Talk:Baseball/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Newbery's Pocket-Book

I've uploaded an image of the page on baseball from Newbery's Pocket-Book, in case it could be of use. See File:NewberyBaseball.jpg. Awadewit (talk) 00:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

el:Μπέιζμπολ

Add the greek article el:Μπέιζμπολ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.202.45.156 (talk) 14:36, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"Baseball" the featured article on French Wiki 6/21/09

Today (6/21/09) the featured article on French Wiki was a lovely, well-written article on baseball which was delightful to read. Although some of the information came from the same sources as this article, there were some different things. I think it might be worthwhile to translate some of it and merge it. NaySay (talk) 14:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

One comical and oh-so-French sentence (in the first paragraph) reads: "Les racines européennes du jeu, longtemps niées par les autorités américaines afin de faire du baseball un sport typiquement américain, sont connues de longue date par les historiens du sport." (The European roots of the game, denied for a long time by the American authorities in order to make baseball a typically American sport, have been known for some time by historians of the sport.)  !!!! Wow! Did the French ever meet a conspiracy theory they didn't like? However, some intense person must have added that; the rest of the article is well-written, informative and surprisingly enthusiastic. NaySay (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeh, but the joke's on them. We got baseball, and they're stuck with soccer. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like you'd fit in well in France. Go ManU. NaySay (talk) 16:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

If the Baseball article on fr.wikipedia is a featured article, why can't we ameliorate our Baseball article, and make it a featured article? We can do better than the French! AdjustShift (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

The Baseball article is already a featured article! I didn't follow the article for some months; I missed the action. DCGeist did a nice job. AdjustShift (talk) 14:53, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Baseball teams fans' message boards or forums

I'm new to baseball - watched first game this summer, and I wonder if they exist at all? I searched and searched with Google and other engines, but found only fan pages or blogs with little or no comments at all. No message boards or forums. There's some pathetic excuse for a board on mlb official site but there too few people who write. I find this strange for a sport which attracts such a big fanbase.Chudinho 21:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You're not looking in the right place. There are hundreds of baseball blogs and fora, some of them very high quality. For example, USS Mariner (Seattle Mariners), BattersBox (Toronto Blue Jays), FanGraphs (stats) and Hardball Times (general interest). Some of these are blogs with full comments, others have fora. Were you looking for a forum for a particular team? Mindmatrix 22:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was looking for Athletics, Orioles and Mets forums. Thanks for these links.Chudinho Chudinho (talk) 21:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Strike

I gather from the article that a "strike" specifically does not refer to a (legal) hit of the ball. Is that right? It seems such a counterintuitive use of language that I wonder if it could be emphasised/clarified more? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.152.243.242 (talk) 19:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Attendance records and the age of steroids

The section "Attendance records and the age of steroids" is not really about attendance. This section has several paragraphs, and only one sentence in one paragraph even mentions attendance. Some reorganization and/or section title change would be helpful. 71.112.25.123 (talk) 19:41, 9 October 2009 (UTC)ATBS

You are incorrect. The section has three paragraphs--each one refers to attendance marks.—DCGeist (talk) 21:32, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

La Soule

"A French manuscript from 1344 contains an illustration of clerics playing a game, possibly la soule, with similarities to baseball..." This seems odd; the la soule article, along with every other reference to it I've seen, describe it as being a football-type game. Or is it just that the name la soule applied to a wide variety of sports? Grant | Talk 06:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Explanation of text-block move

The recent series of edits by BillTunell concerning the racial integration of fall league baseball in the United States are obviously good faith and the material is worthwhile, but the highly detailed content is not appropriate for this overview article on the general topic of baseball. We already have a sizable section on the history of U.S. baseball, but all of its content—which already includes coverage of integration—must remain in summary style in order to maintain a reasonable length and proper focus (please check out WP:Summary style, Bill). The massive addition also disrupts the established chronological organization and flow of the summary history section.

