Witness to the Committee

Last night at Tank’s the luminaries of the Oakwood Whiffle and Ale League had before them a transformational opportunity.  “Opportunity” because for that shining moment, they gathered for the first time in memory as a “Rules Committee” empowered to re-imagine Whiffle as we know it.  “Transformational” because the slate of rules before them, if adopted, promised to re-make Saturday Morning into an exuberant, joyful exhibition of sporting bat-and-ball play.  There were eight carefully crafted rule proposals, each designed in their own way to increase run production, and all merited consideration.  

It seemed that all were united in purpose: that there should be more offense, so that 2-0 leads do not feel insurmountably large. But the Whiffle Sages, the Founders if you will, prevailed upon the committee to consider the import of the "history" and the "traditions" that are the foundation of our Whiffle and Ale Club.  They urged the assembled to be wary of the easy attraction of "run production" and "offensive stats."

And their guidance did hold sway as proposal after proposal was voted down, to the delight of the gallery.

So what was achieved?  Passing on the chance to revolutionize the game, the committee chose to subtly embroider the edges.  It was agreed to add a new “Groundout Line” at about the distance of the pitching rubber.  To record a ground out, pitcher must field the ball inside this new, smaller area.  Balls passing through this area will be recorded as singles, as in the past (the doubles line will remain further back, unchanged).  This will have the effect of marginally increasing singles (which are already the result of over 27% of all at-bats) and marginally decreasing ground outs (which are already only 12% of at-bats).

And then, the most controversial proposal of the meeting: The Automatic Grand Slam.  Currently if a foul ball passes through the basketball hoop at the east end of the backstop wall, it is an automatic grand slam (regardless of the actual runners on base at the time), four RBI.  This proposal would award the same ruling to a foul ball through the hoop at the west end of the backstop as well.  OH.  MY.  GOD.  You would have thought we were discussing using mitts.  The “East Hoopers” waged a furious argument to keep the west hoop out of the game.  They even went so far as to distract the committee over whether the proposal should read “both hoops” or “either hoop.”  An evenly divided committee left Commissioner Berwald in the uncomfortable position of the tie-breaking vote.  The committee fell silent to hear his decision; “either hoop” was the call.  And thus the infinitesimally unlikely possibility that a foul ball would pass through the basketball hoop for a grand slam (it has never happened before) just got imperceptibly more possible with the addition of the West Hoop.

So there we have it.  More singles and another virtually impossible shot at a grand slam.  Only 16 weeks until opening day!