Ballpark Banter- Maple bat crisis

* There has been so much fuss made recently about the dangers of maple bats, that I often wonder why is it now what all of this comes to the surface? It does indeed seem that bats are breaking at a higher rate this season than in years past, and I don't think there is any real rhyme or reason to it. If you can explain why the world is round, then you can explain why more bats are breaking in the Bigs. The spot light has officially been shined on this subject since more and more major league players are using maple bats instead of wood bats, and the subsequent consequences. When ash bats break, they splinter more than snap, lowering the chance of an impromptu spear hurling towards a player, official, or fan.

A few people, most recently an umpire, have been struck by the flying daggers known as broken maple bats, creating bloody scenes and a touchy subject for Major League Baseball. But the only reason why we are talking about this now is because a few people have gotten hurt. That doesn't mean that today's situation is any worse than it was five years ago. I still remember dangerous shards of wood flying across the field when ash was predominantly used among big league hitters.

What do you think is going to happen when a 90 mph fastball meets the handle or end of a piece of lumber? It is going to snap. My point is that this has been happening for years, and now it is being brought to the forefront like it is some ground-breaking scientific discovery. But what is really appalling is some of the ideas being kicked around regarding "fan safety".

I know these broken bats are dangerous and I am not naive to that. I know its an issue, but at the same time, "this is the world we live in." Should we play arena baseball where the field is closed in with four walls the size of the Green Monster and fans can watch from hot air balloons above? The whole idea of putting netting around the entire field, or at least extending it beyond both dugouts, is ridiculous. 300 pound men jumping over chairs and into the first few rows at a basketball game is extremely dangerous too, but is the NBA going to put the court in a box?

It is a treat to be able to see the field without obstruction, and the netting would create a disability to viewers, making it more difficult to witness some of the details on the field that attract the serious baseball viewer. It will make the game less fan-friendly; our game will be like Japan, where fans have to tie bags to long strings and lower them twenty feet down to the field to get an autograph. Think about that.

My point is that simply paying attention is the best defense that any viewer could employ. When you go to a baseball game you know that baseballs and bats have a chance of flying into the stands. You know that going in. So why would you sit close to the field and not pay attention to the game, but instead have your back to the action and because you would rather follow the beach ball in the stands? Would you walk into a busy street without looking both ways for oncoming traffic? I think not, so what is so different about this situation?

What needs to be done is this: fans need to be aware of the dangers of sitting so close to the action, and if they still choose to do so, they do at their own risk. Parents need to make sure their kids are watching the game, if not because that is what you went to the ballpark for, then for safety alone. Baseball doesn't need netting up to the heavens, it just needs people who take this threat seriously. If you don't and are a victim of a beaning, then that is on you. Being alert when watching the game would eliminate 99.9% of these "accidents". (And the only reason I'm leaving 0.1% open to debate is because assuming anything is completely impossible would be somewhat ingenuous, so there is your 0.1% to work with.)


* Finishing up the maple bat fiasco, I don't really think there is much of a difference between maple and ash, in terms of how much they break or how they break. I have seen it all from both bats, and can't say I'm surprised by either one. I don't think it would be right to ban maple bats in the middle of a season, so if MLB wants to do that, they should do it at the end of the 2008 season, giving the players the off season to become accustomed to their new ash bats.

I propose a better idea than that, assuming the technology and resources is available: MLB should propose and idea to the major bat companies, asking them to produce a "composite" bat that has the same feel and action of a maple or ask bat. "Composite" bats have a similar wood feel, but they are nearly impossible to break. Wouldn't this be a much better solution all together? We nearly eliminate bats breaking, clubs save tons of money on ordering bats, and fans can enjoy without the worry of having to dodge a spear. I have to think that a bat company could do this. The trick is making the composite feel as identical as possible to a maple or ash bat. If that can't be done, or the composite doesn't have the same pop as the regular wood bats, then players would aggressively oppose this idea, and I wouldn't blame them.