Red Sox to expand netting behind home plate

Status
Not open for further replies.

Marceline

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2002
6,441
Canton, MA
Wow. Did you and your dad walk back and forth to the ballpark in driving snow, uphill both ways?

I have seats near the visitors' dugout in Seattle. Trust me, everyone with a kid cares if the kid gets a ball.
I guess my parents just wasted all their time and money bringing me to games as a kid then, sitting in seats way back under the upper deck where it's nearly impossible to get a ball.

I guess now I know I shouldn't bother to bring my sons to any games, unless we're sitting right by the field where they can get a ball.

Not everyone is lucky enough to sit in the best seats in the house - there are other reasons to go to games.
 

biollante

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 22, 2001
9,824
Land formerly of Sowheag
I guess I will wait to see it before I fully comment. I know people who specifically picked their season tickets so they would be on the edge of the net. Not sure what it all means when now their seats will have the netting. There will still be an edge somewhere.
 

HriniakPosterChild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
14,841
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
I guess my parents just wasted all their time and money bringing me to games as a kid then, sitting in seats way back under the upper deck where it's nearly impossible to get a ball.

I guess now I know I shouldn't bother to bring my sons to any games, unless we're sitting right by the field where they can get a ball.

Not everyone is lucky enough to sit in the best seats in the house - there are other reasons to go to games.
Your comment (after your tale of woe about the view from Virginia in RFK) was "who cares." All I said was that I've seen plenty of people care from my seats.

I sell plenty of my tickets on StubHub for under face value because the M's usually suck. Come on out to Seattle and see people care for yourself.
 

Turrable

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2011
2,670
Your comment (after your tale of woe about the view from Virginia in RFK) was "who cares." All I said was that I've seen plenty of people care from my seats.

I sell plenty of my tickets on StubHub for under face value because the M's usually suck. Come on out to Seattle and see people care for yourself.
Wrong poster, and I don't doubt that people care. I'm just saying it's dumb, because it is.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
I don't understand this. If you want to be protected from flying objects, you purchase seats in a protected area (for example, behind the plate, upper levels, far away, etc.) If you're willing to take the risk (for you or your family), purchase tickets close to the action. In both cases it's your own choice.

Now, if ballparks got enough complaints from customers that there weren't enough protected seats for the market, then there's justification for extending netting or some other intrusion.

BTW, what about the poor photographers?

And what's going to happen in the 2016 World Series when Fenway wants to add the customary additional seats on the field?
 

HriniakPosterChild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
14,841
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
I don't understand this. If you want to be protected from flying objects, you purchase seats in a protected area (for example, behind the plate, upper levels, far away, etc.) If you're willing to take the risk (for you or your family), purchase tickets close to the action. In both cases it's your own choice.
Point, GNQ.

There is an announcement before every M's game that bats and balls leaving the field can be dangerous, and that if you are worried about that, the M's will exchange your 100 level ticket for a ticket in the 300 level.

I can't imagine how many people have ever taken them up on that offer, but it's there.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
I don't understand this. If you want to be protected from flying objects, you purchase seats in a protected area (for example, behind the plate, upper levels, far away, etc.) If you're willing to take the risk (for you or your family), purchase tickets close to the action. In both cases it's your own choice.
Wouldn't the most direct counter be that if you don't want to watch through a net, purchase tickets elsewhere? Because it's still your own choice, isn't it?
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
You realize that's not true, that people are arguing that the probabilities have to be weighed when making those decisions as well as the outcomes? What you're alleging is akin to claiming that a parent who drives their child to school when it rains is saying it's more important for their kid not to get rained on than to be protected from a fatal traffic accident.

