schrei@faust.UUCP (07/26/85)
Baseball is one of only two significant art forms created in The
United States. (The other is improvisational jazz.) Baseball used to
be a game played by two teams of nine people each, on a grassy field.
Step by step it has become something quite different from what it
once was, and in my opinion, more's the pity. There's very little
that can be done to combat the deterioration of the game, but getting
rid of the DH rule would help.
Most team sports consist of two teams, for example the Cobras and
the Rattlesnakes, each trying to move some object to a specific portion
of respectively opposite ends of the playing field. This describes
football, hockey, basketball, lacrosse, polo, water-polo, soccer, etc.
I'm sure there's a large etc.
In none of these do we find the dazzlingly complex interaction of
offense, defense, and strategy. With the occasional exception of the
football "bomb" (if the down team is not too far down) in none of these
do we find the intensifying sense of drama, often right up to the
last play, that we usually find in a well played baseball game. The
standard is usually just the opposite. The two teams start the game,
usually with both having a possibility of winning, and then one of
them gradually wears the other down to a defeat which gradually be-
comes inevitable.
In baseball, everything plays a significant part in the outcome
-- pitching, hitting, fielding, physical strength, tactics, strategy,
speed, and luck. These facets are not in perfect balance by any means,
but they are still all present in the game as it is played today. It is
my hypothesis that the better the balance among these named facets of
the game, the better the game will be. The DH rule is bad for several
reasons. It significantly eases the tension of the manager's heaviest
decision -- whether to let the pitcher hit. Even without the DH rule,
the significance of pitching has unbalanced these named facets of the
game. A rules change which made pitching somewhat *less* critical,
which made fielding and baserunning somewhat *more* critical, and left
the rest of it more or less where it is, would improve the game, I
think.
In summary, I think the DH rule is a detriment and ought to be
abolished for the following reasons:
1. Abolishing it would encourage at least a *slightly* more rounded
player on the pitcher's mound. This, in turn, would take a little
off the edge of the imbalance toward pitching.
2. It would force the manager to view his pitcher in both an offensive
and defensive role, thereby enhancing the strategic tension.
3. It would be a return toward a cohesive 9-person endeavor as opposed
to having two of the players as part time specialists, not fully
integrated into the proceedings.
4. I don't know this one to be true, but it has been hypothesized
that the DH rule contributes to early pitcher burnout.
5. Just as it would take a little off of the imbalance toward pitching,
it would also take something off of the imbalance toward hitting.
To the extent you reduce the imbalance toward both pitching and
hitting, you would enhance fielding, baserunning, strategy, and
tactics, which I think would be good for the game.