Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Armor or no?

I

IcSyU

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2007
28,748
7,673
113
Watching the Yankees/Indians today, they brought up the armor on the elbow. Do you think hitters should be allowed to wear it or not, and if you're in between, where should they be allowed to wear it.

I for one think armor on the elbow is crap. I understand the purpose for wearing the one on your shin because fouling a ball of your shin hurts like hell, but the armor on the elbow gives a hitter the advantage of being able to stand on top of the plate. Even if they aren't outlawed, getting hit on the elbow pad should count as a ball, not as a hit by pitch.
 
Pitchers not being able to utilize the inside part of the plate has changed a lot in baseball and armor has something to do with that.
 
IcSyU said:
Watching the Yankees/Indians today, they brought up the armor on the elbow. Do you think hitters should be allowed to wear it or not, and if you're in between, where should they be allowed to wear it.

I for one think armor on the elbow is crap. I understand the purpose for wearing the one on your shin because fouling a ball of your shin hurts like hell, but the armor on the elbow gives a hitter the advantage of being able to stand on top of the plate. Even if they aren't outlawed, getting hit on the elbow pad should count as a ball, not as a hit by pitch.
Click to expand...

I would like this tried. If you get hit on the pads it is a ball, if the player doesn't wear any pads and is it on the skin or jersey a base for hit batter.
 
There is a good article in Baseball Digest this month about pitchers loosing their edge on the inside of the plate. They talk to Goose Gossage (notorious for throwing up and in) and Don Baylor. (notorious for getting HBP)
Anyway, article talks about how pitchers are no longer feared by the batters because if they throw inside just a couple times, they will get tossed. Goose pretty much says that if a batter would crowd the plate on him, he would just plunk him.
I have mixed feelings about the subject at hand. While I don't like taking the game from the pitchers, it does make for some more interesting baseball to watch when there are a few more runs on the board.
 
I think they should be allowed to wear it, and I also agree that it should be called a ball if they are hit while leaning into. I think the bigger issue is that the umps need to actually enforce the rule of calling it a ball if they lean in or don't make an attempt to move. I also think there should be some way of enforcing a batter hanging over the plate by the umpire so the pitcher is not at a disadvantage when someone is wearing the armor. Not sure how or what could change that but it needs to be done.
 
MNclone said:
There is a good article in Baseball Digest this month about pitchers loosing their edge on the inside of the plate. They talk to Goose Gossage (notorious for throwing up and in) and Don Baylor. (notorious for getting HBP)
Anyway, article talks about how pitchers are no longer feared by the batters because if they throw inside just a couple times, they will get tossed. Goose pretty much says that if a batter would crowd the plate on him, he would just plunk him.
I have mixed feelings about the subject at hand. While I don't like taking the game from the pitchers, it does make for some more interesting baseball to watch when there are a few more runs on the board.
Click to expand...

Watching a good pitchers' duel is good baseball. I think some of those are much more dramatic than the crazy scores.
 
Either ban it altogether, make it an extension of the bat. Getting hit by it means either the ball is in play, or it's a foul ball. That's enough of a disincentive to crowd the plate, I'd say.
 
jumbopackage said:
Either ban it altogether, make it an extension of the bat. Getting hit by it means either the ball is in play, or it's a foul ball. That's enough of a disincentive to crowd the plate, I'd say.
Click to expand...

I like the idea, of course you would then have people figuring out how to lay down a bunt with their elbow without having to show bunt which could get pretty tricky for the infielders to read. It could be the next huge sport changing development, kind of like the forward pass was to football.
 
I know that this probably isn't the case for most of the pro players, but I had a teammate who threw left handed but batted right handed. He wore an elbow pad on his left elbow to protect his throwing arm while batting. If you think about it, traditionally most players have their throwing arm protected by their body for the most part
 
I am opposed to the body armor that some guys wear on the elbows. But I do like the idea of if you have the armor and get hit it is a ball instead of a HBP.
 
Really the biggest issue, like someone said, is that umpires haven't enforced the rule, which is that you have to make an attempt to get out of the way of the ball. Umps are too afraid to upset a superstar who just got plunked by telling him he can't take first base. (Especially if it's a home team hitter, in which case you're going to tick off the crowd, too.) If MLB would make it a point of emphasis to call that rule correctly, the armor thing wouldn't be much of an issue.
 
ElViento said:
Really the biggest issue, like someone said, is that umpires haven't enforced the rule, which is that you have to make an attempt to get out of the way of the ball. Umps are too afraid to upset a superstar who just got plunked by telling him he can't take first base. (Especially if it's a home team hitter, in which case you're going to tick off the crowd, too.) If MLB would make it a point of emphasis to call that rule correctly, the armor thing wouldn't be much of an issue.
Click to expand...

I guess my opinion is what is the likeliness of a player getting injured by taking a 90+ mph fastball to the elbow? If it's great, they should be allowed to wear it. If it's not that great, then maybe they shouldn't. And after watching that Dodgers player get plunked right above the elbow late in the game last night and the stare down that ensued, it leads me to believe it's more of a tool for allowing the players to stand on top of the plate without the repercussions of the pitcher being allowed to come high and inside on him.

However, I tend to agree with the posts that a lot more would be accomplished by actually enforcing the rules already on the books - that a batter must make a legitimate effort in getting out of the way of the pitch. And I'm sorry, turning your back to the pitch under most circumstances doesn't count as making a legitimate effort of getting out of the way.
 
I for one would love to see guys trying to hit the ball with their elbow, considering its a rounded piece and would go deflect all over the place the first couple times people tried.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom