Foul strike rule

GGC · 04-25-2003, 10:58 AM

Leonard Koppett writes about the 100th anniversary of the foul strike rule in today's Seattle Post-Intelligencier:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/baseba...32_kopp25.html

Skip · 04-25-2003, 11:55 AM

I saw this too. I didn't realize that rule was different between the AL and NL for the first coupla years.

I'm not sure I get his distinction between the effects of the foul-strike rule and the DH, lowering the mound, etc.

Wolf Hopper · 04-25-2003, 12:12 PM

Quote:

One hundred years ago last Sunday -- April 20, 1903 -- baseball as we know it was born.

That morning, when the first Philadelphia Athletics batter stepped to the plate to open the 1903 American League season in Boston, the first two fouls he hit would count as strikes.

Before 1901, fouls didn't count unless caught on the fly for an out (originally, anything caught on the first bounce was also out). That year, the National League adopted a foul-strike rule for the first time. It had been the only major league in existence since 1892.

But in 1901, the newly formed American League also claimed major league status and set off a salary war, attracting many former National League stars. In 1902, it outdrew the National by 30 percent, and that winter the leagues entered into a peace agreement. They would observe each other's contracts and coordinate schedules. That would make possible a World Series between the two league champions.

In its first two years, however, the American clung to the old fouls-don't-count rule. That's one reason why Napoleon Lajoie, baseball's biggest star who had been enticed away from the National League Phillies, could hit .426 to win the first American League batting title.

As part of the peace agreement, explicitly or not, the American also adopted the foul-strike rule.

That was the last fundamental playing rule change baseball made, after many evolutionary changes in the preceding 25 years. So, I call that the true birth of baseball as we know it.

Interesting - - we should use 1903 instead of 1900 as the start of modern baseball, no?

SmedIndy · 04-25-2003, 12:15 PM

I think it's a huge distinction, Skip. While we take the fouls trike for granted - players like LaJoie and Keeler were able to foul any pitch at whim with NO penalty at all. I'm sure 20 pitch at bats happened at times each game with no penalty.

Just as the elimination of the fair-foul rule was a huge step forward, so was this step.

Modern baseball should be counted as the start of the recent homerun explosion, but that's a different kettle o' fish.

Wolf Hopper · 04-25-2003, 12:20 PM

The rule change had a pretty big impact - -
AL batting, sans pitchers, had a Lge BA mark of .284 from 1901-02.

In 1903, for the same group, it went down to .263.

KCBOOMER · 04-25-2003, 12:22 PM

Nice article, but I wouldn't call the move from 50' to 60'6" evolutionary.

JamesI · 04-25-2003, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by KCBOOMER
Nice article, but I wouldn't call the move from 50' to 60'6" evolutionary.

overall this is probably the most important change...

sweaver · 04-25-2003, 12:37 PM

I agree. That 10.5 feet has made a huge difference in the game.

Skip · 04-25-2003, 12:48 PM

Ditto on that. And I wasn't saying the foul strike rule change was minor, just that things like (esp) the DH were also not minor.

SmedIndy · 04-25-2003, 03:03 PM

However - the move back in distance was also coupled with other restrictions to the pitcher as well so the impact of distance ONLY can't truly be measured. No longer could pitchers contort their delivery in a large box. Some readings I have done has stated that THAT change ended the career of more pitchers than the change in distance.

I'd say the foul strike, the fair foul, and the first bounce rules are the largest three impacts.

SHOELESSJOE3 · 04-25-2003, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SmedIndy
However - the move back in distance was also coupled with other restrictions to the pitcher as well so the impact of distance ONLY can't truly be measured. No longer could pitchers contort their delivery in a large box. Some readings I have done has stated that THAT change ended the career of more pitchers than the change in distance.
.

This is true, the change in distance was not the only change that swung things the hitters way. The year 1893 also saw the introduction of the pitchers plate. Now pitchers had to pitch with one foot in a fixed position, on the the pitchers plate. No longer could the pitcher deliver the ball from extreme angles, left and right as they did before 1893.

pwdennis · 04-26-2003, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SmedIndy
However - the move back in distance was also coupled with other restrictions to the pitcher as well so the impact of distance ONLY can't truly be measured. No longer could pitchers contort their delivery in a large box. Some readings I have done has stated that THAT change ended the career of more pitchers than the change in distance.

I'd say the foul strike, the fair foul, and the first bounce rules are the largest three impacts.

I quite agree although it should be noted that the effective distance change really wasn't 10'6" when you consider the actual release point of the thrown ball. It was more like 5-6 feet depending upon the height, length of stride, etc of the pitcher

04-25-2003, 10:58 AM	#1
GGC NetShrine MVP Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Central Connecticut Posts: 299	Foul strike rule Leonard Koppett writes about the 100th anniversary of the foul strike rule in today's Seattle Post-Intelligencier: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/baseba...32_kopp25.html __________________ Gary Geiger Counter 796.357 GV 862 Baseball History

04-25-2003, 12:20 PM	#5
Wolf Hopper NetShrine Creator & Curator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: NetShrine WHQ Posts: 6,191	The rule change had a pretty big impact - - AL batting, sans pitchers, had a Lge BA mark of .284 from 1901-02. In 1903, for the same group, it went down to .263. __________________ Steve, Forum Administrator POSTING TIP FOR THE DAY: When composing a post, think about what you would say if the intended recipient was an individual who was actually sitting just two feet in front of you, in person, rather than just some far away and anonymous audience who only can identify you as text on a PC screen - - and then write your post in that manner. It makes for remarkable and sincere discourse.

04-25-2003, 12:22 PM	#6
KCBOOMER NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Home of the T-Bones Posts: 11,116	Nice article, but I wouldn't call the move from 50' to 60'6" evolutionary. __________________ KCBOOMER *Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball*

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Foul Balls	KCBOOMER	2002 Baseball History Archives	7	10-03-2002 10:40 PM
Strike Zone History	cubfan33	2002 Baseball History Archives	13	06-14-2002 03:17 PM
return of the old strike zone?	gyb13	2002 Hot Baseball Chatter Archives	10	04-09-2002 05:09 PM
Baseball Lingo	NetShrine	2001 Baseball History Archives	46	12-18-2001 11:03 AM
Baseball simulation boardgame	timconnelly	Just Shooting It	15	12-17-2001 03:36 PM

04-25-2003, 11:55 AM	#2
Skip NetShrine Vagabond Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Louisville Posts: 7,866	I saw this too. I didn't realize that rule was different between the AL and NL for the first coupla years. I'm not sure I get his distinction between the effects of the foul-strike rule and the DH, lowering the mound, etc.

04-25-2003, 12:15 PM	#4
SmedIndy NetShrine's Historian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Zionsville, IN Posts: 10,569	I think it's a huge distinction, Skip. While we take the fouls trike for granted - players like LaJoie and Keeler were able to foul any pitch at whim with NO penalty at all. I'm sure 20 pitch at bats happened at times each game with no penalty. Just as the elimination of the fair-foul rule was a huge step forward, so was this step. Modern baseball should be counted as the start of the recent homerun explosion, but that's a different kettle o' fish.

04-25-2003, 12:37 PM	#8
sweaver Netshrine Cleanup Hitter Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Mountain State Posts: 8,883	I agree. That 10.5 feet has made a huge difference in the game.

04-25-2003, 12:48 PM	#9
Skip NetShrine Vagabond Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Louisville Posts: 7,866	Ditto on that. And I wasn't saying the foul strike rule change was minor, just that things like (esp) the DH were also not minor.

04-25-2003, 03:03 PM	#10
SmedIndy NetShrine's Historian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Zionsville, IN Posts: 10,569	However - the move back in distance was also coupled with other restrictions to the pitcher as well so the impact of distance ONLY can't truly be measured. No longer could pitchers contort their delivery in a large box. Some readings I have done has stated that THAT change ended the career of more pitchers than the change in distance. I'd say the foul strike, the fair foul, and the first bounce rules are the largest three impacts.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)