TD,
By your line of thinking you might as well say that an intentional safety by an NFL team with 3 seconds remaining in a game and they having the lead by 3 points, would then be worth 4 points to the opposing team.
Maybe you could also dictate that a MLB batter who hits a sacrifice fly to advance a runner from 1st to 2nd should also get credit for the run he may score subsequently, when another batter moves him along.
Point(s) being that all great games have been altered through the years and ages to make them great. Difficult to see at the time but easier to see with the passage of time.
Cowboy "been pissed since the elimination of the 4th strike and the addition of body armor during jousting" Dennis
If somebody can argue why it is a one ball penalty, that would be great. Truth is, you can't. The only "argument" is, "that is the way it has always been".
I think the RBI acronym speaks for itself. The player who actually physically batted the run in. You could if you want have a "runners advanced stat", which they do - called sacrifices. I don't know, I don't think your point holds any water. I don't think one pocket has been "altered" at all. I bet somebody said "a foul is worth a ball" one day, and it has been like that ever since. And THAT is the point. Why keep it that way if it is not producing the desired results. But maybe you know something and we have changed the penalty for scratches in one pocket through history. If so I'd love to hear about the history. One last thing I will add is I wonder what the stat is on amount of intentionals per game in one pocket at top levels. I would argue that the number is perhaps a little high, but that is purely subjective though. "High" just refers to the fact that I don't think the balance is there.
There should be logic behind penalties in my mind. The key concept here should be BALANCE. Therefore, how much is it worth for a player to take an intentional. If you get the balance right, players will be taking intentionals the "right" amount of times. They should hurt you about as much as they help you (overall). If the balance is off, players take too many, which is arguably the case in one pocket. I think the walk in baseball for example is MUCH MUCH closer to a proper balance than owing a single ball for an intentional is in one pocket. Especially when considering top flight offense. The penalty simply is not correct imo. In fact, I am stunned more people here don't agree. I think the explanation lies in players being stuck in their ways myself.
I am not really trying to change the game. I think it is fine to be honest, yet I don't think we MUST stick to rules that were seemingly originated out of thin air when stiffer penalties may serve us better. In short, I just don't understand the big deal. If you put a guy in a trap, and it is too stiff a penalty to take an intentional, and he then must do something great to get out of it, what in the world is the downside to this? One pocket will still be there. The sky aint going to fall guys.
Anyway, so, try it. What is the argument as to why an intentional is worth one ball? IF there is no real answer, I think this proves a greater penalty for intentionals deserves consideration.