There are on the order of a billion spectators in MLB history; one of those has been killed by a batted ball. And that one wouldn't have been saved by the kind of nets proposed--Alan Smith was seated farther up the first base line than the new netting. There are more who are seriously injured by balls but not killed, but it's still a tiny percentage. The time and money spent on nets would literally be better spent putting up lightning rods (weirdly, Manny Mota-who hit the ball that killed Alan Smith--lost his nephew to an on-the-field lightning strike).
And one has been killed by Josh Hamilton throwing him a ball in a dangerous manner, yet Josh Hamilton continues to work in baseball (and continues to throw balls to fans).
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
Wouldn't the most direct counter be that if you don't want to watch through a net, purchase tickets elsewhere? Because it's still your own choice, isn't it?
Not so fast. What about the season ticket holder who, by virtue of having been a loyal fan for 20 years, has season tickets near the on-deck circle? He finds out that he's now going to be behind netting and a pole that holds the netting up. What's his choice? To go out beyond the Pesky Pole, where there might be season tickets available? That's not much of a choice.
 

Guapos Toenails

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 27, 2001
1,900
Mean Street
Havent posted in a while but thought i'd chime in on this...as a vendor, I've been hit 4 times by batted balls at Fenway, twice during the game, twice during BP. Once during a game I was near section 20, under the roof (technically also behind the net) and a foul ball nicked a seat, changed direction, glanced off a support pole and hit me in the side of the knee. At least thats what I think happened because it sort of defied the laws of physics for me to get hit by a foul ball up there. My point is that the nets are a great idea and will definitely prevent some bad injuries, but you can get hit by a ball regardless of where you are in Fenway.
 

swingin val

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,162
Minneapolis
If only this board was around in 1879 when the Grays put up the first safety net behind home plate. Can only imagine the outrage over the ruining of the fan experience.
 

Corsi

isn't shy about blowing his wad early
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2010
12,955
Boston, MA
I don't even think it boils down that much. I think it boils down to, as usual, risk and cost. My least favorite post in this thread is the douchey Corsi post. I could post accident victims in the last 24 hours that have it a lot worse - should we put a moratorium on driving? Of course not, and that tells you that for every risky behavior there is a cost to eliminating it that society isn't willing to pay.
No, we shouldn't put a moratorium on driving, just as we're not putting a moratorium on baseball. But now automobiles have windshields, airbags, and seatbelts, and laws compelling us to use them.

Sorry my post struck you as douchey, but bosoxlady calling this a "total overreaction" and telling fans to "PAY ATTENTION!" struck me as selfish and naive.
 

sittingstill

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
1,586
Bay State Road
BTW, what about the poor photographers?

And what's going to happen in the 2016 World Series when Fenway wants to add the customary additional seats on the field?
The photo pits at Fenway are past the dugouts, so I'm sure there will be no change to those. Not sure what will happen in the first inning when the pit photogs can shoot from the stands and used to cluster at the sides of the net to get the starting pitchers. And my guess is that for the World Series they'll consider the field proximity an acceptable occupational hazard.

I do wonder whether they will make changes at JetBlue, where the photo pits are between the dugouts and the plate, at the edge of the existing netting. It's a bit close to the plate for comfort; I've been saved in there a couple of times by balls hitting railings.

At Fenway, where I only rarely have a credential, I'll definitely need to reevaluate shooting games. Your eyes may adjust to the netting, but the camera's autofocus has a tougher time. Generally the closer you are to the netting and the farther away the action is, the better chance you have of a clear shot, but I've found it hard to do from the range where I can normally get tickets. It's saved me a bit of cash this winter, since I don't want to buy any tickets until I can get in there and test things out. Maybe I'll just shoot even more minor league games, where you're pretty much a sitting duck for foul balls...


I'm glad this one hit the ground first--the next thing it hit was my midsection. Tim Federowicz in Portland.
 

BoSoxLady

Rules Red Sox Nation with an Iron Fist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2003
3,448
Sorry that you think I'm selfish and naive. :( I'm neither.

I've been a season ticket holder in the Loge for 35 years. I sit on the 1B side, just beyond the net. I CHOSE to sit where there's no protection. If I wanted protection, I'd be sitting behind the plate.

Fans know the risks and if they don't, that's on them. There are numerous warnings throughout Fenway.

Two fans at Fenway were seriously injured last season and I feel horrible about that but you can't put fans in a bubble. Social media went crazy and as a result, the lack of safety at stadiums became a national story.

