but if you throw it backwards through your own hoop…
that should definitely take points off the other team, right? (/s. it has no robots and is therefore boring to me. Maybe if they added flame traps or, like, electrotraps. i dunno. that just seems sadistic.) (baseball needs the trap-makeover first, though. it’s only slightly better than golf.)
I’d say baseball is worse than golf. Baseball is supposedly a spectator sport, while golf never was.
Golf is a game. Yes, there’s physical ability involved, but it has a handicap system - meaning you’re always playing against yourself. Players of disparate abilities and skill can play together. You don’t need anyone else to play a game of golf (in fact, I’d love to be able to play by myself).
Baseball, a “team sport”, has developed into batter VS pitcher, it’s a rather binary game even when the ball is fielded. Get rid of “over the fence”, make that a foul, (and move the pitchers mound farther away) and you’ll see the game become much more interesting. How can you have a sport where some players are too big to run, because home runs are a valid, and frequent event? I’ve been to a total 3 games in my life, each had more than one ball over the fence. Clearly it’s not hard enough.
Moving the mound would reduce speeds so we’ll see more nuanced batting. As it is we largely get attempts at the fence, or bunts, as anything else is too easily caught. With slower ball speeds, we may see more fast grounders between base lines.
The blatant steroid use was a major contributor to this issue.
But changing any of that reduces the marketing value, and baseball is probably the worst offender when it comes to changing to meet marketing (and that’s saying something, with the BS done by the NFL).
Futurama’s “Blurnsball” lampooned it the best.
(I’m not even a sports fan, at all. Never watch anything, just don’t find watching others ay interesting).
no.
but if you throw it backwards through your own hoop…
that should definitely take points off the other team, right? (/s. it has no robots and is therefore boring to me. Maybe if they added flame traps or, like, electrotraps. i dunno. that just seems sadistic.) (baseball needs the trap-makeover first, though. it’s only slightly better than golf.)
I’d say baseball is worse than golf. Baseball is supposedly a spectator sport, while golf never was.
Golf is a game. Yes, there’s physical ability involved, but it has a handicap system - meaning you’re always playing against yourself. Players of disparate abilities and skill can play together. You don’t need anyone else to play a game of golf (in fact, I’d love to be able to play by myself).
Baseball, a “team sport”, has developed into batter VS pitcher, it’s a rather binary game even when the ball is fielded. Get rid of “over the fence”, make that a foul, (and move the pitchers mound farther away) and you’ll see the game become much more interesting. How can you have a sport where some players are too big to run, because home runs are a valid, and frequent event? I’ve been to a total 3 games in my life, each had more than one ball over the fence. Clearly it’s not hard enough.
Moving the mound would reduce speeds so we’ll see more nuanced batting. As it is we largely get attempts at the fence, or bunts, as anything else is too easily caught. With slower ball speeds, we may see more fast grounders between base lines.
The blatant steroid use was a major contributor to this issue.
But changing any of that reduces the marketing value, and baseball is probably the worst offender when it comes to changing to meet marketing (and that’s saying something, with the BS done by the NFL).
Futurama’s “Blurnsball” lampooned it the best.
(I’m not even a sports fan, at all. Never watch anything, just don’t find watching others ay interesting).
Also, golf already has traps.
Just saying ;)
But you’re right, golf was never meant for spectators, the two are more less just as boring as each other, though.
Golf has an advantage in that most people who watch it, usually put it on in the background.
Removed by mod