implemented.
If it is available to both teams, it is statistically equally likely that the leading team uses it to take advantage of the opportunity to cement a blowout, as it is for the losing team to use it to swing a comeback. Resulting in potentially proactive and pre-emptive nullifying the power of the losing golden at bat before they have the opportunity to use it. And in the best case scenario that they equally use it as the leading team, its the same as if it never existed at all. Seems inherently poorly thought out. The only losing or tied after 7 innings is a bit better, but I dislike having different rules for the game depending on which inning it is. Seems not well thought out imo and a bad gimmick.
Sounds like a mockery. Might as well start adding power ups, extra lives, and level (inning) skips. Sounds like someone is watching too much Savannah Bananas.
The world series should never have ended with Verdugo at the plate. But not because of this dumb rule, because the team should have been constructed and prepared in a way that would have given them other options. Roster management is an important part of the game. The game is heavily about statistics. That means someone like Boone or Dent never gets a chance for the unlikely swings that happen in a game like baseball that combines skill and chance. You put it all on the guys with the best odds... who also get out most of the time. What's the difference between the OBP of your best available pinch hitter and the odds of the big hit from your #1 hitter? It's not that enormous unless you have a poorly constructed team.
100% against this. Let the lineup card play as it will. As I see it, this rule would only allow for favouritism in excess of what's out there already. Imagine you're on a baseball team, you're not a superstar but you made it to MLB. You hit seventh in the lineup, you're a solid .270 hitter with not a lot of power but good contact and a great eye. The bases are loaded, two out, bottom of the ninth and your team is down by a run. You've got a 40/40 guy with a .300 average batting third in the lineup. How disheartening would it be to be skipped, basically, in hopes that the statistically better player got yet another crack at things? Also, this would give great players even more at-bats, further inflating their potential numbers and probably blowing contracts up even worse than they already are. No, I'm afraid I'm against this. The only permutation I'd be okay with here is that you can only do it if you're losing, and only then in the seventh inning or later. Even there, I'm not comfy with it.
This is the dumbest idea ever!! These people are not baseball people. The game is better in charge of baseball people. They do stuff like this, they are going to lose the real baseball fan. Why are they trying so hard to hold the attention of someone who watches the game for three innings. Besides, by the time a team uses this, a lot of fans have left the game or turned it off anyway. People leave college and NFL games by middle of the 4th quarter. They need to go home, or want to beat traffic. What are we doing here? Trying to appease 10 percent of the population to get their attention for a few minutes is crazy!! Leave the game alone!!
If they are going to do this, teams should have to declare which at-bat will be their golden at-bat when they exchange lineups. If they don't choose a different batter for that at-bat then they lost it.
and they will make money with sport betting w/ idiots betting who will get the golden ''at bat''. this is sad. what next do overs? Manfred MUST go. js imo
I dont think the players union would be down for this. This is potentially taking a job away from a depth player. Those bench bats who pinch hit, wont be needed. That guy often is then subbed out for a better runner or defender, so now maybe 2 people dont get on the field.
Baseball is about history and tradition. My step grandfather played in the 30s, I watched it in 70s, played from 78-13. If Baseball is dying sport so be it. Let the financial economics readjust and players go back to playing for the love of the game and make a modest living. If you want to make the game interesting. Have an automatic strike zone. That would have a huge impact on the game. Pitchers would have to throw strikes. Hitters would be more selective and not have to worry about a over zealous umpire ringing them up on pitches 6 inches off the plate. That is the part that really was frustrating as a player. Is umpires changing the outcome of games. Or having too much influence. The difference between 2-1 and 1-2 is huge. Or 3-2 having to cover 5" off the plate.
My batting eye was stellar. Think any good hitter has a feel for the strike zone. If I chase pitches that start out as strikes and tail off the corner. Or I get frozen by a back door slider. Yeah, that is on me. But a straight fastball 6" off the plate. Where is the beauty in that? It is just a ball.
Stef Curry has the ball in his hands the entire game. If you want to compare, then why doesn't each team just hit the four best hitters and get unlimited pinch runners with no limits on reentry into the lineup. Most of the changes haven't been needed at all. The pitch clock wasn't "necessary" and it could've been done in a way that would've limited the number of times it needed to be called. Making relievers throw to 3 batters... that's not the worst rule change. All the rest of the changes make me hate the game I love... at the major league level.
A few years ago, the Atlanta Braves had Charlie Culberson on their team. In the late innings, when the Braves manager really needed a hit, Charlie would come off the bench and pinch-hit, and he so often succeeded in that role, he gained the nickname Charlie Clutch. Sure, send Shohei Ohtani up out of order in a desperation move late in the game. What prevents the opposing pitcher from holding up four fingers and pointing to first base? How often does a team "load the bases" in the 9th while trailing, anyway? It's a stupid rule.
