won't want to do this) is to minimize the frequency and/or length of commercial breaks. Those are what make games drag on, not so much something like intentional walks or pitchers and catchers talking. Intentional walks and meetings on the mound have been part of the game for years. Aside from the lack of a salary cap and the problematic home plate rule, baseball itself is fine as it is.

Do you agree, or no, that games take longer? And, please don't do the "commercials" argument.

There are studies that have been out for several years that each half inning is taking longer.

The last time Olbermann did a bit on this, he used the number 105 seconds. Just each half inning. That's more than an extra half hour per game, DURING THE ACTUAL GAME! (Emphasizing it the way he did.)

Sure, commercials have compounded the issue, but the actual pace of play is far longer than it was for the first 125 years of the game. And, TV was around, in a big way, for at least 2 full decades at that point.
GAC

• A hitter will be required to keep at least one foot in the batter's box throughout each at-bat unless there is a foul ball, wild pitch or passed ball -- or if a pitch forces him out or the umpire grants "time."

• A 20-second clock will be posted in each dugout, behind home plate and in the outfield to prevent pitchers from taking too much time. If a batter steps out of the box during the 20-second period that ends with the start of the pitching motion, the pitcher can throw. The umpire may call a strike if the batter has not been granted time. The clock will start when the pitcher has the ball or, after a foul, when the umpire signals "play."

• A 20-second clock will be posted in each dugout, behind home plate and in the outfield to prevent pitchers from taking too much time. If a batter steps out of the box during the 20-second period that ends with the start of the pitching motion, the pitcher can throw. The umpire may call a strike if the batter has not been granted time. The clock will start when the pitcher has the ball or, after a foul, when the umpire signals "play."

Good luck keeping all that straight. It's crazy.

Speed up pitching changes -- relievers should be pretty warm coming from the bullpen. Put a replay umpire in the ballpark -- that would speed up replay. Eliminate the challenge concept too.

While I agree there is a combined variety of factors that led to this, when it comes to batters or pitcher taking up too much time apparently there is already something for that.

The most obvious way to improve the pace of games without making any sweeping changes to in-game strategy would be to enforce a rule that already exists: Rule 8.04 in Major League Baseball’s rulebook says, “When the bases are unoccupied, the pitcher shall deliver the ball to the batter within 12 seconds after he receives the ball. Each time the pitcher delays the game by violating this rule, the umpire shall call “Ball.””

And batters, too, could be held responsible for excessive time spent out of the batter’s box adjusting their gear. The league has the right to crack down on that under Rule 6.02.

“I know it’s difficult for some hitters, but I think their walking around should be limited,” says Pedro Martinez, who’ll serve as a studio analyst in TBS’ postseason coverage. http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/09/mlb-games-length-three-hours-pace-of-play

I've been away from the game too much lately but haven't seen many examples. I was one of those in favor before the addition and my counter to the argument "it would slow down the game" was it wouldn't take as long to watch a manager walk out to the diamond, argue a call, kick some dirt around and head back accomplishing nothing.

I didn't think of the time to decide to whether challenge or not and its impact. Could you explain the concept if you don't mind me asking? Just trying to get a good visual of it. Off topic, to what Sheffield says though momentum is overrated. I won't say it doesn't because sometimes you sense a psychological change but it is way overused to explain something that happens in simple probability. It is easier to explain why in football or basketball but looking at Baltimore's schedule they started w/ a 4-game losing streak, then had a bunch of win a couple then lose a couple then why won 7 of 9 w/ a 3 game win streak followed by a 4 but if i expand that stretch starting w/ the win streak it was a 9-9 stretch that if you expand to 2 games into the Houston series was a 13-16 stretch. Then they won 4 in a row. They were more streak heavy in the 2nd half (noticed a lot more AL East foes). I'm sure momentum was a factor in some of those outcomes but think of it like a weighted coin flip. A coin can land same side 4 times in a row but it is still 50/50 and if you flip 500 times I'm sure you'll see some streaks. You could take it further and looked at when their hitters went 0-4, 3-4, etc. It is like possessions in football or shooting in basketball (if you're really good then shooting a ball is like flipping a coin) or gambler's fallacy.

Sorry about that, how do you hold something you can't prove responsible but I'm sure if there was a way to control & study you wouldn't see any significant change in things going your way vs going the other way.

