Read the debate intro and Loyal Homer’s opinion.
I give Loyal Homer credit for accurately defining the word “steal” and showing the reasons why some believe sign stealing should be against the rules.
Well, let’s continue that line of logic. Sign stealing is bad because it’s “stealing,” and all stealing is bad. Signs aren’t the only things in baseball that are stolen, though. You also have BASE stealing. If the term stealing implies that some unethical or improper action is being followed, then we can’t just stop at sign stealing… my new call to action is to rid baseball of the crime that is base stealing!
I’m being facetious, of course. But, the argument Loyal Homer presents for why sign-stealing should be against the rules is flawed. Just because it has the word “steal” in it doesn’t make it a bad thing.
Now, let’s consider the intention behind sign stealing. Sign stealing is an attempt by one team to intercept and decode secret communications that may help interpret their opponent’s strategies and put them in a more advantageous position. Is that any different from studying film, or scouting reports, or any other type of analysis performed in preparation for an upcoming game? You’re collecting information – based solely on observation – and attempting to interpret it in order to be better prepared for an opponent.
If the New York Yankees paid someone from the Texas Rangers organization to tell them what each and every nuance of a catcher’s glove position meant, or used advanced technology to record signs, then rules have been broken. I am not speaking of this type of sign-stealing. However, if members of one team recognize the trends and patterns of an opposing player and accurately interpret them, then no rule-breaking has taken place. It is just the mental aspect of the game of baseball. Also, if the Rangers know that A-Rod once knew their signs (for example), then shame on them for being so stupid as to use the same signs now that he is their opponent.
Here’s a hypothetical situation. Let’s say A-Rod notices that whenever a certain batter assumes their batting stance, if they open their stance up they usually pull the ball into left field. After seeing this a few times, he recognizes the pattern. The next time he sees it he tells the outfielders behind him to shift more towards that direction. Is there anything wrong with that? I don’t think so. So, why is it any different to indicate to a batter what pitch you think is coming? You could still be wrong – you’re just trying to analyze the game.
Now consider this – why does a team feel like it has to SEND hidden or secret messages?
Have you ever seen the comedy that is a third base coach signaling his batter instructions? It looks like a cross between my drunken cousin Ted trying to do the Electric Slide at a wedding and a guy swatting at a fly while wiping pudding off of his face and uniform. It’s completely ridiculous, so why go through it?
They must because they’re trying to secretly communicate information based on situations and positioning that THEY see, and want to gain an advantage over THEIR opponent. The intention is exactly the same. You are trying to hide your strategy from them, so they are entitled to try and guess that strategy.
I argue that sign stealing is nothing more than a case of “the pot calling the kettle black.” If one team is allowed to take measures in concealing secret messages back and forth from coach to player, then their opponents are equally entitled to observe and analyze those messages to try and divine meaning from the madness. Both are secretive, and both are intended to give one team an advantage over the other.
If you don’t want your signs to be stolen, then don’t use them!