If Rob Manfred had his way, MLB games would end with scores similar to NBA games. I used to think Bud Selig did the most to ruin baseball; Rob Manfred has a guy on his staff to "hold [Manfred's] beer."
I see this as a completely out of touch suggestion and comparing the game to basketball is illustrative of that fact. Pinch hitting already exists, and with enough stipulation to keep the game interesting. Also, while the ramifications for ‘lesser’ players in the league would be big, imagine what a change like this does at all the lower levels. How many kids are gonna have to stomach watching the coach’s son strikeout in their place? Or how many minor leaguers won’t get their chance to prove their spot to their senior? Its one AB sure, but top loading the league for stars leaves the game in shambles.
A terrible idea that must surely (?!) be something to keep people talking baseball during the quietest news time. A lot of good reasons not to do it described above and below the line here but one more to consider: What happens to those unsung heroes who score the game?
Look, the reason MLB is losing viewers has nothing to do with the content. There is no need to try and spice it up. Put it back on TV. The advantage baseball has was it just on 5 nights a week, and for part of the year it's the only sport of the big 4 that is even running. Now you have to pay $50+ per month to follow a team, and it's still full of advertisements. Degenerate gamblers don't care, while regular fans said no way am I doing that. All you have to do is put it back on TV with no blackouts and people will see MLB's advertisers again.
I thought this was a joke. In a way I was right. What else is next... in every second inning runners get prepositioned halfway between the bases, or maybe the offense gets to make one defender play without a glove each inning? Why not, just make the bats Titanium or whatever... they have zero respect for the game.
I can imagine a "Golden Strike" or something, like a guy is designated to be eligible for a one-time 4 strike at-bat when he comes up. But a whole At-Bat??? Hell no
What is the "value" of the Trout/Ohtani AB in the WBC? I don't know anyone who watched it. I don't hear anyone other than the MLB Network talking about it. I'm in a fantasy league that has existed for 35 years with 15 other hardcore fans. None of them ever said a word about the WBC other than the Mets fans who were pissed when Diaz got hurt.
Isn’t pinch hitting and running the same idea as this?? Is it really any different what type of player you sub in? Relief pitching is also this same concept to a lesser degree.
I don't like that rule and hope it does not become implemented. Strategy is often a big part of the game. Especially since the situation can change with every pitch. I can picture a counter strategy of HBP of the golden at-bat. Not an IBB.
I'd suggest pitchers having to face 6 batters instead of 3. And a starter has to go at least 6 innings, unless his team is down by 10+ or he's hit 100 pitches before then.
Come the day and come the hour ,come the man, Come the power and the glory. A chance for any man to be a hero, taken away in the name of entertainment.
Of all the Banana ball rules the MLB should steal it should be if the if fan catches a foul ball, the batter is out rule. Not the Golden At-Bat rule. It would encourage fans to stay interested in the game and force hitters to try and put more balls in play.
If it's the 9th inning, and your boy isn't due up, that means that your boy had his chance in the 7th or 8th. Don't mess around with it.
A double with no-one on base doesn't have the same impact as a double with the bases loaded. Not all at-bats are equal. That's not a conclusive argument
@@actiumgd2891 true!
Pinch hitter and runners are sort of the same idea. Such a big difference whether that player subbed is in the game already or sitting on the bench (sarcasm)
What if they intentionally walked him? How is it fair that he gets no chance because the other team is scared of him ?
@@Ericericericericericeric teams do this now. puts extra runner on base.
we need to come to grips with the fact that the people who come up with these rules actually hate the sport. This is just another form of money grab for them. The most valuable hit in the entire history of baseball was by a relatively-unknown catcher named Hal Smith, who played at a time when there was another catcher named Hal Smith. That's what makes this sport so incredible.
Bingo! Owners are shamelessly greedy & Manfred hates baseball sigh
Yes! My first thought about the Golden At-Bat rule was that it deprives us of the opportunity to see a .223 hitter turning a game around in the most unlikely way. As to the reply from @@JustMeELC I agree that Rob Manfred is ruining the game worse than Bud Selig, which was a pretty high bar to clear.
Agree 100%. They are trying to destroy the game of baseball with these crazy rules. Ghost runners in extra innings, three batter minimum when bringing in a reliever, can't take out the second baseman or shortstop when sliding into 2nd base, can't take out the catcher on a play at home, pitch clock and now this golden at bat BS.