The additional material Bill has provided is specifically relevant to and more appropriate for our well-established topical article on the History of baseball in the United States. As detailed discussion of the major leagues' racial integration already exists there, I've moved Bill's material to that article's Talk page for the moment, so what's new and/or better written can be incorporated without creating redundancies. Best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 20:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Um, this was like a year ago, can we unlock it? I just wanted to edit the part where it says that Taiwan has a professional baseball league, whereas it should say that it's the Republic of China. 209.196.230.72 (talk) 05:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Cricket in See Also and Related Sports

Cricket is a closest cousin to baseball and there is a very informative page that compares both the sports Comparison between cricket and baseball. This page has to be on this page as it is on the cricket's page. this will help people understand the comparison between both the games. Please keep these changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazyeditor9 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Both of those terms are already linked in the article. The See also section is for terms not otherwise linked in the main text.—DCGeist (talk) 05:01, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Cricket is a cousin to baseball, though I'm not sure I would call it a close cousin, more like a medium-distant cousin. Games like rounders and British baseball (which is similar to rounders) are much closer to baseball than cricket is. But they were rather closer in the early 1800s than they are now. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Presumably rounders is a related sport? Hakluyt bean (talk) 03:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Myth

It is a myth that baseball came from rounders, we dont know that it is true. Please do more research for those of us who love the game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.213.69.90 (talk) 21:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The article does not claim that baseball came from rounders. Please learn how to read for the sake of those of us who love our sanity.—DCGeist (talk) 22:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Let's see, who should I believe, an anon IP address, or Henry Chadwick? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The origins of the game!!!

Actually, the baseball game has it's roots in Romania - Europe, being an game which was modified after romanian game - oina. The first written documment which mention some of the rules was discovered in the year 1364 during the reign of Vlaicu Voda in Romania. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.106.156.12 (talk) 21:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

According to the equally-credible Ensign Chekhov, it was inwented by a little old lady from Leningrad. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

What does "10 m" means?

On the third paragraph of "Origins of baseball" section, there is this sentence: "first bye just 6 yards (10 m) from the home bye". What does "10 m" means? If m is for meter, something is wrong. 6 yards are 5.49 meters, and 10 meters are 10.97 yards. --ClaudioMB (talk) 03:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the catch. There was a problem with the coding of the little template that converts the measurement. Should be all better now.—DCGeist (talk) 04:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Throw from out field to home plate.

Does it get there faster by throwing to cut off man or direct from out fielder? Were the out fielders in the Mickey mantle era have better arms? Rich —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.50.142 (talk) 10:46, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

It depends on the situation. Keep in mind that a thrown ball, like a batted ball, immediately starts to slow down due to air resistance. So in terms of total flight time, hitting the cutoff man would seem to be faster. But it also takes a couple of seconds for the relay man to whirl and throw. So if it's a shallow fly ball or hit, the outfielder is more likely to throw directly to the plate, as it would be more efficient. If the ball is hit more deeply, the outfielder will typically relay the ball, since a throw toward the plate from deep in the outfield would be less efficient than hitting the cutoff man. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:56, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

BB is right, but it's even more complicated than that. Bo Jackson throwing to home from the fence in right might make sense; Damon doing it from the fence in left won't. So you have to take into consideration the relative strengths of the outfield arms, the relative strengths of the infield arms, the distance, the relative time that it will take different infielders to whirl and throw, and the increase (or decrease) in accuracy from the infielder handling it in the middle, and the option you add (if there is another runner on base) of instead of throwing home -- the infielder catching the other runner off the base.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:12, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that's something I neglected to mention - the cutoff man might concede the run and try to nail another runner. Always a case-by-case situation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know that air resistance is the main thing anyway. In a vacuum, you get the greatest distance by throwing the ball upwards at a 45-degree angle. But it takes longer to get there, of course, because it has to go farther.

