I'm not sure that I follow this. Was that not allowed anyway? I mean if he's not on the IL, what's the dif? Is there any push back as to what players who are active on the roster do between games? Unless they mean letting a player fluctuate between the majors and minors to toss re-hab games every five days or so, I can't see an issue with it.
From MLB: "clubs will have to designate each of their players as either a pitcher or a position player prior to each player’s first day on the active roster for a given season. That designation cannot change for the remainder of the season. Position players will not be allowed to pitch except in the following scenarios:
Ok, the explainer makes more sense. This is because there’s a limit on the number of pitchers you can have on the new 26 man roster. The limits on position player pitching are not draconian at all — extra innings, run differential greater than 6 — and there’s no limit on pitchers hitting at all.
Personally, I think they should be allowed to do just that. A team should have 25 (well 26 now) players, period. Use them however you want. Why should MLB dictate how many pitchers a team can carry? In the NFL you don’t actually have to have any wide receivers if you don’t want.
Because games that feature 10 pitching changes cause people to watch other sports
Teams that want to carry 16 pitchers in order to have that many pitching changes will very quickly find themselves in deep trouble when it comes to position players. That stuff will work itself out.
I believe the reference to 10 pitching changes was across both teams. The future of MLB looks rather dim if things like multiple mid-inning pitching changes continue to routinely drag down pace of play.
Oh ok. Well they’ve addressed that by requiring pitchers to pitch to three batters or the end of the inning.
Thanks, This is like "I can't get work because I'm not in the union, I can't get in the union because I can't get work."