I respect your take but a money grab could only happen if the fans watched the sport and if their making more money from the rule that means more eyes have been put on the sport and that’s what you want as a fan to see your sport have a billion fans one day I think this rule could get baseball closer to that think about soccer players and NFL players they get crazy views yet Baseball players get more money than them yet no one outside of diehard fans haven’t even seen their face before but if the sports biggest stars had an opportunity to score big every game the sport could change for the best but I definitely see your point of view but hear me out World Series game two final inning imagine if they could’ve put Soto instead of Trevino we could’ve seen two grand slams in the World Series back to back it would’ve definitely been more thrilling
@@rimurutempest1646 anyone who understands baseball knows the "golden at bat" would be a flop. Even the biggest stars make outs 65-70% of the time. It's just making a joke out of the sport. Why not just have 9 hitters and 9 fielders and no connection between them? Would that be better if it brought in more fans?
They should make a new rule that says you can't change the rules anymore.
I think you would miss those unsung heroes and playoff games. We wouldn't have a David freese moment from the Cardinals world series
yeah, who gives a shit about Bill Mazeroski or Bucky Dent?
@@dabneylanghorne6192 good point!
@@venalleader2909Everybody did after they came through in the clutch. One of the best parts about baseball is that the person you least expect can be the hero of the game. That’s what makes the sport better than Basketball or Football.
@@AppleJuice-eo4gh yeah, and the "Golden At Bat" will be incredibly disappointing because great hitters fail 65-70% of the time
Part of what makes baseball great is that it’s “Americas past time” it’s a very traditional sport that’s been passed down from generation to generation. It’s more than a game, it’s a culture. All these rule changes take away the historical and nostalgic aesthetic that is baseball.
Absolutely, they are destroying one of their biggest selling points. I'm fine with the pitch clock because the amount of time some guys were taking really took the piss, but banning the shift (i.e. mandating where players have to stand), universal DH, potentially messing with the batting order? That's all way too far and destroys what makes baseball so unique in the first place - that you are watching fundamentally the same game today that was played 100 years ago.
Don't ask me what I think...I'm still salty with the NL adding the DH. Part of the strategy of baseball is planning around lineups, and part of the excitement is watching the triple A call-up who's due up nail a walk-off home run. That's what's exciting about baseball.
This golden at bat might be fun for the fans of one team, but also is an expletive-filled eye-roll for the fans of the opposing team.
Why don't we just go back to the days where the batter could request what type of pitch they wanted? Forcing the pitcher to throw a fastball down the middle might make things more exciting too, right?
Universal DH is a good thing. No one is trying to watch a pitcher hit.
DH should not be a thing in either league, if a pitcher can hit a batter then they should also be willing to take it.
@@JackKnoxx that's your opinion. Last I checked there was some Japanese pitcher who apparently is a pretty good hitter too. Game needs more two way players.
@@JackKnoxxThink of all the great moments that happened with a pitcher hitting. The relief pitcher who hit the home run in Atlanta when Jon Sterling was shocked, the Bartolo Colon home run, or Max Scherzer complaining about how lucky his teammates were getting. The NL DH took away so much strategy from baseball, and it took away future hilarious pitchers hitting moments.
Commissioner may yet succeed in turning M L B into playground whiffle-ball. 😡
This is absolute BS. I'm all for rule changes and evolution -- bring on the robo-umps, make fair-or-foul electronic, hell make it so they have to run clockwise around the bases every other inning just to mix it up. But this is would break one of the fundamental aspects of the game: batting order. Why not allow one roster addition in the middle of the game? Baseball means being stuck with your roster and batting order and having to deal with it. Worst idea I've ever heard.
Clockwise, eh?🤔
I actually think running clockwise is a fantastic idea. No joke forcing a team to hit to all sides of the field keeps it entertaining.
Maybe allow it under specific circumstances. Only right-handed batters after August, and only on Tuesdays under a new moon.
Jokes aside, I think the One ROster +1 out of the blue would be more fun and better for HItting than this inane motion from the owners and Manfred
Lol its EdwardCurrent! Checkmated any Atheists lately? :D
P.S. I like watching you dismantle truthers in the comments section of your Building 7 videos.
I’m with Freddy, this is like arena football. Leave my favorite sport alone!
I’m a purist. Stop playing with the game. Get rid of the DH and let pitchers bat like they did in the old days.
Teams should have to build rallies! If your best hitter is due up 5th in the inning, you had better get on base!
I hate it. The Bucky Dent HR would not have happened with this horrible rule. Plus, Trout vs. Ohtani would no longer be special if it happened every day.
