Clipping:A critique of the foul bound

19C Clippings
	Clippings in 1853 Clippings in 1854 Clippings in 1855 Clippings in 1856 Clippings in 1857 Clippings in 1858 Clippings in 1859 Clippings in 1860 Clippings in 1861 Clippings in 1862 Clippings in 1863 Clippings in 1864 Clippings in 1865 Clippings in 1866 Clippings in 1867 Clippings in 1868 Clippings in 1869 Clippings in 1870 Clippings in 1871 Clippings in 1872 Clippings in 1873 Clippings in 1874 Clippings in 1875 Clippings in 1876 Clippings in 1877 Clippings in 1878 Clippings in 1879 Clippings in 1880 Clippings in 1881 Clippings in 1882 Clippings in 1883 Clippings in 1884 Clippings in 1885 Clippings in 1886 Clippings in 1887 Clippings in 1888 Clippings in 1889 Clippings in 1890
	Add a Clipping

Date	Wednesday, November 5, 1884
Text	Managers may still cling to the idea of retaining the “foul bound,” but spectators are fast becoming disgusted with this old relic of school-boy town ball of years ago. It does not require more than the skill of the average amateur to make a short or long run and capture a ball rebounding from mother ear. Spectators pay to witness a game of base ball by professionals rather than amateurs, because the game is more scientifically played by the former, and the more it can be elevated to the grade of a science the greater will be its drawing qualities. It really costs the managers money to retain this feature, and why they should persist in doing it in the face of the experience of the League is a conundrum a little beyond the average comprehension. Another reason for it abolishment is that it would increase the efficiency of the batsman as against the now overwhelming skill of the pitcher. It would give him more chances to get in his hit.
Source	Sporting Life
Tags
Warning
Comment	Edit with form to add a comment
Query	Edit with form to add a query
Submitted by	Richard Hershberger
Origin	Initial Hershberger Clippings

Comments