THE "SPIT" BALL
Renewed Protest By Manager Fielder Jones
Notwithstanding the Possession of a Great "Spit Ball" Pitcher
the Chicago
Manager Declares That this Delivery Injures Base Ball
Special to "Sporting Life," August 3, 1907
Chicago, Ill., July 31 - Although two "spit" ball pitchers
helped him win the American League pennant and one of the two was responsible
for the White Sox winning the World's championship last fall, Manager
Fielder Jones, of the Champions, is in favor of doing away with the "spit"
ball. "I warned Comiskey
against the evils of the 'spit' ball two years ago," said Jones recently.
"He laughed at me and said baseball was more prosperous than ever.
That may be all true, but I would be willing to wager that the crowds
would be even larger if it were not for the 'spit' ball. Comiskey was
on the Rules Committee when I begged him to have a rule inserted prohibiting
a pitcher from moistening the ball, but he thought that my fears were
groundless."
AN INJURY
"In my opinion the 'spit' ball is doing a great injury to the game.
In the first place, it is not natural. In the second place, it is not
cleanly. Lots of people do not like to go out to the park and watch a
pitcher slobbering all over a ball. Thirdly, the use of the 'spit' ball
lengthens the games, as pitchers who depend upon the 'spit' ball consume
so much time applying the moisture. Another reason is that when a 'spit'
ball pitcher has good control of his 'spitter' the opposing team can consider
itself lucky if it gets a hit. I do not care what some others may say,
but a hit off a 'spit' ball is nothing but luck. The fans went crazy over
Wednesday's game in which all hit the ball hard and the fielders had a
chance to make some fine stops and catches. That's base ball. The rooters
like to see the ball hit or a fine piece of fielding."
DEMORALIZES FIELDERS
"Then again, with a 'spit' ball man in the box, the fielders behind
him are more liable to make errors in consequence of the slippery condition
of the ball. Furthermore, a fielder with a nonspitter in the box knows
generally where to play for the batter. With a 'spit' ball pitcher at
work, it is much guesswork with him. A left field hitter may hit to right
field and vice versa. It is said that 'spit' ball pitchers would not have
to be feared because they would be unable to control the ball. Such talk
is ridiculous, for any good 'spit' ball pitcher has as good control as
any of them who do not use the delivery in question. Two years ago, when
I made
the first kick against the 'spit' ball, Chesbro and Howell were practically
the only 'spit' ball pitchers. Now we have Walsh and Smith, Cleveland
has Liebhardt, Berger and Rhoads, Philadelphia Dygert, New York Orth and
Brockett, Boston Winter and Pruiett, Detroit Mullin and Willett, St. Louis
Howell and Morgan."
TIME TO ACT
"By another year there may be twice as many and it would be no surprise
to see all the pitchers within a few years using this delivery which injures
the game. Now is the time to act. Let the league instruct its umpires
to call every ball pitched in which the pitcher uses the saliva a ball
and this delivery will be killed in short order. Then we will see a stop
put to star pitchers being made of twirlers who have nothing but plenty
of moisture with which to dampen the ball."
|