Michael Kay brought up doing something almost exactly like this towards the end of last season. Not a coincidence the example was a yankees game. This is a straight up gimmick. Freddy and Joe both nailed it with their takes.
Why not just take on all the Savanah Bananas Ball?! WTF? This is Manfred taking a page out of the another horrible commish in the NFL, "We need scoring up" so they do dumb stuff like making incomplete passes illegal so we have more points. Like its exciting to watch the refs tell us why the teams are walking down the field. It ruined the game for fans of the game in order to attract people who are not fans. It makes no sense to change your game that people love, for people who will never like it.
@@truekingofthejungle9038 😂
I refuse to watch any thing regarding the Savanna Bananas. What a travesty they make of the game of baseball. If Manfred the Wonder Dork thinks this type of thing is good for the game he has totally lost me. He needs to concentrate on why the Dodgers can get away with deferring the majority of Ohtani’s contract so they can load up now on other overpaid players. Bowie Kuhn would have tossed that contract ASAP, and I was no Bowie Kuhn fan.
Yes, for sure! While we are at it....if you are batting under .200 you get 4 strikes but the second baseman can only throw to first underhanded. And if 6 lefty batters bat in a row the other team gets a run.
You’re only giving Manfred more ideas
Let’s also implement a GOLDEN TEE rule. Every team has ONE golden opportunity to literally put a little league Tee on home plate every game to make it easier to hit a homer. But WATCH OUT - you only get one opportunity per game!
I really don’t like this, because as someone else in the comments section has said it’s exciting when a non superstar gets a crucial hit. For example Jim leyritz hitting a walk-off home run in game 2 of the 1995 ALDS
NO NO NO NO NO
MANFRED MUST GO
Except he just does what the shamelessly greedy billionaire owners want sigh
@@JustMeELCThe Commissioner of MLB has a l w a y s worked for the owners exclusively, but in the past there was the pretext of magnanimity. This rule is full-on assclownery and they are turning the National Pastime into a 10th-rate carnival. The cabal is hell-bent on alienating lifelong fans, the same corporate gangsterism that characterized the Astros’ rise to prominence.
On behalf of The Game:
BARF.🤮
Why not just give your 27 outs to whoever you want? Have Harper hit 27 times. Have 9 DHs. Split offense and defense like the nfl.
Add in some special teams for certain situations...
That's called cricket, basically. Everybody bats until everybody is caught/thrown/bowled out. One guy can put up a 100 runs before he gets out.
@@irtnyc Little known fact, we fought a war just so we didn't have to play in sweaters.
There are very few rule changes by MLB that I have liked. The rules to protect players from dirty slides (or collisions at home) is about the only change that I have liked.
I don't see any need to ban the shift, for a pitch clock, to limit throws to first base, for the designated hitter, for multiple wildcards, etc.
They have done a great job making me lose interest in baseball.
A great thing with baseball is how performances compare with the past. There's already a lot of things that muddy these efforts. I don't like it.
Try it in the all-star game? It's like every at-bat is the Golden At-Bat Rule.
No, no, no, no, no. This will ruin baseball. We have enough exciting moments in the game that come back "organically." We don't need to play around with it. PLEASE don't let this happen!
This feeels like NASCAR creating a single race championship format for the "game 7" moment. The specialness of that "game 7" moment wore off after a few years
Honestly I think this is an even worse idea. And I'm saying this a diehard NASCAR fan
As far as drama, look at Game 3 of the ALCS. A rookie, Jhonkensy Noel, is sent in to pinch hit with 2 outs and hits a home run to tie the game. Would that moment have been as dramatic and memorable if it had been Jose Ramirez. Sometimes, those moments are remembered because that guy who can't bat his weight comes through with a clutch hit.
That sounds effing lame to me. I’m not against rule changes in general, but this one sucks. What a cheesy gimmick. Let the Savanna Bannanas keep that childishness.
How about starting in the 10th inning, you start with the bases loaded and can bat any players you want, any order you want, but the same batter can’t bat consecutively, unless it’s a Tuesday?
I hear Manfred also wants to have something called the Red Circle. A red circle will be set up on top of the the fence in the deepest part of the outfield in every park. It’ll be 15 feet in diameter and if a batter hits it for a home run, then an extra three runs will be added on top of the home run’s original total. Some are already calling it the 3 Point Circle.
Flat out stupid. First it's one "Golden At-Bat", then its 2, 3... 5. What they need to do is add another 5 seconds to the pitch clock. 1/2 the players coming up to bat look rushed.
And injuries are up league wide... But you know $$$ over everything sigh
@@JustMeELC 💯
This just sounds dumb'
Absolutely not!! If you want that kind of garbage, go watch banana ball. Manfred is a disgrace as a commish and will go down in the history of the game as the absolute worst!
Manfred hates baseball but its billionaire owners shameless greed driving the bs ugh
Isn’t pinch hitting and pinch runners sort of the same idea?
@@jono601 No, becuase Nohit Shortstop would remain in the game under this proposal.
@@ronaldwayne7092 I didn't say it was the exact same thing. it's the same concept. just slightly different players. guys off the bench can pinch hit. But it's completely different if it's guys on the lineup?
Terrible idea. If you crave artificial drama this much, just stop testing for steroids.
I think we are all getting punk'd. Nobody is considering this.
I suggest to Manfred...let's say, your in a a bit of a pinch, a batter is up who doesn't do well against the current pitcher, you can have a different guy bat for that guy, but only if they haven't played in the game yet. How's that for a new rule? Not sure what you would call that batter. I'd call him a relief batter. The other team could replace the pitcher, too. I'd call that a "pinch" pitcher. I think this would be great for the sport.
That would be the end of baseball for me. Just make every game a HR hitting contest. Get a commissioner that actually likes the game not just trying to attract 20 somethings to watch.
The tiktok Goldfish brained morons? Yeah, I wouldn't cater to them at all. They'll never have enough money saved up anyway.
Not a fan at all. It prevents a player from having a "clutch" moment which could change their career. If Juan Soto gets a game winning hit no surprise. But if the rookie gets that hit it changes history
Hello Jesse Cole? How's that Golden At-Bat working for you? It's just awesome! Banana Ball possibly impacts MLB....very cool! Let's add in foul balls caught by a fan is an out. LOL
It is hard to think of a worse idea. Madden's critique was spot on, point by point.
And no, nobody cares if Steph Curry takes the last shot in a game in Sacramento in December.
They should have to let one random fan bat every game instead of this.
Hey, at least you can hear the beeping lol
I gave up on the MLB "improvements" with the designated hitter! Now you have bigger bases, runners on second in extra innings, robo balls and strikes coming? I'll stay home and give up on the MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA. Results are fixed to the benefit the ownership mobs! Maybe the opposition can pick the next hitter?
I've got a different rule I'd like to see, one that would give good hitters better at bats. It's a fix for intentional walks. It would, I think, be better than the automatic intentional walk, although it could be combined with it... make pitchers pitch to batters by making it so any 4 pitch walk puts the batter on 2nd instead of 1st.
The logic for it is basically it forces the pitcher to get at least one strike. That means the hitter gets at least one decent pitch in most situations. Runner on second and a great hitter up? You don't intentionally walk him because it pushes the runner to third and it doesn't set up the double play. If you do get that one strike? Well, now you are just two strikes away, so maybe you go after them. It also puts more pressure on a pitcher who is struggling. If you fall behind 3-0 it's always a hitters count, but if the batter will get at least two bases with another ball? That creates new strategy.
I don't even like the golden at bat for all star games. Think about it... you've got a bench full of all star hitters and you tell someone that you are sending up Ohtani or Judge instead of giving them an at bat. I agree that it kills the idea of team.
Now, spring training... the games don't count and it's not a prestige situation. Maybe there it works. Sure, if you want to win you send up a Soto or a Judge, but maybe you want to see how your rookie responds in a high leverage situation. In spring training it actually creates some actual utility. Heck, in spring training do it once an inning. That lets you get more at bats for hitters you either want to evaluate or for hitters you think need a few more swings to get locked in.
Easy no from me, a cheap gimmick that threatens the integrity of the game. Another example: Golden Out Rule change: a team has the option once in a game to extend an inning by 1 out to 4 outs. 😂
how much more could Soto command on the open market if he was going to get an extra 50-100 ABs per year? This is a non-starter
What kills me is, this is the result of a slippery slope that started with a much older rule that I hate. The designated hitter.
I would like to see a rule that once you get to the 10th inning, possibly later, batters and defensive replacements can return once you run out, especially in the All Star game. Maybe you would have to put in players in the same order they exited. I really like this for catchers since the position is so specific and teams sometimes like to use the other catcher as the DH.
This might be the worst idea for a rule change I've personally ever heard floated out there for MLB. I wouldn't even want to see this in an ASG... HOWEVER, this sounds like a really fun idea for a slowpitch beer league, or the annual military softball tourney I play in that's solely for bragging rights (and also drinking beer) lol
Chasing short attentions with record nullifying changes to the game upsets everything. Being jealous of Banana-ball and its popularity, respectable and expected. The entertainment industry known as MLB needs a pick-me-up in the softer markets, but changes like this seem like good conversation more than a functional adjustment. Also, the ripple effect into the lower levels. Little League would be broken.
