MLB bans third-to-first pickoff

By Sean Gagnier
@SeanGagnier

The owners have spoken, and the third-to-first pickoff move is history. While the move very rarely worked, it was a favorite of some pitchers who wanted to keep runners honest. With runners on first and third, the pitcher would fake a pickoff throw to third prior to throwing to first, in an attempt to catch the runner leaning toward second.

The rules commission has decided that this move will now be considered a balk. It was deemed a balk because of its incredibly low success rate. It was seen as being nothing more than a waste of time and the definition of a balk.

Many pitchers would use the move to buy time for a reliever in the bullpen or simply to annoy runners on base. The move so rarely worked, you could likely count the successful times on one hand, that it was used more to see if a runner could be caught off guard or a batter tip his hand.

But looking at the move in detail shows that it fits the definition of a balk almost to a T. The pitcher motions forward prior to spinning to third and then pivoting back to first. If that isn't a balk then someone needs to redefine the term.

The banning of this move will likely have very little effect on the game, as so few pitchers actually attempted it. But it could serve to speed the game up a bit and could give a slight edge to baserunners who no longer have to worry about a trick-move catching them off the bag.

With one common sense rule change made, maybe the MLB can step into the 21st century and get some instant replay like the rest of the world.

Why the BBWAA Got It Right With the MLB Hall of Fame Elections

By Sean Gagnier
@SeanGagnier

It's old news, everyone knows that the Baseball Writers Association of America did not elect any player to the MLB Hall of Fame this year, and many fans are upset. Why? Because a bunch of cheaters and undeserving players were denied enshrinement?

Deal with it.

The only player that actually deserved to get in was Craig Biggio, and he should bump his numbers enough next season to make it to Cooperstown. As for the others? They don't belong there.

Jack Morris? Read our opinion on why he should never see Cooperstown. In short, his numbers are pedestrian at best and nothing makes him stand out over the throngs of other average pitchers that fade away.

Then we get to the steroid users. It has been said that perhaps baseball should just put these players in the Hall because they were the best of their era despite taking performance enhancing drugs. Bull. They cheated and they should be barred from history.

If you want to acknowledge their achievements, fine. But leave them in the museum outside of the Hall. But Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens and Rafael Palmiero should never be inducted. They defiled the game without regard and should be punished.

Wanna say that those who took amphetamines were cheaters and many of them were elected to Cooperstown? A decent argument, but amphetamines do not physically alter a person like PED's did. Just look at Bonds, his hat and shoe size grew several sizes. (while I'm sure other things went in reverse)

These men are and forever will be, liars and cheaters. But, I am not married to the idea of keeping them out forever, I am a reasonable man.

The steroid era cheaters can be voted into the Hall when Bud Selig climbs down off his high throne of Alzheimers and senility and allows the all-time hit leader Pete Rose into Cooperstown.

Want to say that the Hall can't be taken seriously if the all-time home run leader* isn't included? The same can be said for Rose. The man was incredible on the field and deserves to be immortalized for it.

Did he bet on the game? Yes. Did he throw games or effect the outcomes of any game with his gambling? No. But he is labeled a cheat and barred for life.

So in the eyes of baseball, a man who bets on the game and on his team to win, is worse than a player that goes out of their way to deliberately cheat the game.

Sorry, but the writers got this one right.