Clipping:Every pitch a ball or a strike; criticisms of this rule
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 |
| Add a Clipping |
| Date | Saturday, May 13, 1871 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Boston vs. Olympic of Washington 5/5/1871] Mr. H. A. Dobson, of the Flour City...umpired the game strictly in accordance with the letter of the new rules, never letting a ball pass after the first one, without it was called either “strike” or a “ball.” It is the first game so umpired here, and if not satisfactory to either players or the audience, the fault is in the rules, and not with the umpire; for he has as much right to violate any other rule of the game as to disregard the requirements of the rule governing the calling of balls and strikes. The enforcement of the rule precludes fine batting. To show how the rule works when so strictly applied, it is but necessary to say that in this game the Bostonians were out-batted and out-fielded, but won the game by waiting. Harry Wright’s orders were to wait for three balls, as they must necessarily come before three strikes in nine cases out of ten. Eighteen of the Boston nine were sent to their bases to twelve of the Olympic; forty-six strikes were called on the Boston to twelve on the Olympic, showing that the game was won by simply waiting. Truly not very scientific play. In the last innings, when Brainard had dropped his pace to accommodate Waterman, who was catching, the Boston began to bat lively and made six out of their twelve first base hits. ... This is no criterion of the strength of the two nines, and the second game will have more interest in it than this one, for we predict that nine out of ten umpires will disregard the strict letter of the rule; and batting may be the thing to win in the next contest. |
| Source | New York Clipper |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | Edit with form to add a comment |
| Query | Edit with form to add a query |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Origin | Initial Hershberger Clippings |
Comments
<comments voting="Plus" />