How Much Is "Too Much" These Days?

I just realized just how long it's been since I posted something up here.  Today's not going to like my recent posts.  In fact, the spark for today's post is not something I typically write much about anywhere -- sports.

I am what would be classified as a "passing" fan of most sports.  In general, I'm a fan of the whole sport more than any specific team playing it.  That is how I am with baseball -- I'm a fan of the New York Mets more by association because of my husband.  So, when ESPN's "Outside the Lines" segment earlier today was talking about the front offices of Major League Baseball's off-season suggestion for teams to extend the protective netting out to the dugouts and the four teams who did, it caught my attention.  Many changes in MLB trickle down into the lower player development leagues to basically get players used to playing in the situation.  This is where I become a bigger baseball fan.  I like our city's minor league team and will spend several nights over any given summer watching them play.

To those not familiar with the sport's situation, it may sound odd.  What's the big deal about adding netting?  Currently, teams have a mandatory mesh netting between the playing area and the fans' seats for an area behind home plate.  The big wigs in MLB's offices have suggested to teams that they extend that current netting out to the beginning of each dugout.  It is basically a request to make that protected area 70 feet longer each direction away from home plate.

The 'Add More Net' group point out the need for it because two years ago, a news group said there are over 1700 fans hit during games a year.  The 'No New Net' group have said all along that netting keeps fans from getting the interactions they want with the players.  It prevents fans from catching foul balls.  It hinders viewing the game well.  The thing is ... I see both sides' point.

 I agree, 1700 people getting hurt at a game in a season is terrible news.  Steps need to be taken to stop as many of those happening as possible.  My discussion to have with them is about paying attention.  Like I said, I've spent many evenings at our Field watching our MiLB team play and many more times watching the Mets on television.  You can not believe the amount of times I've seen people (unfortunately, many women) more interested in what's going on with their phones or fully looking at each other talking -- here is one time I give it to the guys for their ability to hold whole conversations without ever making eye contact -- than anything happening on the field.  The Mets coverage has even shown many each game.  I don't mean to say anyone deserves to be hit and I don't victim-blame but there needs to be some level of responsibility for our own safety by actually watching the game you paid to see, some places that's alot.  There are signs everywhere about being alert and paying attention for balls and bats possibly coming into the fans' area during play.  This trend to off-set responsibility or try to bubble wrap people and everything around us has brought up an attitude of total indifference to observing anything going on around us.  God has created a fabulously beautiful world around us.  You just have to look at something outside your self.

That isn't to say I am with the 'No Net' group.  I think their objection based on player availability is ridiculous.  One of my objections to many top-tier sports players is that 'gotta get paid' attitude.  I don't have the money to attend MLB games -- I've only been to two, in fact -- but the guys in the minors don't seem to be hanging around where fans can ask them for autographs, netting or not.  They're down in the clubhouse doing their thing.  Fans typically have to wait for an autograph session -- at a booth in the concourse area -- to get one.  The idea that the netting is hindering fans' viewing the game is also silly.  There is this fancy little thing that our brain and eyes can do - it's called something like using multi-focal points.  Basically, when we want to look at the keyboard in front of us, our brain has our eyes focus on that and things outside the frame of our laptops is fairly out of focus and ignored. When we want to see something 200 or 300 yards away, the things up close become fairly invisible and ignored.  This to say, if you want to see the netting, you'll see the netting, but if you're focus is out on the playing field, the netting practically disappears.  I know because hockey -- which I am a huge fan of -- put up that netting at the ends of the rink several years ago as a safety precaution and I have the net-disappearing-thing happen.  When I focus on the game, the strings of the netting disappear.  And I imagine some sports-fan pastor should be able to parallel a sermon out of the idea!  I hate to suggest the heart of this complaint is that cameras and camcorders aren't as amazing as our brain and eyes.  They get caught up trying to decide on which to focus on, the netting or the player standing 100 feet past it.

My 'No New Net' agreement is with the catching of foul balls.  Some of the netting supporters are going to the point of demanding that netting needs to go along the edge of the playing field from foul pole to foul pole.  This is the end-game realization some opposed to netting are coming from. While I agree there needs to be the opportunity to get a foul ball at a game -- seriously, how cool would that be? -- there also needs to be recognition of how that has become more dangerous.  The players these days are getting bigger and stronger.  That translates to hitting harder and that into balls moving faster.  That speed is great when it headed for that orange line 370 feet from home plate.  It makes for a very quick trip to the fans sitting behind the dugout, though.  The reaction time necessary when fully paying attention to the game - note back to my statement earlier about how some aren't - are phenomenal.  My source of concern personally is in the increasing amount of bats being broken by these increasingly stronger batters.  Pieces of bat, usually that larger barrel end, flying into the seats isn't cool.  That really is probably a discussion mechanical engineering trained baseball fans need to have about the wood used in bats or other similar design conversations.

I don't think there really is a right or wrong answer for this topic.  I was just interested is what others think about it.  I would really love your opinions in the comments below.