Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksabr
The "inevitability rhetorical technique" is a valid response for when an anti-DHer lays out a plan, usually half-baked, as to how the American League, all the minor leagues, the NCAA, et al., can comfortably drop the DH, the conceit of which is that all those leagues, all the colleges, all the international organizations, and everybody else on the planet—except for fifteen lumbering American League batters and the MLBPA—wants to make that happen.
|
Did I claim that? Nope.
I will cite the above polls as proof that (a) more fans would rather see the DH eliminated in the AL than added to the NL, and (b) the
vast majority of fans do not want to see it added to the NL.
I'll cite my own link that, at least as of 2009, the MLB owners wanted to eliminate the DH from the AL, and it would have been eliminated, except that the MLBPA blocked it, a move that I conceded was probably in the best interest of their members because they were not offered enough to make it in the players' financial interests.
I also offered a plan that I never claimed would be adopted, that was an emotional response to the inevitability argument, because if something horrible (by the standards of sports; nothing can happen in sports that's as horrible-- or as good-- as things that can happen in real life, but the forcing of the DH into the NL would be one of the worst things that has ever happened in sports that lacked outside-of-sports implications) were inevitable, you have to "make it evitable."
But rather than argue the merits, because for pro-DHers that is unwinnable, you perpetuate the myth that it's inevitable that the DH will be universal, which has a bandwagon effect if people believe it, because some people are shallow enough not to evaluate the merits but rather will join any side they feel certain will win.
The owners do not want to add the DH rule to the NL, and in fact probably, as in 2009, would strip it from the AL if they could. The fans don't want the DH in the NL also. The MLBPA wants to force it in-- in this case, not rationally evaluating its members interest (the responding dip in baseball revenues, even though I admit it would probably almost all be a temporary dip, would mean owners would spend less money on player contracts due to lesser revenue until revenue rebounded).
The MLBPA has outmaneuvered the owners before, which I usually have applauded. I particularly don't like the salary cap owners would also like, because I think it should be possible to keep a great team together. Is it possible the MLBPA will outmanuever the owners and get it in? It's possible. It's more likely the MLBPA will extract other concessions (ones I might well like) instead. It's far from inevitable.
And if you're for the DH, you should be able to argue why less strategy and more one-dimensional beer leaguers make for a better game.
Edited to add: Yes, I realize Chuck and others on this topic are largely trolling at this point just to get people who prefer real baseball to DH-ball riled up, but I guess I lack the self-control not to respond despite that.