MLB Rule Changes for Abbreviated 2020 Season

[julio]

MLB announced a number of rule changes for the 2020 campaign.

• The three-batter minimum, a rule change that was instituted this past offseason, will remain in place, requiring pitchers to face at least three batters or pitch to the end of a half-inning, with exceptions for injuries and illnesses.

• Both leagues will use the DH to avoid overtaxing pitchers by having them hit.

• During the regular season, every half-inning after the ninth will begin with a runner on second base. The designated runner would be the player who made the final out the last time his team was at bat (or a pinch-runner). If that runner scores, the pitcher won't be charged with an earned run. This rule will not be in place for the postseason.

• There will be no restrictions on position players pitching in 2020.

• If weather forces a game to be cut short before it is official, it will be continued at a later date rather than started from scratch.

• Players and managers will be expected to maintain physical distance from all umpires and opposing players on the playing field whenever possible. Players or managers who leave their position to argue with umpires, come within six feet of an umpire or opposing player or manager for the purpose of argument, or engage in an altercation on the field will be subject to immediate ejection and discipline, including a fine and a suspension.

• Pitchers will be permitted to carry a small wet rag in their back pocket to be used for moisture in lieu of licking their fingers. Pitchers will not be able to access the rag while on the rubber, and they must clearly wipe the fingers of their pitching hand dry before touching the ball or the rubber. Water is the only substance that will be allowed on the rag. [This should be interesting...!]

[el-pietro]

The extra innings base runner rule will be interesting. I'm surprised its the player who makes the last out rather than the last to complete a plate appearance. It is theoretically possible for a player on base due to this rule to also be due to bat before they have come around to score/get thrown out? Its probably extremely unlikely but is it possible.

Lets say in the 9th inning the top of the order comes up. The first three batters all get on base but do not score. Bases loaded for the fourth batter, he strikes out. Fifth Batter also strikes out. The sixth batter comes up and the first batter gets thrown out trying to steal home.

10th inning. First batter made the last out so he starts on second base.
Seventh and eighth batter walk, bases loaded for the 9th batter who strikes out.
Now you have the first batter on third but also due up in the batting order, what do they do?
So if the first or second batter in the 9th (or any subsequent) inning makes the final out on the base-paths then as long as you have 6 batters in that inning its not that unlikely to happen.

[zambonir]

I guess I thought it was the player who makes the last out *at the plate," but sure, as you note there are scenarios where the inning ends before that player's AB is over. Will be rare. And possibly also strategic!

[schillingfan]

Are the extra innings sudden death or will it be each team gets a half an inning and the team that scores the most wins. I assume the latter, but it hasn’t been specifically stated.

[tom81]

The Athletic article from Rosenthal has a different take on who leads off.
“Each half-inning following the ninth inning will begin with a runner on second base. The runner will be the player in the batting order immediately preceding that half-inning’s leadoff hitter. But if that player is to be the pitcher, the manager can opt for the player preceding the pitcher in the batting order instead.“

[zambonir]

For sure the latter. I mean, it's still baseball. You'd have to let the home team bat last.

[flyers19rw]

How will MLB operate during COVID-19 pandemic? Here are some rules, protocols...

A good article form the LA Times on the basics of how the game will operate this season.

[el-pietro]

Looks like the schedule will be 10 games against each divisional opponent, and 20 Inter-league games. You would think that means 4 games against each of the 5 AL East teams but no, they have said they are going with 6 games against inter-league rivals so that leaves 14 games against the remaining 4 teams. Who knows how they will spread those out.

I have a real issue with imbalanced schedules, but I also realise that over 162 games its probably not a huge deal. In a 60 game season its a much bigger factor and it seems like a completely unnecessary thing to do that makes things far more complicated.

The Yankees will play 6 games against the Mets and the Rays will play 6 against the Marlins. Thats 10% of the season, equivalent to 16 games in a normal season.

The Yankees won the AL East by 5 games last year, in a 60 game season that is a margin of 2 games. Even if the Yankees play 4 games against the Marlins and Rays 4 against the Mets that could be difference.

I'm not sure who our "rival" is. I thought it was the Red Sox but google tells me its alternates between Blue Jays and Red Sox with it being against Blue Jays in even years. That might work out in our favour with the Braves playing the Red Sox but it just seems like its being forced and its so unnecessary this year.

Of course whats even more ridiculous is that some of our rivals for the Wild Card get to play the AL Central while we have to play the AL East, though I realise what that is the case and I have no complaints about limiting travel in these circumstances.

