Making Baseball More InterestingApril 28, 2008 Tim Worstallblogs10 CommentsHow to do so, asks Freakonomics? Hmm, hesitant to argue with Americans on such matters, but there\’s some very good ideas here. previousCompetition TimenextBritblog Roundup # 167 10 thoughts on “Making Baseball More Interesting” Eva April 28, 2008 at 7:36 pm Drugs. Having watched both, I’d have to say cricket wins for slowness but baseball for mindbending weirdness, especially played at night under floodlights, on a surreal green field, in those bizarre costumes. PC6300 April 28, 2008 at 8:32 pm Writing an article about baseball under the heading of “Freakonomics” turns my stomach. I thought the first half of the book was really good. It wasn’t until the second half that I began to agree with Neal Boortz. Asking the government to educate your children will result in all sorts of problems. For example, -people that think that Freakonomics was a good book. -people that reduce baseball to a game of pitch and catch. -people that propose ways of making baseball more like football or basketball because they prefer the later two. Baseball is a profitable business. Unless they can find a way to make it more profitable, expect it to remain unchanged. BTW- I sat 4 rows up yesterday during a cold and windy game where a struggling pitcher for a mediocre ballclub threw a complete game shutout. The final score was 10-0. I loved all 162 minutes of it. Cabalamat April 28, 2008 at 9:20 pm Nude women’s baseball? Tim adds: and this would be better than nude womens’ cricket in what way? john gibson April 29, 2008 at 12:30 am I saw some of it on tv the other night, and turned over after about 30 sec. So Much For Subtlety April 29, 2008 at 4:30 am Compulsory gambling? No one is allowed to watch the game on TV or buy a ticket to the stadium unless they have $100 on the outcome? We all know incentives work, right? Stella Baskomb April 29, 2008 at 5:23 am Dubner blithers: “What is baseball’s biggest innovation of the past 40 years? Steroids maybe. Or the specialization of the pitching staff (yawn).” thus flaunting his ignorance of baseball. 40 years ago was 1968 – the following year, the playoff system was introduced. The designated hitter arrived soon after in the early 1970’s. The strike zone has continued toward the size of a microdot, and hitting has dominated the game – to the delight of fans. Speaking of strikes, there was one in 1994 that cancelled the World Series. Lots of spiffy new stadiums built in the past 40years. That’s 4 significant changes and a significant event – and I haven’t even had breakfast yet. Maybe it’s time for this chump Dubner to get a real job? Anon April 29, 2008 at 11:13 am I think you could improve it as follows All players to wear minskirts All players to be young women Rename it Rounders So Much For Subtlety April 29, 2008 at 12:35 pm Anon. I saw a movie once starring Madonna, Rosie O’Donnell and Lori Petty. It was called “A League of Their Own”. Now admittedly they did not call baseball rounders, but they did put several young women (as enumerated above) in miniskirts. Now I admire Geena Davis’ acting but it says something that even she cannot save this film. I think you need to go and rent it, watch it a few times, preferably sober, and then come back and tell us what is wrong with your plan. If you’re still sober that is. Alcohol cannot wipe the memory of Madonna *and* Rosie in the same film from my mind. Little Black Sambo April 29, 2008 at 2:14 pm I thought cricket had laws, not rules. Kyle Dunn October 14, 2008 at 11:07 pm “I am paying 30 dollars a ticket (more in most cases) to see Barry Bonds crush a 496 yard home run. The worst thing this is doing is making games higher scoring and (gasp!) more interesting for people to watch these days” Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.