The Pirates scored their runs in the 10th inning the old-fashioned way, stringing base hits together to plate a couple of runs. It should have been a comfortable lead.
But as Richard Rodriguez came out to pitch the bottom of the inning to end it, the Braves already had the tying run at the plate, through no fault of his own.
The extra-inning rule that puts a runner on second base to start the inning didn’t wind up deciding Thursday’s game against the Braves. The Pirates would have scored regardless, and Rodriguez closed it out without a sweat. But the idea that the game, or any extra-inning game, could be decided by just one bloop is wrong.
To be fair, Derek Shelton has admitted that he likes the rule. It does help manage innings and pitcher workloads, which is still a major concern after the shortened 2020 season.
But is it right for games to be decided this way? If the visitors fail to score in the top of the inning, all the home team has to do is bunt the runner to third and then hit a sac fly to win. (Yes, statistically speaking, bunting the runner to third is actually the smarter play, depending on who is at the bat.) It’s a situation where someone could now theoretically pitch a perfect game and take the loss.
Put this in the same pile as the seven-inning doubleheaders. Pitcher health is a priority, and nobody wants a game to go 18 or 19 innings. Accept it as a necessary evil for now, but don’t bring it back in 2022. Hopefully the next Collective Bargaining Agreement doesn’t lump those changes in with the universal designated hitter and whatever else both sides have in store.
YOUR TURN: What do you think about the new extra-innings rule?