So if you throw to the cutoff man, you and he can both throw the ball flatter, and you may be able to reduce the total time for that reason. --Trovatore (talk) 08:49, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the factors include initial angle and initial velocity, just as with hitting the ball: line drive, deep fly, or popup. A flatter throw is usually thrown with more force, so air resistance is less of a factor. It also doesn't go as far as a high, arcing throw would. But the object is to get it there as quickly as possible. Different from hitting, where the object is to hit it as far as possible, at least when you're swinging from the heels. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI ...

I've nominated rookie Ike Davis for DYK here.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

'American Baseball' vs Baseball vs 'British Baseball'

Just a more general observation here after reading someone refer to 'American Baseball' - should the entry title in Wikipedia not reflect the fact that there is actually a distiction between the two?

eg. American Football, Football. American English, British English.

Comments appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.80.191 (talk) 17:33, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

American baseball is not the name of a sport. The word in the English language for the sport played by many millions of people in many different countries is baseball. British baseball is a game played by a few thousand people.—DCGeist (talk) 18:16, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Picture of Babe Ruth

Maybe this is a little finicky of me, but wouldn't it make sense for this article to have a picture of Babe Ruth, arguably the sport's most iconic player? (e.g. basketball has an image of Michael Jordan)? Maybe not in the place I previously put the photo, but maybe "Popularity and cultural impact"? Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 19:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

International Rules Baseball

Another form of baseball, similar to that mentioned by Jane Austen on the first page of NORTHANGER ABBEY, is still played on Merseyside and in South Wales. There is some information about this at the Tourist Information Office in Cardiff. ZoeinDerby (talk) 18:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Foul tip versus tip in the text

The dispute is which is clearer:

The batter swings at any ball (even one outside the strike zone) and misses, or tips it directly into the catcher's hands

or

The batter swings at any ball (even one outside the strike zone) and misses, or foul tips it directly into the catcher's hands

I think it is plain that the second is preferable. This is a specialized use of the word tip, and the pipe means that the reader has no obvious indication that the link is not to the tip article. On the other hand the phrase foul tip is evident to the reader as a specialized term, and if he doesn't know what it means, the link is plainly there to be followed. --Trovatore (talk) 03:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Reasonable, and yet I disagree.

• For many readers unfamiliar with the terminology—and those uninterested in or ignorant of our Wikilink system—the appearance of foul tip here is likely to produce confusion with the immediately following foul ball. The point is not so crucial in this general overview article that such confusion is necessary.
• My informal survey of high-quality sources (aka Google Book Search) indicates that "tips the ball" is a substantially more common verb formation than "foul tips the ball".

On a personal note, I was pleased to see the phrase "I'm still right though" in your last article edit summary. That makes two of us! It's good to have something in common.—DCGeist (talk) 03:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I disagree too. 68.101.3.151 (talk)

(ec) It is a more common verb formation among people who already know baseball. For those who don't, the meaning of tip is not clear. The meaning of foul tip is not clear to those people either — but it's obvious to them how to remedy the situation, provided they're not looking at a print copy. (If they are looking at a print copy, well, at least it's still clear that a term of art is being employed; that's not clear with the bare word tip.)

This is precisely why pipes to specialized articles, when linking common words, are almost always to be avoided. (Pipes that link long phrases are to be avoided for different though related reasons — they rely too much on the hypertext to make the meaning plain.) --Trovatore (talk) 03:52, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

The proper term is "foul tip". A foul tip is a special case of a foul ball, i.e. a normal foul ball can be caught for an out, whereas a foul tip is merely a strike. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:49, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

The meaning of tip in this context is perfectly clear, Trovatore. This is a standard meaning of the verb, which can be found in any decent English dictionary. Let's look at my Webster's: "tip vb: (1) to strike lightly: tap (2) to give a glancing blow".