I agree with Freeman, Maddon, and Antonelli. That said, I can come up with one version of the rule that might be acceptable to me. There has to be more of a cost to a team to exercise their golden at-bat opportunity. So, I would possibly find it acceptable if the player chosen for the golden at-bat has to sit out the next game.
That extra wrinkle would make it so that teams likely wouldn't use the opportunity every game. When they would use the opportunity it would likely be scenarios where they're playing a division rival in the next game is perhaps against a less challenging opponent. At least in the version I'm proposing, the star player wouldn't get an extra 162 at-bats for the season, relievers wouldn't always be facing the star batters from the opposing teams, and there might be a few more opportunities for fans to get to see the star players batting in crucial end of game moments.
I could still do without the rule. But I might be able to tolerate the version I just described.
Might as well make them use even more juiced (juicier?) balls in the 7th, 8th, and 9th. Let them swing USSSA composite bats while we’re at it.
Is this for real ? If so one of the stupidest ideas I’ve heard in a while
⚾️ NBO... New . BATTING Order...!!! Something we yell out once per game to shuffle best batters to top of lineup late in games back in my school yard days 😂😊.....
I have a much simpler/better suggestion: add the option that the team can have a "Pinch-Hitter" from off the bench replace the batter in the lineup. /s
They’ve already ruined it by having a DH in both leagues. This Golden At Bat thing is totally a gimmick and doesn’t even come close to be a natural thing in a game.
What about if they do this you can do it for your pitcher, even if you used that pitcher earlier in the game and it doesn't count towards the 3 batter rule. Example you bring back your starting pitcher for the one at bat, then after bring back the reliever that you were just using for the following at bat.
If they're going to implement this, they should allow the other team to reverse it. Once per game the other team can replace any opposing hitter with a random fan of their choosing from the stands.
Let's also make a golden pitch. One at bat where the fielding team can choose to strike out a batter with one pitch.
Next we'll come up with a way for a base runner to steal third base from first and some runners are wort two runs when they score instead of just one run.
There's only so much silliness a grown man can take. If they do this baseball will lose a lifetime fan.
Dumb idea. Let's not turn baseball into a carnival.
They basically had this with pitching but then they implemented batter minimums. If you can’t have golden relievers why have this? Manfred wants to golden shower all over baseball.
Also would we have a Big Sexy homer with this rule? What about Koo Dae-Sung vs Randy Johnson?
How much harder will this make it for a young player to get playing time. Forget a cup of coffee, guys are going to have to settle for an espresso.
Manfred can start his own league and play Calvinball in his back yard. I want to watch regular baseball because after over a century and hundreds of thousands of professional games you still see weird and wild new things happen because of the players. They are really what makes baseball great. Not gimmicky rules.
One of the things that makes baseball such a beautiful game is the fact that it's a TRUE team sport. In order to have a consistently winning team, you need offensive production up and down the lineup. Everyone doesn't have to be a 90-RBI guy, but they need to be productive in some manner. Taking your best hitter and just inserting him into the lineup once a game takes away from that. I vote no.
I have previously heard the idea of bringing starters back for the last innings of the all star game. In that kind of environment, there would be so much extra hype. But the all star game is an event to showcase the best players in the game and to have fun, rather than conforming to the strict rules or strategies of baseball. That's the same reason I like the home run derby so much, because I can watch the top hitters do the thing that's most exciting during a game.
But for the regular season, there is a decorum to the game which must be preserved. Part of that is having a batting order where every player takes their turn batting. This is also why I was so against the universal DH. So to let someone go out of turn just to make the relievers work harder than they already do? Absolutely not. Pitchers are overworked as it is
Home runs are decidedly not the most exciting aspect of a baseball game.
I'm 37, and I'm a new baseball fan (have known baseball since I was 9, but only fan for 2 years), and I HATE the idea of Golden At-Bat. I love game of strategizing your line-up, love Trout-Ohtani moment, but I also so love that sometimes your best hitter will miss the opportunity to come up and seal the game. That is what makes baseball interesting. So the executive that loves the idea is WRONG about new fans like me. We love baseball as it is. If this rule is implemented, a lot of new fans like me will leave, and I'm a Shohei fan as well, but HATE the idea.
Does the other team then get to change pitchers
I can remember complaining about baseball adding nets everywhere and my friends saying “it’s just nets, it’s not that different”. No one seems to consider that these dumb changes never stop.
I hate it.
