ImageImageImageImageImage

Protective netting for fans, pro or con?

Moderator: JaysRule15

dagger
RealGM
Posts: 41,305
And1: 14,332
Joined: Aug 19, 2002
         

Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#1 » by dagger » Sun Jun 7, 2015 2:44 pm

I'm not doing this as a poll, but what does each of you think about extending the netting behind the plate to protect more fans to the left and right of the backstop area. The players have been asking for in CBA talks, the owners were against. In light of the Boston incident, where a fan has sustained a very serious head wound from a splintered bat, has the time come for baseball to take protective measures like the NHL did?

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/bost ... ing-060715

If Major League Baseball had acted on a request by its players, the broken bat that seriously injured a woman at Fenway Park on Friday night never would have reached the seats.
The players, in each of the last two rounds of collective bargaining, proposed that protective netting extend down the foul lines and even to the foul poles, according to major-league sources.
The owners, however, rejected the proposals for the 2007 and 2012 labor agreements, citing concerns that additional netting would detract from the experience of ticket buyers in certain premium seats, sources said.
"Some owners are afraid to upset the fans that pay some of the highest ticket prices, when in reality, it's an effort to protect those very fans," said Diamondbacks reliever Brad Ziegler, a member of the negotiating committee for the players' union.
"(The owners) seem afraid that fans will lose access to the players - autographs, getting baseballs, etc. -- and that will cause those ticket holders to be unhappy. Or, that they'd have to watch the game through a net. (But) fans behind home plate pay the highest prices, have the same issues, and yet those seats are always full."
Baseball requires protective netting behind home plate, and some teams also use protective screens down the foul lines during batting practice. The woman at Fenway struck in the face by a broken bat -- Tonya Carpenter, 44, of Paxton, Massachusetts -- was sitting beyond the netting, in the second row between home plate and the third-base dugout.
Carpenter, who could be heard screaming as she was taken off the field in a stretcher, was rushed to Beth Israel Deaconness Medical Center in Boston. Her family said in a statement that her condition was serious. Baseball issued a statement saying fan safety was a priority.
"We have the utmost concern for the victim of this terribly unfortunate incident," the statement said. "We will continue to keep her and her family in our thoughts and prayers. We appreciate the efforts of the Red Sox, the first responders, the Boston Police and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
"Fan safety is our foremost goal for all those who choose to support our game by visiting our ballparks and we will always strive for that experience to be safe and fan-friendly."

In 2008, baseball identified the emergence of maple bats as the reason for a sharp increase in the number of broken bats, and imposed design standards that cut the number of shattered bats in half, MLB spokesman Mike Teevan told the Los Angeles Times.
At the time, former commissioner Bud Selig said he was not considering more extensive protective netting around the field of play, similar to what is used in Japan.
"While we're always very, very concerned with the health and the welfare of the fans, you also don't want to do anything to obstruct the views of the fans, which creates really a major problem. You sort of have to weigh one against the other."
A spokesman for baseball said Saturday that the sport is constantly evaluating safety issues and that commissioner Rob Manfred likely will revisit the question of whether teams should install additional netting.
Players, however, say that the owners have seemed to place a greater priority on fan ambience than fan safety.
"The blowback we got is that people pay lots of money for those seats and don't want a net in front of them," said left-hander C.J. Wilson, the Angels' player representative to the union. "The difficulty for owners is balancing the premium seats and the safety of the people in the premium seats.
"Obviously, there is a lot of velocity involved with anything that goes into the stands, whether it's errant throws, broken bats, foul balls -- especially foul balls. It's terrible whenever something happens and somebody gets hurt. That's why we encourage people to literally bring a glove to the game. It's completely random when it happens. It's not predictable."

According to a 2009 study by Sports Illustrated, foul balls had killed 52 spectators since 1887. The only fatality at a major-league park occurred in 1970, when a 14-year-old boy was killed by a foul ball at Dodger Stadium, SI said.
Most parks include signage that warns fans who sit close to the field to pay close attention -- "Be Alert Foul Balls and Bats Hurt," the signs at Fenway say. Tickets include disclaimers shifting all responsibility for injury to the fan.
In 2002, the NHL responded to the death of one of its fans -- Brittanie Cecil, 13 -- by mandating protective netting behind each goal. Cecil was hit by a puck while attending a Columbus Blue Jackets home game, and died two days later.
NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, addressing critics of the netting, said at the time, "After three minutes people won't know it's there."
Left-hander Chris Capuano, the Yankees' player representative, said that baseball needs to act before a tragedy occurs in a major-league park.
"Hopefully something bad doesn't have to happen for something to change," Capuano said. "We talked about it the last time (in collective bargaining). I'm sure it will be on the table this time."
Baseball's collective-bargaining agreement expires on Dec. 1, 2016.
2019 will never be forgotten because FLAGS FLY FOREVER
Sifu
Veteran
Posts: 2,556
And1: 1,005
Joined: Apr 26, 2007
Location: Bizarro World

 

Post#2 » by Sifu » Sun Jun 7, 2015 5:15 pm

A similar debate occurred when hockey put the netting in. Now there is no debate at all. If now hockey were to propose taking the netting down, you would have a revolt.