Bugs, I disagree that a "foul tip" is a special case of a foul ball. I would say it is clearly a variant of a swinging strike. Avoiding the introduction of the term foul tip into this general overview article relieves the general reader of being drawn into such an abstruse debate.—DCGeist (talk) 18:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

No, it is not in fact clear. If the usual English meaning of tip were being used, then it would still be a foul tip even if it went above the batter's shoulders or the catcher's shoulders or whatever that rule is, but it isn't — that's a caught fly and an out, regardless of the number of strikes.

This is in fact a specialized meaning of the word, and that should be made clear without forcing readers to follow (or hover over) a hyperlink. --Trovatore (talk) 18:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

So, (a) the action that occurs plainly meets the dictionary definition of the verb tip and (b) the sort of high-quality sources we rely on demonstrate that tip is a much more common verb formation than foul tip in descriptions of this action—so what you're saying is that it's not clear to you.—DCGeist (talk) 22:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

No. I'm saying it is a specialized usage of tip, and that the piped link does not make it clear that it's a specialized usage.

I'm not disputing that what happens can be described in ordinary language as "tipping" the ball. The difference is that the baseball sense of the word "tip" being used here has defined boundaries, which the ordinary usage does not have. That makes it a different sense of the word, a specialized one, and that fact should not be hidden behind a pipe. --Trovatore (talk) 23:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

The foul tip is defined thusly in the definitions section of the official major league baseball rules book: "A foul tip is a batted ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to the catcher's hands and is legally caught. It is not a foul tip unless caught and any foul tip that is caught is a strike, and the ball is in play. It is not a catch if it is a rebound, unless the ball has first touched the catcher's glove or hand." Note the lack of anything about "above the batter's shoulders" or whatever. It's not really needed, because by observation such a foul ball would not be "sharp and direct". "Tip" is a generic word. "Foul tip" has a very specific meaning. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Can I take it you agree with me that the term "foul tip" should appear in the text the reader sees, and should not be hidden behind a pipe? --Trovatore (talk) 23:27, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Trovatore, you simply keep repeating a blatant error. The use of tip in the current context is not a "specialized usage" at all—it completely agrees with an ordinary meaning of the verb tip. It is an ordinary usage of the verb tip. (A fact that our high-quality sources support.) There certainly does exist a specialized term that involves the word tip, which is the compound noun foul tip. A link to the article on that bit of minutia is provided as a supplement. It is far from an essential component of an overview article on baseball, so the fact that it arises in piped form is not important.—DCGeist (talk) 06:08, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I am not in error; I am correct. It is certainly related to the ordinary usage, but it is not the ordinary usage, simply because it is more precisely defined. That is a difference, and an important one. It should not be hidden behind a pipe. --Trovatore (talk) 06:53, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Foul balls and tips both count as strikes until there are two strikes. The difference is a foul tip goes behind home plate while a foul ball goes in front of it (usually along the base lines but not always) if one of them is caught then they go down as a fly out, but they must be caught out of the air. A ball can also bounce or roll in fair ground then bounce or roll into foul ground as long as this happens once it is past 1st or 3rd plate it is still in play. Personally I prefer using Foul tip since the purpose of this article is to educate people about baseball we should use the correct terminology by using foul tip since it is correct and that is how most baseball fans would phrase it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.95.245.209 (talk) 14:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

"gameplay"

"Gameplay" is not widely used when talking about baseball, I've never seen it used before reading this article. My understanding is that it's a newer term used when discussing videogame interfaces, which obviously does not apply.

A baseball novice looking at this page would think there is some esoteric thing called gameplay which rules the play of baseball games.