The idea sounded cool at first, but could inflate the stats of some players to the point where you have to (at least to put it in context) put an asterisk next to any record they achieve, something like *achieved after Golden Bat Rule. Idk. You don't have to put the asterisk but might create a tier-system of baseball records. There are some good reasons for the Bat Rule. I wouldn't consider it the end of baseball if it got implemented.
If it is available to both teams, it is statistically equally likely that the leading team uses it to take advantage of the opportunity to cement a blowout, as it is for the losing team to use it to swing a comeback. Resulting in potentially proactive and pre-emptive nullifying the power of the losing golden at bat before they have the opportunity to use it. And in the best case scenario that they equally use it as the leading team, its the same as if it never existed at all.
Seems inherently poorly thought out.
The only losing or tied after 7 innings is a bit better, but I dislike having different rules for the game depending on which inning it is.
Seems not well thought out imo and a bad gimmick.
Sounds like a mockery. Might as well start adding power ups, extra lives, and level (inning) skips. Sounds like someone is watching too much Savannah Bananas.
The world series should never have ended with Verdugo at the plate. But not because of this dumb rule, because the team should have been constructed and prepared in a way that would have given them other options. Roster management is an important part of the game. The game is heavily about statistics. That means someone like Boone or Dent never gets a chance for the unlikely swings that happen in a game like baseball that combines skill and chance. You put it all on the guys with the best odds... who also get out most of the time. What's the difference between the OBP of your best available pinch hitter and the odds of the big hit from your #1 hitter? It's not that enormous unless you have a poorly constructed team.
100% against this. Let the lineup card play as it will. As I see it, this rule would only allow for favouritism in excess of what's out there already. Imagine you're on a baseball team, you're not a superstar but you made it to MLB. You hit seventh in the lineup, you're a solid .270 hitter with not a lot of power but good contact and a great eye. The bases are loaded, two out, bottom of the ninth and your team is down by a run. You've got a 40/40 guy with a .300 average batting third in the lineup. How disheartening would it be to be skipped, basically, in hopes that the statistically better player got yet another crack at things? Also, this would give great players even more at-bats, further inflating their potential numbers and probably blowing contracts up even worse than they already are. No, I'm afraid I'm against this. The only permutation I'd be okay with here is that you can only do it if you're losing, and only then in the seventh inning or later. Even there, I'm not comfy with it.
How about the opposing team can ask to switch the pitcher with any one else on the field for any one inning?
You can already do that though unless I’m mistaken.
This is the dumbest idea ever!! These people are not baseball people. The game is better in charge of baseball people. They do stuff like this, they are going to lose the real baseball fan. Why are they trying so hard to hold the attention of someone who watches the game for three innings. Besides, by the time a team uses this, a lot of fans have left the game or turned it off anyway. People leave college and NFL games by middle of the 4th quarter. They need to go home, or want to beat traffic. What are we doing here? Trying to appease 10 percent of the population to get their attention for a few minutes is crazy!! Leave the game alone!!
How about an offense and a defense? Nine designated hitters. That sounds like fun. Let's do that.
Manfred truly hates baseball & billionaire owners are greed driven above shame ugh 🙄🤦
If they are going to do this, teams should have to declare which at-bat will be their golden at-bat when they exchange lineups. If they don't choose a different batter for that at-bat then they lost it.
Part of me would like to see them give this a try in A ball just so we could definitively see that it's a bad idea.
and they will make money with sport betting w/ idiots betting who will get the golden ''at bat''. this is sad. what next do overs? Manfred MUST go. js imo
I dont think the players union would be down for this. This is potentially taking a job away from a depth player. Those bench bats who pinch hit, wont be needed. That guy often is then subbed out for a better runner or defender, so now maybe 2 people dont get on the field.
Not to mention its a ridiculous cheap gimmick smh
Such a bad idea.
Baseball is about history and tradition. My step grandfather played in the 30s, I watched it in 70s, played from 78-13. If Baseball is dying sport so be it. Let the financial economics readjust and players go back to playing for the love of the game and make a modest living. If you want to make the game interesting. Have an automatic strike zone. That would have a huge impact on the game. Pitchers would have to throw strikes. Hitters would be more selective and not have to worry about a over zealous umpire ringing them up on pitches 6 inches off the plate. That is the part that really was frustrating as a player. Is umpires changing the outcome of games. Or having too much influence. The difference between 2-1 and 1-2 is huge. Or 3-2 having to cover 5" off the plate.
My batting eye was stellar. Think any good hitter has a feel for the strike zone. If I chase pitches that start out as strikes and tail off the corner. Or I get frozen by a back door slider. Yeah, that is on me. But a straight fastball 6" off the plate. Where is the beauty in that? It is just a ball.