I would think the same thing would happen in baseball.
s e n s i
RealGM
Posts: 17,093
And1: 3,626
Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Location: Toronto
       

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#3 » by s e n s i » Sun Jun 7, 2015 5:17 pm

you honestly don't even notice the netting if you're sitting behind home plate, so i'm all for extending it down the lines further past the dugouts if it prevents injuries like what happened in boston. this was a freak accident but no freak accidents are better than one obviously as it seems as though bats are flying into stands at an alarming rate (not just by the jays) and it's only a matter of time before another one helicopters onto someone's head.

broken bats flying into the stands is far less an issue however - i think it's more likely a home run ball striking and injuring someone in the LF bleachers is more likely to occur than something like this happening again and no one would be rushing to put netting around the entire field. that being said, extending the netting is obvious but how far is the question.

as an aside, the NHL is the least proactive league when it comes to implementing preventive measures and i don't think extending the netting in ballparks is as necessary as installing netting behind the nets in hockey was. this is a league that didn't have it's goalies wear masks for over 40 years and it was idiotic to not have netting until 2002, with pucks getting slapped into the seats at over 100 mph with regularity.
galacticos2 wrote:MLB needs to introduce an Amnesty clause. Bautista would be my first victim.

Bautista outplays his contract by more than $70 million over the next four seasons (2013-2016).
User avatar
Santoki
General Manager
Posts: 7,813
And1: 2,635
Joined: Feb 16, 2007
Location: Toronto
   

Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#4 » by Santoki » Sun Jun 7, 2015 5:35 pm

Don't baseballs fly into the stands at similar speeds just as often if not far more often though?
Maddogfromto
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,690
And1: 63
Joined: Jul 16, 2001
Location: Brampton

Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#5 » by Maddogfromto » Sun Jun 7, 2015 7:14 pm

I brought a couple of Cousins of mine from New York to a game at the Rogers Centre and they were shocked at the lack of protection around the field




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
North_of_Border
Pro Prospect
Posts: 910
And1: 369
Joined: May 18, 2014
   

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#6 » by North_of_Border » Sun Jun 7, 2015 8:37 pm

Con: Takes slightly away from the game experience of being at the ball park for an MLB gamee

Pro: At the end of the day, u get to go home to ur family and watch ur kids grow up, until u finally die of naturel causes at the age of 80, in a warm bed, with a bottle of vine in ur hand and a sexy girl's......
User avatar
Trilogy
RealGM
Posts: 16,650
And1: 3,589
Joined: Oct 13, 2005

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#7 » by Trilogy » Sun Jun 7, 2015 8:42 pm

Do the obvious and don't wait until someone dies to do so.
dagger
RealGM
Posts: 41,305
And1: 14,332
Joined: Aug 19, 2002
         

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#8 » by dagger » Sun Jun 7, 2015 9:18 pm

Santoki wrote:Don't baseballs fly into the stands at similar speeds just as often if not far more often though?


I think that's true, and more likely to cause injuries of some kind, though the broken bat is a much harder object to stop or deflect.

This article, written last season, suggests the number of injuries is much higher than MLB would like to admit.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... ans-a-year
2019 will never be forgotten because FLAGS FLY FOREVER
Randle McMurphy
RealGM
Posts: 38,052
And1: 21,163
Joined: Dec 07, 2009

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#9 » by Randle McMurphy » Sun Jun 7, 2015 10:01 pm

Just put the netting up already.
One flew east, one flew west, one flew over the cuckoo’s nest.
Sifu
Veteran
Posts: 2,556
And1: 1,005
Joined: Apr 26, 2007
Location: Bizarro World

 

Post#10 » by Sifu » Sun Jun 7, 2015 10:16 pm

I go to the ballgame to watch my favorite team. The risk of getting hit and injured is just an added bonus. I am surprised Rogers isn't charging extra for the thrill of getting injured.
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,434
And1: 17,967
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#11 » by Schad » Sun Jun 7, 2015 10:22 pm

Here's the fun thing: MLB now has a wealth of data about exit velocity on contacted balls, so it shouldn't be difficult to pull the numbers on fouls, determine what areas are subject to foul balls which are reaching the stands at an unacceptably high speed, and extend the netting to match. It doesn't matter how eagle-eyed spectators might be...a ball at 100 mph or more off the bat that is only covering 100 feet before leaving the field of play allows for very little reaction time, and the average fan does not possess reflexes on par with the guys on the field.
Image
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
Gibby
Rookie
Posts: 1,142
And1: 361
Joined: Jun 06, 2012

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#12 » by Gibby » Mon Jun 8, 2015 7:42 pm

Would be an overreaction.
Image
User avatar
Steven1562
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,398
And1: 7,262
Joined: Jun 29, 2012
       

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#13 » by Steven1562 » Tue Jun 9, 2015 3:52 am

Even if it saves one life it's worth it put the netting up already. I think multiple people will have to die before anyone does anything about it damn shame really.
Any time y'all wanna see me again
Rewind this track right here, close your eyes
and picture me rollin

Scottie Barnes Believer.
User avatar
Skin Blues
Veteran
Posts: 2,625
And1: 872
Joined: Nov 24, 2010

Re: Protective netting for fans, pro or con? 

Post#14 » by Skin Blues » Tue Jun 9, 2015 8:22 pm

I don't want it, and I think it's a bit ridiculous that people only care about things after somebody gets hurt. People know the risks of going to the park. Maybe it sounds crass, but one injury really makes zero difference to what protocol should be, in my opinion. The odds don't justify making changes. One person suffering a major injury out of 25+ million people per year? If that's the threshold for major change we might as well not even let these people drive on the highway to get to the park, because that's infinitely more dangerous.

Return to Toronto Blue Jays