from Amazon
Friday, May 06, 2011
Waiting for the death of a child
This is usually what has to happen:
Nine years ago, a fatal tragedy struck another spectator sport. The 2002 death of 13-year-old Brittanie Cecil—hit by a deflected puck during a National Hockey League game in Columbus, Ohio—prompted the league to require its teams to install protective nylon netting in the corners and behind the goals of each NHL arena.
Japan’s Central and Pacific Leagues have long taken a pro-active approach, utilizing protective screens that run the length of the foul lines. (An extended screen is visible in this photo from the 2008 Red Sox-Athletics series in Japan.) MLB clubs have not followed suit primarily because some fans have suggested that they don’t want obstructed-view seats.
But that explanation rings hollow. NHL fans did not stop buying tickets because of the new screens, and MLB’s clubs have acted to enhance safety before. When Don Zimmer was struck by a foul ball while sitting in the dugout during a 1999 American League Division Series game, Yankees owner George Steinbrenner unilaterally ordered that a protective screen be installed in front of the Yankee Stadium dugouts. The decision made the Yanks the first team to take such a step. The other owners followed Steinbrenner’s lead, and dugout screens are commonplace today.
This is the way it always is, the approach of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, or “has anyone died yet?”. It’s a reactive manner thinking, it’s a limited form of thinking. It’s wishful thinking. Hope is not a plan. In addition, since we’ve seen actual data as to how fans react with a change (the NHL providing the test case, as does apparently the Japan league), then the theoretical objections don’t hold water.
The baseball fans that don’t support the netting are simply engaging in a summary opinion with no evidence.