Stef Curry has the ball in his hands the entire game. If you want to compare, then why doesn't each team just hit the four best hitters and get unlimited pinch runners with no limits on reentry into the lineup.
Most of the changes haven't been needed at all. The pitch clock wasn't "necessary" and it could've been done in a way that would've limited the number of times it needed to be called.
Making relievers throw to 3 batters... that's not the worst rule change. All the rest of the changes make me hate the game I love... at the major league level.
Whew... for a second there I thought the headline was "MLB's New Golden Shower Rule."
NO.
A few years ago, the Atlanta Braves had Charlie Culberson on their team. In the late innings, when the Braves manager really needed a hit, Charlie would come off the bench and pinch-hit, and he so often succeeded in that role, he gained the nickname Charlie Clutch.
Sure, send Shohei Ohtani up out of order in a desperation move late in the game. What prevents the opposing pitcher from holding up four fingers and pointing to first base? How often does a team "load the bases" in the 9th while trailing, anyway? It's a stupid rule.
If Rob Manfred had his way, MLB games would end with scores similar to NBA games. I used to think Bud Selig did the most to ruin baseball; Rob Manfred has a guy on his staff to "hold [Manfred's] beer."
I see this as a completely out of touch suggestion and comparing the game to basketball is illustrative of that fact. Pinch hitting already exists, and with enough stipulation to keep the game interesting. Also, while the ramifications for ‘lesser’ players in the league would be big, imagine what a change like this does at all the lower levels. How many kids are gonna have to stomach watching the coach’s son strikeout in their place? Or how many minor leaguers won’t get their chance to prove their spot to their senior? Its one AB sure, but top loading the league for stars leaves the game in shambles.
A terrible idea that must surely (?!) be something to keep people talking baseball during the quietest news time. A lot of good reasons not to do it described above and below the line here but one more to consider: What happens to those unsung heroes who score the game?
Look, the reason MLB is losing viewers has nothing to do with the content. There is no need to try and spice it up. Put it back on TV. The advantage baseball has was it just on 5 nights a week, and for part of the year it's the only sport of the big 4 that is even running. Now you have to pay $50+ per month to follow a team, and it's still full of advertisements. Degenerate gamblers don't care, while regular fans said no way am I doing that. All you have to do is put it back on TV with no blackouts and people will see MLB's advertisers again.
Nope, send Matt Stairs to bat.
If they did implement it, it's automatically two outs and a full count to start the at-bat.
I thought this was a joke. In a way I was right. What else is next... in every second inning runners get prepositioned halfway between the bases, or maybe the offense gets to make one defender play without a glove each inning? Why not, just make the bats Titanium or whatever... they have zero respect for the game.
Who ever came up with need to be fired! To many owners and execs only care about money. The game is getting put on the back burner.
I am guessing if on base the player cannot be used
I can imagine a "Golden Strike" or something, like a guy is designated to be eligible for a one-time 4 strike at-bat when he comes up. But a whole At-Bat??? Hell no
What is the "value" of the Trout/Ohtani AB in the WBC? I don't know anyone who watched it. I don't hear anyone other than the MLB Network talking about it. I'm in a fantasy league that has existed for 35 years with 15 other hardcore fans. None of them ever said a word about the WBC other than the Mets fans who were pissed when Diaz got hurt.
Isn’t pinch hitting and running the same idea as this?? Is it really any different what type of player you sub in? Relief pitching is also this same concept to a lesser degree.
I don't like that rule and hope it does not become implemented. Strategy is often a big part of the game. Especially since the situation can change with every pitch. I can picture a counter strategy of HBP of the golden at-bat. Not an IBB.
I'd suggest pitchers having to face 6 batters instead of 3. And a starter has to go at least 6 innings, unless his team is down by 10+ or he's hit 100 pitches before then.
Ridiculous. When I was about 11, some of my friends tried that BS on the playground. It didn’t fly then, and I hope it never does.
Come the day and come the hour ,come the man,
Come the power and the glory. A chance for any man to be a hero, taken away in the name of entertainment.
Who proposes these rule changes? MLB is slowly going the way of NBA. So who would CWS or DET or COL put in there.
Play it like Little League. 12-man active roster each game. Everyone bats.
Can a batter go bat back to back, like a team, say, the dodgers, use their golden at bat on the 9th spot, and Ohtani, is also the leadoff batter.
No. Just NO.
This isn't wiffle ball.
Was Jayson Stark being a good journalist n asking those questions or was he advocating for it?
Of all the Banana ball rules the MLB should steal it should be if the if fan catches a foul ball, the batter is out rule. Not the Golden At-Bat rule. It would encourage fans to stay interested in the game and force hitters to try and put more balls in play.