I'm sure more than half of the examples of "gameplay" in this article could be replaced with "play" and require no more work. The rest could be changed with minimal rewording. 67.175.214.83 (talk) 15:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I looked at the sort of high-quality sources on which we rely via Google Book Search, and see that "gameplay" is used almost exclusively within the context of videogames. Your edits seem entirely reasonable, and I'll restore them. I note that you didn't make the change in the section header where "gameplay" appears, and indeed, I believe it should be retained there for clarity and euphony.—DCGeist (talk) 19:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

While I'm actually neutral on the changes, I did feel they needed to be discussed first before being implemented. Another editor apparently agreed with me, and also reverted the changes. Please wait for a consensus to revert again. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 20:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

The change has been discussed. Both the IP and I have given detailed arguments in favor of it. You have declared yourself neutral. The revert action by JNW (who has zero previous involvement with this article) is immaterial, as no comment was offered here or even in edit summary. In sum, there is no reasoned opposition at all to the change, which is what is relevant to determining consensus.—DCGeist (talk) 20:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you guys really edit warring over the word "Game"? I can see a new chapter in Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars being written as we speak.--Jojhutton (talk) 20:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I'm asking that a broader consensus be reached before changes are made. Your comments aren't very helpful either. - BilCat (talk) 20:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

As Jojhutton suggests, this is a minor change. If there is reasoned support for it and no explicit opposition to it, there is obviously no need for a "broader consensus." If we demanded that for every small change, nothing would ever get done here.—DCGeist (talk) 21:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

He's making fun of you, since you've reverted as much as I have! I don't demand discussion on every minor change, nor do I intend to. I was merely trying to give time for the users who put the words there in the first place to have time to comment first, as they may well have had a good reason for choosing the word to begin with. Forgive me for actually caring what someone else might think in this case. I certainly won't make that "mistake" again if you're involved! - BilCat (talk) 21:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Good. If you'd taken two seconds to check the revision history statistics or the discussion that brought this piece its Featured Article status, you would have realized that I'm the article's primary contributor. As it happens, I introduced the word "gameplay." Now, you can go off and worry about who's making fun of whom.—DCGeist (talk) 22:02, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

This exchange took an inappropriately personal turn only when BilCat declared, "He's making fun of you, since you've reverted as much as I have!" BilCat, if you strike that comment, and apologize for the unnecessary sarcasm with which you concluded, I'll be happy to strike those comments you regard as "uncivil." As for "ownership claims," I made none. BilCat declared that the history of the article's composition was relevant; I provided the pertinent facts about my role in that composition. Those facts appear to have made BilCat very unhappy. I'm not sure how to address that angst.—DCGeist (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

It never ceases to amuse that the ones who initiate the incivility are always the ones to whine the loudest about it.—DCGeist (talk) 07:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow. For what it's worth JNW's edits had nothing to do with gameplay vs. play. He(or she) reverted changes done by a fifth party about where the first recorded game with codified rules took place. 67.175.214.83 (talk) 16:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

That's funny...and absolutely correct. So, in the end, no one even implicitly opposed the change from "gameplay" to "play" at all except on oddly conceived procedural grounds. And the world breathed easy...—DCGeist (talk) 18:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

citation needed

Re Block's work, the information that there is evidence supporting him either needs a citation to back it up in this article or the comment should be removed and the citation given in the history of baseball article. 4.249.63.199 (talk) 22:55, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

The evidence supporting Block's position is detailed and cited in the very next paragraph! Oy.—DCGeist (talk) 07:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 117.120.16.132, 2 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} I believe "hardball, in contrast to the derivative game Softball" is derogratory to the said game. yes they have similarities, but calling baseball Hardball because "in contrast" softball is soft is completely unwarranted

117.120.16.132 (talk) 10:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Derogatory to which of the two games? And by the way, a cricket ball is even harder than a baseball. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:43, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Not done: per above. It's not derogatory to either game. If you think it is, I think you are being a bit too sensitive. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 03:26, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

What an amazing sport... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.51.18.20 (talk) 22:43, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Members per team

9 is given in the info box. Is everyone happy that this takes into account the DH hitting for the pitcher in the American League? 86.44.71.5 (talk) 13:07, 24 December 2010 (UTC)