Oakland Park Baseball

Apologies in advance for a super long post.

I think, without getting into looking back at boxscores, it is clear that we have had fewer home runs hit since some of us have moved to wood bats. That said, I am with Peter on this, I think it should be a matter of choice. I do not support the enforcement of this as a rule.

Fundamentally, on this issue and also the issue of tardiness, I see two basic standpoints. You'll have to forgive me for the over-simplification, I realize we do not neatly fit into one of the two camps, but more or less, by and large, this seems to be roughly how it is:

Some of us, with Ken merely being the most ardent and outspoken of this group, get the most out of a game when it is intensely competitive, and both sides are giving 100% on every play. A game with fewer home runs and more baserunning is more to their liking, usually. A home run hit with a wood bat is an exception - they are, somehow, special. This is the equipment the MLB uses, this is how the game is meant to be played.

The other group enjoy the game just as much with less of a competitive atmosphere. We are not pro athletes, they say, I'll do my best but I ultimately don't care about winning the game as much as having a good time. They come to have fun, and hate it when a call is fiercely debated. A little debate is OK, but we have been taking it too far recently, they say. Also this group is will be lenient on late-comers and let them rotate into the fielding rather than DH all game, or until someone leaves.

Now, these are archetypes, therefore most of us will probably identify with attitudes from both, and not be clearly one or the other type. I myself am mostly the second type, but I also favor wood bats, and am strongly disappointed if I see someone giving less than 100% on a play. My bottom line is: play the best you can, and you're we're cool, whether your best is actually good or not matters far less. It is a factor to be weighed when the teams are being drawn up, and positions decided, but that's about it. I want people to come on time, but if we haven't actually started yet, I don't mind sitting out one inning to allow a rotation. Two innings may be required if we also have a big turnout that day. I agree with Ken in that teams should be capped, but I say at 9 each, and with the caveats he outlined regarding arrival time.

Both groups are currently tolerating each other, but on occasion we are seeing some friction. Since around May or so I think we have all noticed an increase in tempers flaring, call-arguing and general bitching. It is hard to see a solution to this, and only one idea comes to my mind. The live games are when we use all the MLB rules, and they seem to naturally increase the competitive spirit involved. Lead-offs and stealing and aggressive pitching, this is all great stuff. The only bad thing about them is the walks, which have been coming down but still need to come down further.
How about this: let's just try and not argue calls much and bitch at each other about a play or choice of bat, except at the live games. In the MLB they argue, and they give 100%, and the win matters. Any MLB player would take an ugly, bad-tempered win over an honorable, friendly loss.

Anyone still reading at this point, give yourself a cookie.

*takes the cookie and munches away*


I'm all for having fun, that's why I play baseball in the first place.

But to me, a part of the fun is the crazy competativeness of it all, winning fuels me, and I do so hate to lose. I'm dissapointed in myself when I go 0-4 in a game, and I'm dissapointed when I got 3-4 in a game. I want to do everything perfect, and it's upsetting when other people are lack luster.

I generally, however, don't scream and yell, and I apologize for the few times I have (especially in the last month or so, I've been frustrated with a lot of things, other than baseball).

Please remember that when someone yells at you, it's not because they hate you. I'm sure that if you could talk to the same person the next day, they would be completely apologetic, and would have a much more intelligent conversation, but during games, people get frustrated, get caught up in the heat of the moment, ect...

I think ya get the point.

Anyways, enjoy the game, enjoy the sun, and keep a clear head. It'll be better game if everyone does.

tallguy wrote: Some of us, with Ken merely being the most ardent and outspoken of this group, get the most out of a game when it is intensely competitive, and both sides are giving 100% on every play. A game with fewer home runs and more baserunning is more to their liking, usually. A home run hit with a wood bat is an exception - they are, somehow, special. This is the equipment the MLB uses, this is how the game is meant to be played.

I would llike this particular discussion to be wheeled back into one thread, so I'll quote and respond to this elsewhere.

The other group enjoy the game just as much with less of a competitive atmosphere. We are not pro athletes, they say, I'll do my best but I ultimately don't care about winning the game as much as having a good time. They come to have fun, and hate it when a call is fiercely debated. A little debate is OK, but we have been taking it too far recently, they say. Also this group is will be lenient on late-comers and let them rotate into the fielding rather than DH all game, or until someone leaves.

These two things don't really go together... remember that Carlos was one of the late comers on our team, and in my opinion he is one of our better fielders, none the less- I would've rather had him sit than any of the less impressive fielders who arrived on time.

About being competative... I honestly feel like this group has evolved a great deal since last summer. We've become and attracted better players, and better players naturally have more of a competative edge. Why? becuase if you don't care whether or not you win, you are less inclined to give 100% (as a side reference, Dorian and I have recently had this same conversation with some of our friends who want to play poker "for fun", but not for money). The competition has to mean something for people to try their best, and playing a game where everyone tries their best (regardless of the W/L outcome) is more fun to me than a game where half the people don't care.

I myself am mostly the second type, but I also favor wood bats, and am strongly disappointed if I see someone giving less than 100% on a play. My bottom line is: play the best you can, and you're we're cool, whether your best is actually good or not matters far less.

I totally agree with this. I still think that the 100% that a person who really wants to win gives is going to be more than the "100%" that the person that likes to play gives (perhaps this is where the phrase "giving 110%" comes from?).

Both groups are currently tolerating each other, but on occasion we are seeing some friction. Since around May or so I think we have all noticed an increase in tempers flaring, call-arguing and general bitching. It is hard to see a solution to this, and only one idea comes to my mind. The live games are when we use all the MLB rules, and they seem to naturally increase the competitive spirit involved. Lead-offs and stealing and aggressive pitching, this is all great stuff. The only bad thing about them is the walks, which have been coming down but still need to come down further.
How about this: let's just try and not argue calls much and bitch at each other about a play or choice of bat, except at the live games. In the MLB they argue, and they give 100%, and the win matters. Any MLB player would take an ugly, bad-tempered win over an honorable, friendly loss.

I feel like people have been less honest recently. I feel that a lot of people have been jumping into conversations when they don't have perspective and people have been making calls when they are not sure whether the call they're making are right.

I think the following guidelines should be used for discussing close plays.

-On plays on the bases the offensive pitcher should be the one to make the call. This means that he has to get himself in a good position to make a fair call, but if he doesn't see it clearly he should ask the people near the play what they saw. No one besides the offensive pitcher should make a call unless they're directly asked by the offensive pitcher. If no one is certain whether a runner was safe or out, he should be called safe.

On hit balls down the line, the catcher should be the one making the fair or foul calls, if the catcher doesn't see the play, he should defer to the appropriate base coach. If no one clearly sees the play it should be considered fair.

Anyone still reading at this point, give yourself a cookie.

Awww... but I don't have any cookies

TheLegend wrote:
-On plays on the bases the offensive pitcher should be the one to make the call. This means that he has to get himself in a good position to make a fair call, but if he doesn't see it clearly he should ask the people near the play what they saw. No one besides the offensive pitcher should make a call unless they're directly asked by the offensive pitcher.

TheLegend wrote:On hit balls down the line, the catcher should be the one making the fair or foul calls, if the catcher doesn't see the play, he should defer to the appropriate base coach.

I agree with these ideas.

I also agree with what Ken is saying. In fact, with a general consensus from the key players I'd be willing to add it to the Rules page online (which we need to start bringing to the games, by the way.)

Yes, Ken came up with a good system. Let's remind everyone before each game so the pitcher and catcher will be alert to watching plays closely.