Gomez Addams
New Member
First of all, I thought the players played well in the game. However, how can they possibly "run" out of pitchers with 11 of them on each staff ?
I thought it was absurd. It was one big bait and switch. The term "game" was used far too loosely. Only as long as it was convenient.
Just wait until they see their TV raitings next year. I can gaurandamntee you that I will not be watching.
I keep hearing these announcers saying "they ran out of players" and that is just not the case. There were players available and playing but they CHOSE not to continue to play them.
I am just disgusted about how the whole scenario played out.
I thought it was absurd. It was one big bait and switch. The term "game" was used far too loosely. Only as long as it was convenient.
Just wait until they see their TV raitings next year. I can gaurandamntee you that I will not be watching.
I keep hearing these announcers saying "they ran out of players" and that is just not the case. There were players available and playing but they CHOSE not to continue to play them.
I am just disgusted about how the whole scenario played out.
) in doing so. As an example, the Cubs and Sox used to play an exhibition game every year in the middle of the season, and it would never go past the 10th inning. Unfortuanely, that game stunk since only the scrubs played, but they had it set in stone before the game began that it would not turn into a marathon. I don't have a problem with an exhibition game being tied as long as it is possible to have a tie before the game begins. Don't make up the rules as you go along just because it got out of hand, you should plan for these situations. Expanding the rosters won't prevent it from happening, then more pitchers will pitch fewer innings. I dunno, baseball is trying to destroy itself, and that seems to be the only thing they're doing right these days.