I still don't believe the extra netting is necessary and I have every right not to want my perfect view obstructed. I hope the Red Sox reduce the price of my tickets. :)
 

Corsi

isn't shy about blowing his wad early
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2010
12,955
Boston, MA
You said that all fans need to do to not get nailed by a screaming foul ball is "pay attention." That's rubbish. I don't care how closely you're paying attention, if a liner is coming your way up at upwards of 100 mph, you could have the quickest reflexes on on the planet and you're not getting out of the way of that ball.

I'm truly sorry your precious view is going to be so slightly affected by a net next season, but if it saves even one person a trip to the emergency room, then it's worth it.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
You said that all fans need to do to not get nailed by a screaming foul ball is "pay attention." That's rubbish. I don't care how closely you're paying attention, if a liner is coming your way up at upwards of 100 mph, you could have the quickest reflexes on on the planet and you're not getting out of the way of that ball.

I'm truly sorry your precious view is going to be so slightly affected by a net next season, but if it saves even one person a trip to the emergency room, then it's worth it.
If you want to cut down on ER visits, stop selling beer; beer consumption at the park causes much more suffering than foul balls. Why should I be allowed to enjoy a cold brew while watching the game if that means someone else (perhaps through their own fault, perhaps not) will end up hurt?

There's no great principle at work here. Injuries related to foul balls are a PR problem that can be solved without a significant impact on revenue, so the owners are putting up nets. Owners make big bucks on beer sales, and most folks blame drunks for the alcohol-related injuries they cause, so the suds will continue to flow. I don't have a problem with either decision; it's the desire of you and others to get on your high horse about it that's annoying.
 

sketz

Bad Santa
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
203
seattle
Oh, what a first-world problem. I've been scanning the main page for the last few days, kept seeing this thread title and couldn't understand why it kept getting so much action (and yes, I am aware that I've just added to it).

Benefit: it will likely prevent some injuries. Cost: a partially-impaired view for some people. Seems like a pretty straightforward decision matrix, requiring the use of horses neither high nor dead, and the Sox have decided that the benefit outweighs the cost. I would imagine they do the same kind of analysis on whether to raise ticket prices in a given year or not. People can agree or disagree with the analysis as they like, but the invective seems misplaced in what appears to be a rather simple business decision. Thanks to the poster above for the pics of what the Japanese teams are doing in their stadiums - I personally think that's a great idea.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
So Guapo, who has been to literally hundreds (maybe thousands) of games, in a role where HE CAN NOT PAY ATTENTION to the ball, has been hit 4 times. Sittingstill, who is even more exposed and closer to the action is still among the living, thank goodness.

Yes, let's bubblewrap everyone and everything. THIS IS DANGEROUS!!!

Friggin' nanny state you all seem to want.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,548
So Guapo, who has been to literally hundreds (maybe thousands) of games, in a role where HE CAN NOT PAY ATTENTION to the ball, has been hit 4 times. Sittingstill, who is even more exposed and closer to the action is still among the living, thank goodness.

Yes, let's bubblewrap everyone and everything. THIS IS DANGEROUS!!!

Friggin' nanny state you all seem to want.
Dude. You know it's not an electric net, right?
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,330
Southwestern CT
The net is expanding because of a number of factors. The catalyst is certainly the incident(s) last year, including the one at Fenway where the woman suffered a gruesome injury. But the reality is that teams have potential liability here and so they are taking steps to mitigate this while trying to keep as much of the fan experience as possible.

I do feel sympathy for long-term season ticket holders like BoSoxLady. She's right to say that fans sitting in those seats need to pay attention at the park. Unfortunately, things have changed and games are more of an "entertainment experience." As a result, fans sitting in seats that mandate paying attention to the game don't perceive the risk. There's also the (relatively new) phenomenon of jagged bats are flying into the stands with much greater frequently. Add it up and MLB has concluded that the risk is too high. And I think they're right.

The long and short of it is that the Sox (along with MLB) will be changing things until they feel the right balance is achieved. It sucks, but from the owners perspective I understand it completely.
 