[andyb]

Agree these natural rivals are pretty stupid. Though on this schedule I bet MLB really wanted to have more 3-game series instead of 2.

One advantage we might have if our opponent is Toronto is we could be playing in Buffalo. The Blue Jays may not really have a home advantage this year and would be living in hotels in Buffalo away from their training facilities.

[LoneStarPhan]

Live Q&A: Matt Gelb answers your Phillies questions noon - 1...

Interesting discussion from Gelb at the athletic.com if you can access it. He promises more in a column tomorrow. Bottom line, still things that are not clear and many things to still work out.

[LoneStarPhan]

Blue Jays uncertain as to playing in Canada and Canadian officials say MLB has not approached with a plan to seek relaxing the restrictions in travel to Canada.

Also reported that Blue Jays have several positive tests of players in Florida.

Multiple Blue Jays Players, Staff Test Positive For COVID-19; Site For Home...

Of course, there is also the 14 day isolation requirement now in effect for coming from Florida into New York. How will that work with baseball teams if still the policy in late July and beyond?

[andyb]

One thing caught my eye in that chat regarding the 40-man roster. Gelb said he thought all 30 players on the opening roster would have to be on the 40-man roster. That might create some challenges, especially if we had to clear some spots to promote players that might not be around when the roster contract to 26.

Maybe the 40-man roster needs to start at 44 and go down to 42 and 40 in lockstep with the major league roster. Otherwise lots of teams might need to waive players that they would want to keep in ordinary circumstances.

[zambonir]

Either approach makes sense. Though tbh I don't see it as a huge problem if they make you stick to 40. In the Phillies case it means you either use Williams or Garlick or cut one of them loose (if you're trying to make room for a minor league invite guy). And if you're seriously interested in having Torreyes on the team, would Gamboa really be any worse, as just a pure emergency glove? Grullion instead of Bethancourt seems easy enough too.

Seems to me you have to expand the tax threshold as well as the 40-man, if a team is close to maxed and wants to sign some $1-2million guys for those roles (both true of the Phillies). Otherwse you just gotta go with your kids.

And if the Phillies end up putting Bohm and Howard on the roster Opening Day that's already gonna bounce someone like Neil Walker and a reliever anyway.

Of course there will also be a 60-day DL (or I guess it's gonna be 45 now). And maybe a COVID exception. And then some of the guys who would have opted out but then come back and gone to AAA will still be on the 60-man roster.

[Lucky_Beagle]

If a player opts out due to Covid concerns as permitted and receives his salary will the salary count against the team total? Having to count his salary plus a replacement player may also put a team close to the limit over the top.

[zambonir]

Also a good question. I would say it shouldn't, but I'd also say the number of players who might actually do that can be counted on one hand. They themselves have to be at risk to get paid, it can't just be about a family member or feeling generally cautious.

[LoneStarPhan]

I saw that there is a (I think) 110 page manual of the special rules for the 2020 season that I guess covers all these questions on rosters, etc.

We will learn more every day. Of course, there may even be some situations that they didn't think of and that will have to be settled on the fly.

[LoneStarPhan]

The 60 game schedule will again be an unbalanced, unfair schedule. If fact, it may well be the most unfair schedule in the history of professional baseball.

I am very disappointed that teams will be competing for playoff spots against teams that they have not played and no team they have played have played.

In addition, the old natural rival BS is again in play so even teams in the same division are not competing fairly against each other. This is especially disappointing since it could have been so easy to avoid this happening in this shortened season.

[Lucky_Beagle]

The NFL has teams competing for playoff spots against teams they have not played every season. They have a very unbalanced schedule. I think baseball can handle it. Even when teams play the same schedule they don't always play the "same teams" based upon pitching matchups, days of rest for various players, recalled minor leaguers, and of course injuries.

[julio]

The question I have is this: Do players on the active roster (whether 30, 28, or 26, depending on the date) have to be on the 40-man roster - or can clubs include non-roster players from their 60-man player pool on their active roster, without "selecting" them, and without clearing a 40-man roster sport for them?

It seems to me that the answer must be that they DO have to put such players on the 40-man roster - but I haven't seen that actually addressed.

[Lucky_Beagle]

Can a player refuse to report to a new team if traded? Is there any consideration of how sending someone from the east coast to the west coast (or any combination of locations) via trade will impact teams?

What about umpires...will they be kept in the same division all year to decrease exposure to new people and travel?