Rules You Would Like To See Changed in Sports

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

They need to change the scoring rule in baseball that starting pitchers cannot be credited with the win if they pitch less than five complete innings.

When the scoring rules were first established, this made sense: virtually no starting pitchers were removed before the fifth inning unless they had pretty conclusively failed.

That whole paradigm has changed: starting pitchers are routinely removed now after less than five complete innings, even when they pitch very adequately.

In fact, completing five is now the equivalent of what used to be a complete game -- and for a shorter interim period, was the often derided "quality start."

Starting pitchers can be tagged with a loss by throwing one pitch -- give up a leadoff home run and then get yanked -- but they must throw five innings to be awarded with a win.

The main statistical result of the collision of the scoring rules has been that starting pitchers in the 21st Century get far fewer decisions and far fewer wins than their ancestors of 30-40+ years ago. The decisions have mainly been spread around through mobs of one-inning relievers.
 
Last edited:
Bring back ties.

I'm not a fan of overtime in just about any sport. I'm perfectly fine with games ending without a winner. Basketball is an exception because OT is basically an extension of the game.

Football and hockey use different rules for the postseason because their regular-season tie-breakers suck. I'm fine with 60 minutes and shake hands, particularly in college football. One of the most famous games in history -- Notre Dame vs. Michigan State -- ended in a tie.

That includes baseball. The Japanese have it right. Play 12 innings and call it a draw, counting as half a win and half a loss in the standings. No Manfred Man. No excuses for not using the 13 pitchers on your roster.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
I've made my peace with the DH. Now that it's consistent on every level of the game, I think it's fine. I don't miss seeing .139-hitting pitchers corkscrew themselves into strikeouts.

I'll never make peace with the ****ing zombie runner. But I'd probably stop bitching about it if, during the regular season, it wasn't invoked until the 13th inning. Three more innings of real baseball isn't going to hurt anybody.
Excellent points.
I am willing to compromise on the Manfred Man. I like your idea to delay his appearance. I’d also consider putting him at first in the 10th.
 
I posted something similar on the baseball thread, but since you mentioned Bart ...


What's the tally for Oscar?

1784153319292.png
 
I don't like the seven-inning doubleheader rule b/c you're purposely shortening games that are going to count the same as nine-inning games. Those seven-inning doubleheaders were also disorienting b/c its just ****ing weird to be midway through a game in the fourth inning.

That said, I have never seen an idea so universally embraced. Players, managers, execs, most sportswriters. Everyone loved them. So of course Rob Manfred, the biggest dip**** in this nation not perpetually sporting an orange hue, immediately got rid of the seven-inning DHs after the pandemic seasons.
 
They need to change the scoring rule in baseball that starting pitchers cannot be credited with the win if they pitch less than five complete innings.

When the scoring rules were first established, this made sense: virtually no starting pitchers were removed before the fifth inning unless they had pretty conclusively failed.

That whole paradigm has changed: starting pitchers are routinely removed now after less than five complete innings, even when they pitch very adequately.

In fact, completing five is now the equivalent of what used to be a complete game -- and for a shorter interim period, was the often derided "quality start."

Starting pitchers can be tagged with a loss by throwing one pitch -- give up a leadoff home run and then get yanked -- but they must throw five innings to be awarded with a win.

The main statistical result of the collision of the scoring rules has been that starting pitchers in the 21st Century get far fewer decisions and far fewer wins than their ancestors of 30-40+ years ago. The decisions have mainly been spread around through mobs of one-inning relievers.
This is going to have to happen sooner than later. I wouldn't be stunned if someday we see the win awarded by the official scorer determining which pitcher performed most effectively. It would make things awkward when Justin Verlander VI is going for his 300th win and gives up six runs in the first two innings of the Mercury Mets' 14-13 win, but that's a good 100 years away anyway so none of us have to worry about it.
 
So you foul 'em right after they cross the half-court line?
Think about shooting fouls.
If someone is fouled on a long shot, they are rewarded by moving up half the distance. If they are fouled under the basket, they are punished by moving back 15 feet. If Shaq could have taken his free throws from the spot of the foul, people wouldn't intentionally foul
 
I wish. If they did, maybe in a few years the ASG would become something again. Watching that as a kid in an NL city and seeing those AL players (and the uniforms!) was mindblowing.
I just don’t want Skenes to never pitch to Judge.

Maybe mix the post season where the top eight teams from the NL and AL would be combined into a mixed post season. AL 1 would face NL 8 in a five game series and NL 2 would face AL 7 in a five game and the World Series would be the only seven-game series.

I hate three-game series in baseball. Detest one-gamers.
 
I hate pass interference in football.

You can push a receiver, bump, face guard, slap their arm down…

But you cannot hold a receiver.

Only throw to a receiver WHEN THEY ARE ****ING OPEN.

**** do I hate just throwing it up and hoping for a flag.
 
I hate pass interference in football.

You can push a receiver, bump, face guard, slap their arm down…

But you cannot hold a receiver.

Only throw to a receiver WHEN THEY ARE ****ING OPEN.

**** do I hate just throwing it up and hoping for a flag.
I'm on board with this, both for pass interference and especially defensive holding.

You've got a third-and-29, and (typically) Mahomes gets bailed out because of a hand on a receiver that you need to watch in triple-slow motion to even be able to spot. Five yards and automatic first down.

**** that all the way.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top