Last edited:

effectivelywild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
466
They should just offer ticket holders who will have their sight lines obstructed an opt-out, to help prevent them from being around during their decline years....
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
It comes down to this: Do you want to have the opportunity to voluntarily place yourself in a dangerous situation and maintain all the responsibility that goes with that, or do you want someone else to deny you that option on the basis that you're not competent to judge the risk. If the situation is deceptive - meaning there's no way anyone could understand the likelihood of injury, that's a different story. If you're not allowed an option to voluntarily reduce the risk, that's a different story.

If you enter an optional situation as a mature thinking person and wish to take a risk, you should be able to. Unfortunately in America, if your neighbor drowns in your pool, his family's lawyer is probably going to sue your ass.

Teams have every right to de-risk the fan's experience. It's just unfortunate that they need to - and there's still no good explanation why this isn't mandated at every minor league or college or high school or playground baseball diamond - other than the obvious. On a different note, I'm certain there's also a negative impact of over-doing safety in making people less aware of their surroundings under the assumption that someone or something's looking out for them. Before there was a regulation on construction sites to protect every hole in the floor with plywood, or surround with a barricade - it was SOP that you (a) never ever took a step backward and (b) you never walked looking up at the ceiling. Old-timers still do that. Younger guys assume they can't fall through an opening. It's not at all an analogy to the baseball net thing, but the process has similarities.
 

swingin val

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,162
Minneapolis
The only people allowed to have an opinion are the several dozen season ticket holders that this change affects? That is quite the bar you have set.
 

richgedman'sghost

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2006
1,870
ct
Lose and BoSoxLady: Do you honestly think you could get away from a screaming line drive? Some of those travel over 100 miles per hour. I know I'm more comfortable with a net or a screen to protect my nephew and myself. I agree season ticket holders should be compensated in some manner but isn't that already happening?
 

Lefty on the Mound

SoSH Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 20, 2004
1,452
Madbury, NH USA
The only people allowed to have an opinion are the several dozen season ticket holders that this change affects? That is quite the bar you have set.
Everyone has an opinion. If the experience you pay good money for is adversely affected by a change then your opinion of that change matters. Otherwise it does not.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
My seats are one row in front of Bosoxlady's. I can safely say that she or I could avoid any ball hit in our direction. The ball has too far to travel and the angle is not right for a screaming line drive. More likely it would be a foul that came off the top of the bat. In fact, I am aware of only one or two balls that made it to the vicinity of our seats in the several years that I have been in the neighborhood. Most die off before that or go to the upper deck.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I'm more afraid of crossing Brookline a Avenue before or after the game than I am of getting hit by a ball. And like Koufax, my seats are well out of the line of fire and the net probably won't affect my view of fair territory from my seats in the 3B grandstand.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,472
Somewhere
The usual. This country knee jerks decisions all the time. There will be a boulder that kids have played on for 100 years, 1 numbnuts falls off, they remove it from the park.

If you're that worried, don't go to the game. There is risk stepping outside everyday, we can't pad the world.
This exact construct could be used to make the opposite argument to the same effect (as others have already demonstrated).

That alone should tell you how worthwhile this tact is
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
My seats are in line with the Red Sox on deck circle. They are about a far towards home plate as you can go without having the net in in the way. I chose that spot to avoid the net. Now it looks like my preference will be thwarted.
 

BoSoxLady

Rules Red Sox Nation with an Iron Fist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2003
3,448
My seats are in line with the Red Sox on deck circle. They are about a far towards home plate as you can go without having the net in in the way. I chose that spot to avoid the net. Now it looks like my preference will be thwarted.
Exactly. In the decades that I've been going to Fenway, two balls entered my section. One struck the steps between section 17/18 and softly landed in the lap of the woman behind me and the other struck the walkway railing and bounced back.

More fans are injured by slipping on spilled beer. I imagine the Red Sox will cut back on their beer sales.

