Frayed Knot wrote: Centerfield wrote: By the nature of the way the bases are set up, shifts hurt LH hitters more than they hurt RH hitters. This is obviously not a huge issue facing the game, but does it warrant no action? The way the bases are set up also helps LH batters to the extent that they're closer to 1B. I don't think this warrants action either. A so-called extreme shifts only 'hurts' (if you want to use that word, I'd opt maybe for 'challenges' instead) those LHBs who pull almost exclusively and are slow-footed - a fairly small percentage I'd say. You wouldn't pull that shift on Reyes or Ichiro even if they were dead-pull guys because they'd out-run a grounder hit to a 2B positioning himself in short RF. What those LH hitters can do is pull less, or bunt occasionally like Edgy says, and the shifts would disappear overnight. And even as it is, any manager employing a shift is engaging in a risk/reward that's going to cost him outs on occasion too. It then becomes up to him whether he thinks he's stealing more outs than he's losing. Fair points. Interestingly the ones proposing the rule were also arguing "integrity of the game". Meaning baseball has been played forever with two infielders on each side of second base, and now these new defensive shifts are changing the way the game is played. If I had to make a call, I'd probably vote against banning shifts, but I am surprised to see such uniformity from everyone on this board. We never agree about anything.