7 Inning Games and AB Qualifier for Batting Crown
 

I was wondering with all the 7 innnings games is the 3.1 plate appearance per game still in effect to qualify for the batting title ?

Don't know the answer to your question, but I actually have been lovin' the 7 inning games. In fact, I would like to see it become a permanent thing for all 162 games.

The upsides are numerous: less wear and tear on the players; fewer pitchers needed; starting pitching becomes more important again; shorter game times; more double-headers could be scheduled which would result in more days off and a later start to the season.

What's the downside? I know it would mess with the stats a bit, but a full season used to be 154 games and even fewer than that if you go way back, so the at-bats wouldn't drop that much by comparison.

I don't know who enjoys 4 hour baseball games, but it ain't me.

Television causes 4 hour baseball games. 9 inning minor league game can last just over 2 hours these days.

^ This. ^

I never thought I'd say it, but I like the 7 inning games. Maybe starting pitchers could get a few complete games. Time is about 2 1/2 hours-3 hours. Scoring first is even more important, etc.

I don't like the extra inning rule which puts a player on 2nd base to start an inning. Why is this rule still in effect, ? Hope it changes at All-Star Break. Just watched a game. Fly ball out runner advances to 3rd, next batter, fly ball out and runner scores and they win the game without even getting a hit. I don't like this rule at all.

It's a good question, and I'm surprised we haven't heard the answer anywhere.

I wonder if the thinking that since only doubleheader games are 7 innings, and teams only play a handful of those, the rule can stay the same.

After all, in a 9 inning game, a player is going to get 4-5 plate appearances, so a few 7's in there shouldn't have a huge effect.

Off the subject, but a subtle tie-in:

I'm thinking that so many intra-league games have 'devalued' NL and AL league leaders.


.

Can’t disagree with you…once significant cross league play started, “league leader” became a bit arbitrary.

If I was 2nd in my league in HR but had more than the “leader” in the other league, that wouldn’t sit right.

I actually like the inter-league play. Fans get to see stars from the other league and it evens the playing field a bit.

I haaaate 7 inning games, and really haaaaaaate putting a guy on 2nd base in extra inning games.

It's not because I'm an old fogey traditionalist either. I love the DH, bat flips, inter-league play and the idea of robo-umps to call balls and strikes.

I'm sad we're no longer going to see a 22 inning marathon. There's a certain tension to wondering if a team is going to run out of pitchers, or bench players........and we know it's just one game out of the regular season, but when a game drags on like that, it feels like the stakes are getting higher and higher as the game goes on.

Anybody have any idea if that same rule is going to apply during the playoffs?

It would be a shame if we were forever robbed of ever seeing anything again like the Astros vs. Mets Game 6 of the 1986 Playoffs.

Or anytime there's a pitchers duel for 9 innings. Both teams get shut down..........and we're just going to negate that by putting a guy on 2nd with no outs to start an inning. It's insane to me. Just for the sole purpose of shortening games.

For the record, I also hate shoot-outs in hockey. It's a cop-out IMO.

I'll be the old fogey Dave.

These 7 inning games and a man on 2nd base are for little league games, not professionals.

Today's players are at the peak of fitness compared to past players who where involved in marathon innings / double headers.

Handsomely paid now, play two more innings and don't complain.

Don't get me going on the " shift ". Professional player, hit to the opposite field.

You kids stay off my lawn !!! Next time I keep the ball !!!