Those poor kids who come to games on weekends with a glove are shit out of luck. Sigh.....
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
10,736
NJ
So, I haven't been to Fenway since the new netting has been put up. If one were to buy field box tickets, how badly does it effect your view? Is it possible to still take pictures, or does the netting ruin any shot?
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I'll let the professional answer this (post 115 of this thread). Money quote:
Your eyes may adjust to the netting, but the camera's autofocus has a tougher time. Generally the closer you are to the netting and the farther away the action is, the better chance you have of a clear shot, but I've found it hard to do from the range where I can normally get tickets.
 

sittingstill

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
1,586
Bay State Road
the professional
Thanks!

I still stand by what I said, with a few updates. I posted in last year's photos thread about my experience from Box 50. The biggest problems with the netting are shooting at an angle (the netting pattern gets more concentrated and throws off the autofocus), following a moving player (same thing--the autofocus can get confused), and keeping the heavy black tape or cord from the edge of the netting out of your view (especially where there's a gate to the field).

I didn't usually get the netting--I just got blurred photos. The exceptions were shots like this [it was Cuevas' debut]:



but I think that's from dropping the shutter speed to 1/100 in order for the video board image to be clear.

I do shoot through the netting at McCoy and Hadlock all the time, but that's right up against the net and 99% of the time I'm shooting the pitcher. A straight shot and being close to the net and farther from the action generally works--at least with a good camera. FWIW, this is Bobby Dalbec through a chain link fence (not right up against it trying to shoot through the holes):



Edit: here are some (bad) photos I shot last April just to show the tape around the field gate between Box 50 and 51:





and a sample from this year's Opening Day, when I had a loge seat that had previously been solid for photos but is now a total loss thanks to the top edge of the netting (bad focus is mainly on me, as I admittedly wasn't trying too hard knowing that I wouldn't use anything I shot--but it was harder with that cord there):

 
Last edited:

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
10,736
NJ
Thank you for the photos. So it is possible to get decent photos from say field box 50 - 52. I have a Canon SLR with some decent lenses, but really just take pics for fun.
 

sittingstill

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
1,586
Bay State Road
Anyone know how far back in the loge you'd need to sit to avoid the screen?
The loge seat I had Opening Day was row GG IIRC--second row in one of the loge sections that's right over a concourse entrance. Lower than that and I think you'll have that hazy net effect in photos you see above. Further up the loge you might get that cord low enough to shoot the pitcher. That said my cousin has season tickets in about row 5 of grandstand 15 and I find the cord that goes out to RF to support the netting would mess up photos from there, too.
 

sittingstill

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
1,586
Bay State Road
Thank you for the photos. So it is possible to get decent photos from say field box 50 - 52. I have a Canon SLR with some decent lenses, but really just take pics for fun.
Definitely--as long as you're not right in line with the gate. Just pick your spots--e.g., easier to focus on 2B than to track the base-stealer from first.
 

uncannymanny

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2007
9,081
Im sure she’ll be fine once someone explains to her that she could get tossed a foul ball by a player and that dad was able to take photos without impediment.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I stand by my original recommendation: make bubble wrap available for all fans as they arrive at the ballpark. Or maybe for when they leave the house? Can we get stats on accidents en route to the park? I mean, we went to Yankee Stadium a couple weeks ago and saw someone fall off a bicycle trying to avoid an oncoming car in the parking lot.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
I went to Fenway a couple weeks ago for the first time in a decade and didn't even notice the netting, despite sitting behind 1st base. This is such a silly thing to get worked up about.
 

scotian1

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
16,324
Kingston, Nova Scotia
In 2005, I had my best seats in over 50 years of attending games at Fenway Park, Dugout box 76, second row. During the game, Gabe Kapler hit a line drive that was heading straight at me. As I dropped my scorebook ready to attempt to catch it?, the fan in font of me reached his hands up and deflected it down where it hit me square in the chest. It then bounced back off me to where he was sitting. It left a purple mark on my chest for two weeks. I think the fan in front had a broken finger. The only change I would have made to this is if I was sitting that close again, I would bring a glove. I can still picture the ball coming with absolutely no spin on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.