»Defensive indifference«
|
|||
 defensive indifference ♣ It's in baseball, where the catcher lets the runner steal second/third base because the defensive team is winning by a bit (normally, i think 3 runs or more) and there's 2 outs ( i think) in the bottom of the 9th inning. my whole concept of it needs some correction, but what is the point of it? Couldn't it backfire on you? I mean, throw that runner out or at least attempt to, it may give you another out. I think it's just risky, the Angels scored a run b/c on defensive indifferenc, making the score 3-1. A homer would've tied it, but unfortunately, the batter popped out. But defensive indifference made a comeback a lot more probable. I googled it, and couldn't find a reasonable explanation why. Stupid stupid concept. Someone prove me wrong. posted by sangu |
|||
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgEntertainment & SportsSports topics/newsdefensive indifference |
|
|||
 This is why I hate baseball, such stupid, stupid, pointless rules.  posted by Kupov |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Kupov: This is why I hate baseball, such stupid, stupid, pointless rules What other stupid, stupid, pointless rules do you hate in baseball? Well, it looks like nobody really can help me. Oh well, worth a shot. posted by sangu |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Maybe they let the original batter 'steal' a base so that the next one, who in their opinion is easier to throw, is snared? But I don't follow baseball. I spent quite a bit of time trying to find some official rule or good explanation but nada.. The I'm Feeling Lucky also sent me to a forum where they say the runner isn't even credited with having stolen that base..  posted by ryder |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
ryder: the runner isn't even credited with having stolen that base.. Nope he isn't. ryder: Maybe they let the original batter 'steal' a base so that the next one, who in their opinion is easier to throw, is snared Possible..nah, not really. I've never seen that done and..I've seen catchers let runners take third base as well. posted by sangu |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Sangu...I'm disappointed you didn't PM me about this...Of course I can help you out w/this. For shame. 
Anyhow, this is strictly a strategic move. Like you said, usually, this is done late in games when the team in the field is up by more than 3 runs. The key element to it, however, is the batter at the plate. Since you saw it in an Angels game, I'll use them for an example... If we're up by 3 (or more) w/2 outs, Figgins is on 1st, and Adam Kennedy is at the dish, we'll let Figgins steal as many bases as he wants. Reason being, you don't want the pitcher to start worrying about the runner and walk the hitter, worsening the situation. Plus, w/Kennedy at the plate, there's a pretty remote chance that he's going to jack one out. So, you focus on getting him out and ending the game. Now, if Vlad or Anderson were up, this would be a different situation. There is a definite possibility that they could put one out, so you want to pay attention to the runner. However, this situation is dictated by how many runs you are up. If you're up 3 w/a man on base, let him run as much as he wants. Because even if Vlad or Anderson hits one out, you're still up 1. In fact, even if your up 2, I'd say you can let Figgins run because even if a hit scores him, you're still up 1. However, if you're up 1...you damn well better pay attention to that runner. 
Basically, it's a situational thing...mainly on the batter and how many runs you're up. If this doesn't clear it up for you, let me know.  posted by GP |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
GP: If you're up 3 w/a man on base, let him run as much as he wants. Because even if Vlad or Anderson hits one out, you're still up 1. In fact, even if your up 2, I'd say you can let Figgins run because even if a hit scores him, you're still up 1. But yeah, I guess. It inreases the chances of a comeback, but didn't think about the pitcher worrying about the runner. posted by sangu |
|||
|
|||
 Register Log in |
The time now is 12 February 2012, 08:40 php B.B. |