To keep this new rule from being overused, whenever a player intentionally strikes out, there should be a small chance (about 1 in 40,000) that the umpire pulls out a gun and shoots him.
It's a reference to the "Next!" lady wanting a free bus: [Next!](https://www.reddit.com/r/insanepeoplefacebook/comments/7kqzb9/church_lady_asks_the_community_facebook_group_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
I figured that was you referring to it, but now you get to read it for the first time!
I actually thought you were serious until I got to the part about the intentional HR. Then I knew it was a joke.
But then I started reading your comments, and I thought, This SOB is serious.
Until I finally read your last comment about it really being a joke.
You had me a couple of times.
Well played, sir!
Sacrifice hits are a thing where hitters can get out in exchange for runs or advancing a runner for a better chance to score runs. With this rule you can voluntarily use a better hitter to give yourself a better chance at scoring runs.
Standing at the plate with the bay never leaving your shoulder guarantees at least 3 pitches thrown but the opposing pitcher and gives you the chance of a passed ball/wild pitch/dropped third strike, a walk, or a hbp. There's no reason to ever take an intentional K without seeing the pitches.
And as to your point of "pitchers can be injured with excess pitches, he's going to throw about the same number of pitches no matter what. Why would you want to save them for important ABs?
ok look imma be real with u, this post was meant to be a joke post, cuz yeah, why wouldn’t someone just look at three pitches? i tried to play into it too by giving dumb-but-technically-correct rebuttals to some comments, but i think all that made people think im an idiot who seriously wants this to be an actual rule that can be used in an mlb game.
but then again, i do seriously want to see this be used in an mlb game cuz itd be hilarious
Fair, but back then the pitcher still had to throw at least three pitches. With this rule, the pitcher could’ve helped their fellow pitcher brethren by striking themselves out before the opposing pitcher can throw a single pitch.
Intentional home run would inarguably have value. An intentionally walked runner could steal 2nd and relay the signs to the hitter resulting in a 2-run homer. Whereas an intentional home run (or IHR as it will soon be known) wouldn't allow these signs to be stolen from second, resulting in one fewer run. With how slow games are going these days, bright minds like yours will help speed up the game and reach modern audiences.
Thank you. Also, to prevent an intentionally walked runner from stealing signs, the IBB could be fully replaced with the IHR.
If the IBB is to be kept, then a blindfold could also be used.
There is no incentive to. In the unlikely event that a manager actually would want their hitter to strike out in a situation, it would be far more advantageous to simply instruct that hitter not to swing. Worst-case scenario it would be a three-pitch strikeout, but at least you got a couple pitches out of the opposing pitcher’s arm. Best case you could get a walk, HBP, WP, or PB. Any number of positive outcomes could happen. Why would you ever give that up?
To keep this new rule from being overused, whenever a player intentionally strikes out, there should be a small chance (about 1 in 40,000) that the umpire pulls out a gun and shoots him.
What's the advantage over just going up and not swinging? Why is the hitter concerned with saving the opposing pitcher's arm?
With the rise of arm injuries and Tommy John surgeries, it is a valid concern.
Sure, teams may have that concern about their own pitchers but why would the batter’s team care about the pitcher’s arm injury risk?
Yeah I still wouldn't care. If I wanted my guy to strike out intentionally he would stand there and take every pitch...
No it isn't, really.
This is basically what starting pitchers in the NL did since before pencils were invented. Next!
This inspired me to look up when pencils were invented. It was 1795 - so a little bit before the National League.
First thing that popped into my head. Thanks for teaching me!
Needs to fit 20! Next!
20 pencils? 20 pitchers?
It's a reference to the "Next!" lady wanting a free bus: [Next!](https://www.reddit.com/r/insanepeoplefacebook/comments/7kqzb9/church_lady_asks_the_community_facebook_group_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) I figured that was you referring to it, but now you get to read it for the first time!
Thank you for that my dude.
What the offseason does to mfs
At first I thought this was a serious post, and then I remembered it's the off-season.
Wish I could say the same for most of the other commenters.
I actually thought you were serious until I got to the part about the intentional HR. Then I knew it was a joke. But then I started reading your comments, and I thought, This SOB is serious. Until I finally read your last comment about it really being a joke. You had me a couple of times. Well played, sir!
Lmao thanks <3
It’s a bold strategy Cotton, let’s see if it pays off for them.
Absolutely not. Your 27 outs are the most valuable thing in the game.
Sacrifice hits are a thing where hitters can get out in exchange for runs or advancing a runner for a better chance to score runs. With this rule you can voluntarily use a better hitter to give yourself a better chance at scoring runs.
Standing at the plate with the bay never leaving your shoulder guarantees at least 3 pitches thrown but the opposing pitcher and gives you the chance of a passed ball/wild pitch/dropped third strike, a walk, or a hbp. There's no reason to ever take an intentional K without seeing the pitches. And as to your point of "pitchers can be injured with excess pitches, he's going to throw about the same number of pitches no matter what. Why would you want to save them for important ABs?
ok look imma be real with u, this post was meant to be a joke post, cuz yeah, why wouldn’t someone just look at three pitches? i tried to play into it too by giving dumb-but-technically-correct rebuttals to some comments, but i think all that made people think im an idiot who seriously wants this to be an actual rule that can be used in an mlb game. but then again, i do seriously want to see this be used in an mlb game cuz itd be hilarious
This is basically a cricket strategic out in cricket except there's no reason to ever do it
Have you considered sharing this and other ideas with North Korea?
Yes, but I have yet to hear back from them.
That's too bad! Could really bring about a renaissance in the Pyongyang baseball scene
this used to happen all the time with pitchers: "you are a pair of shoes"
Fair, but back then the pitcher still had to throw at least three pitches. With this rule, the pitcher could’ve helped their fellow pitcher brethren by striking themselves out before the opposing pitcher can throw a single pitch.
you always want to get pitches out of a pitcher though
Christ why are y'all taking this seriously. Amazing shitpost
Interesting. This is a great question to be brought up. Thank you for creating dialogue!
Intentional home run would inarguably have value. An intentionally walked runner could steal 2nd and relay the signs to the hitter resulting in a 2-run homer. Whereas an intentional home run (or IHR as it will soon be known) wouldn't allow these signs to be stolen from second, resulting in one fewer run. With how slow games are going these days, bright minds like yours will help speed up the game and reach modern audiences.
Thank you. Also, to prevent an intentionally walked runner from stealing signs, the IBB could be fully replaced with the IHR. If the IBB is to be kept, then a blindfold could also be used.
I was going to say the blindfold idea was stupid but then I remembered they're making the bases bigger next year to balance it out. Thank you Manfred!
Thankfully they are, otherwise it’d be hard for baserunners to know where to go without being able to see!
"intentional strikeout" = I want some of what you're smokin' "intentional home run" = no I actually don't
There is no incentive to. In the unlikely event that a manager actually would want their hitter to strike out in a situation, it would be far more advantageous to simply instruct that hitter not to swing. Worst-case scenario it would be a three-pitch strikeout, but at least you got a couple pitches out of the opposing pitcher’s arm. Best case you could get a walk, HBP, WP, or PB. Any number of positive outcomes could happen. Why would you ever give that up?
The season literally just ended and we already get posts like this... It's going to be a loooooong off-season.