Instant Replay In Baseball...

[yourchoice]

My vote is against the grain...I think they should use it for more than just HRs.

And, if it were up to me there wouldn't be a DH, but the Players Association would never go for it. The DH takes a lot of intrigue and strategy out of the game, and allows someone to play the game while only truly playing half of it.

[Blak Smyth]

Originally Posted by yourchoice

My vote is against the grain...I think they should use it for more than just HRs.

And, if it were up to me there wouldn't be a DH, but the Players Association would never go for it. The DH takes a lot of intrigue and strategy out of the game, and allows someone to play the game while only truly playing half of it.

I agree about the DH, and always wondered why all teams in the same league don't play by the same rules?

[The Poet]

Originally Posted by yourchoice

My vote is against the grain...I think they should use it for more than just HRs.

And, if it were up to me there wouldn't be a DH, but the Players Association would never go for it. The DH takes a lot of intrigue and strategy out of the game, and allows someone to play the game while only truly playing half of it.

Originally Posted by Blak Smyth

I agree about the DH, and always wondered why all teams in the same league don't play by the same rules?

I am of the opinion that everyone is entitled to an opinion, but am also of the opinion that said opinions should have some sort of internal logical consistency. To me, supporting an innovation like replay while objecting to the DH shows said inconsistency. Also, as for "all teams in the same league" playing by the same rules . . . well, unless I am mistaken, the National League is the ONLY place where there is no DH, and that counts high school, college, minor league, American Legion, whatever. So if anyone is to blame for this "discrepancy", it is the mossback old fogies in the Senior Circuit.

Just my , and worth every penny.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by yourchoice

and allows someone to play the game while only truly playing half of it.

Are you also upset that iron-man football isn't played in the NFL anymore?

[yourchoice]

Originally Posted by The Poet

I am of the opinion that everyone is entitled to an opinion, but am also of the opinion that said opinions should have some sort of internal logical consistency. To me, supporting an innovation like replay while objecting to the DH shows said inconsistency. Also, as for "all teams in the same league" playing by the same rules . . . well, unless I am mistaken, the National League is the ONLY place where there is no DH, and that counts high school, college, minor league, American Legion, whatever. So if anyone is to blame for this "discrepancy", it is the mossback old fogies in the Senior Circuit.

Just my , and worth every penny.

Interestingly, it's my opinion that supporting the DH while not supporting instant replay shows inconsistency. Anyone who professes to be a traditionalist while supporting the DH shows a lack of consistency. Seems logical to me.

Of course, by this logic, I am acknowledging that my support of replay while not supporting the DH is inconsistent. I don't really care! I am of the opinion that everyone is entitled to an opinion, and while some may think some opinions lack some sort of internal logical consistency, I am of the opinion that is just their opinion.

Originally Posted by Stephen

Are you also upset that iron-man football isn't played in the NFL anymore?

No, and to clarify I am certainly not upset. I have no idea what gave you that impression.

But, to your point, to the best of my knowledge the rules of football were never changed to either allow, disallow, or make mandatory two-way players. Teams/Coaches/Players played both ways by choice, not by rule.

IMHO, you're arguing apples and oranges.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by yourchoice

No, and to clarify I am certainly not upset. I have no idea what gave you that impression.

No, I wasn't under the impression that you were upset.

Originally Posted by yourchoice

But, to your point, to the best of my knowledge the rules of football were never changed to either allow, disallow, or make mandatory two-way players. Teams/Coaches/Players played both ways by choice, not by rule.

I'm speaking solely of your commenting of the strategy of the evolution of the game, not what governs what one can and cannot do within it. Not apples & oranges to me.

[yourchoice]

Originally Posted by Stephen

I'm speaking solely of your commenting of the strategy of the evolution of the game, not what governs what one can and cannot do within it. Not apples & oranges to me.

I don't believe my original post made any statement about the evolution of the game. I simply prefer the strategy involved without the DH. I can see if my point was "the way things were" your point about football may be relevant, but that was never my point.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by yourchoice

I don't believe my original post made any statement about the evolution of the game. I simply prefer the strategy involved without the DH. I can see if my point was "the way things were" your point about football may be relevant, but that was never my point.

You prefer the old(er) style of play, as opposed to one which incoporates a DH. I really don't see how that conflicts with what I said, at least not with my view from the cheap seats.

[yourchoice]

Originally Posted by Stephen

You prefer the old(er) style of play, as opposed to one which incoporates a DH. I really don't see how that conflicts with what I said, at least not with my view from the cheap seats.

It's not my preference because it's older, it's just my preference. Whereas I would think a traditionalist would prefer what is older.