Slowing down the game though doesn't seem it needs all this. They already have a rule for the people slowing down the pace unnecessarily and something looks like needs to be done w/ this replay thing in baseball but always been a fan of getting things right though I have some awful football memories before replay.

On edit - In the end I'm glad it's a trial run meaning if the results are disastrous the changes won't be implemented. (hopefully that change in the PAT they tried out in the preseason won't be used)

a manager first has to decide whether to challenge a play or not. So he waits (tick, tick) for a "thumbs-up" or "thumbs-down" from a team advisor watching the replay in the locker room. If the advisor calls for a challenge, the umpire crew calls for a special headset and is connected (tick, tick) to a remote umpire based in New York City. The call is reviewed (tick, tick) and made from there.

The challenge has to be right otherwise the manager loses the the chance to appeal a call for the rest of the game. But what's the point of review then? You run the risk of being penalized just to be sure the right call is being made.

One of the options argued for from the very begiinning was to have a review umpire located onsight to review every play at the ballpark and be available to overturn a call immediately. I'd like to try this and get rid of the manager challenge and New York review.

-----------

As I mentioned in earlier threads, the game is longer because the game has evolved. Batters work the count and there are more pitching changes.

Enforce the rules already in the books as you suggest. Shorten warm-ups on pitching changes. But please, let's not add these absurd chiild-like "one foot in" rules and just play the damn game.

I timed the inning breaks during Game One of the Giants/Nats -- 2 minutes, 30 seconds. In many instances the player were ready to go but the game was held up so TV could get their comericals and promos in -- according to Giants announcers.

By eliminating one :30 commercial between each break they'd pick up 9 minutes. MLB could charge a little for more advertising since the elimination would cut down on clutter which is better for ad retention.

or a different one I came across but I remember average pitch counts have gone up, almost a full unit if I remember correctly. Which may reasonably explain the average length going up despite runs going down which in theory should lead to shorter games.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=1484

I agree on the ads but I wonder how serious they are about finding solutions to shorten the game (it wouldn't bother me much in their shoes unless I would lose significant money but how much does it bother the casual or longtime viewer? It may not help w/ attracting new viewers but w/ more and more prime-time programming finally being produced and more and more sports being shown on more and more channels. Hell, if they really wanted to shorten games they could order umpires to throw more strikes(that helps doesn't it?). I understand why, it would affect the integrity and I'm sure the organization that umpires report to is independent of the MLB business organization.

If I was baseball, I'd stop w/ these ridiculous additions that most (from what I can tell) see them for what they are and have the opposite effect of selling the game. I admit the All-Star rule had me more interested first couple of years but in-the-head, no one is really playing like it matters since the outcome only helps a select few. I recall a quote from a Yankee, I believe, in a story where the All-Star manager (more positive he was a Yankee) where there was a game heading into extra innings or there where he expressed hope that the NL (or AL if facts are backwards) player drives in a winning run and the player asked about the home field thing and I can't remember at all what he said but remembered summed up my feelings on the whole thing. Something like that he was more interested in getting rest during the break and didn't care much who had that extra home game.

On edit - I forgot, selling the game. OK, the ads help there but I'd actually do things or leave the responsibility w/ those who know what is needed to improve the game by destroying it with gimics that don't make any sense (quality of baseball) when applied logic to it. Why have 2 shot clocks going on when there is a rule and I'm sure most players won't be offended if those 12 seconds felt reasonable. Warn 'em before the game so there are no surprises.

it could help for the pace to pick up sometimes, but that's the game.

But let's get to the crux here: the league thinks it's costing them younger viewers.

Maybe they have market research to back this. But I'll bring up this evolution thing, because society, like baseball, has evolved too. In my lifetime we've gone from four broadcast channels to hundreds. There are countless new ways in which we can choose to be entertained over what we had just 20 years ago alone. MLB has competition where there wasn't competition before.

So they think by speeding up the game pace they can win new fans -- as if that alone could compete with a myriad of cable networks, video gaming, video streaming, and social media. Good luck with that.

Want fans? How about installing the salary cap and true revenue sharing to help bring more teams into playoff contention.

But stop this All-Star home field advantage and one-game wildcard playoff bullshit now. Amend replay. Enforce the time rules on the books. Shorten pitching changes. And give me a salary cap and revenue sharing.