One for One: A Defense of Pitcher Retaliation in Baseball

Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 42 (3):379-391 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Baseball rules prohibit pitchers from intentionally throwing at batters. When a pitcher does so, however, it is common practice for a pitcher on the opposing team to retaliate by throwing at the first player of the offending team to bat the next inning, and for umpires to ignore the rule forbidding that. I argue that player retaliation in the form of one for one is a better response to the initial violation than any other that is available, one for one can be justified as payback and for anticipated good consequences, and everyone who becomes a professional baseball player has consented to the practice. From these claims, I conclude that one for one is in the best interest of baseball, it is best if umpires follow common practice and wink at the rule forbidding it, and players cannot complain if they are told to throw at batters in certain circumstances, or are thrown at in just those circumstances

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,252

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Ethics of Pitcher’s Retaliation in Baseball.Sean McAleer - 2009 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 36 (2009) 36 (1):50-65.
Income justice in professional sports leagues: The case of the Major League Baseball.Gottfried Schweiger - 2012 - Revista Portugueasa de Ciencias Do Desporto [Portuguese Journal of Sport Science] 12 (Supl.):160--164.
There's No Lying in Baseball (Wink, Wink).Mark Hamilton - 2004 - In Eric Bronson (ed.), Baseball and Philosophy. Open Court. pp. 126--138.
Merricks on the existence of human organisms.Cian Dorr - 2003 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (3):711–718.
Thinking Goes to the Ballpark: Baseball Cognition and its Development.Michael Patrick Searson - 1989 - Dissertation, Rutgers the State University of New Jersey - Newark
The Perilous Quest: Baseball as Folk Drama.Dennis Porter - 1977 - Critical Inquiry 4 (1):143-157.
Why Jim Joyce Wasn’t Wrong: Baseball and the Euthyphro Dilemma.Amber L. Griffioen - 2015 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 42 (3):327-348.
Baseball Stadiums and American Audiences.Kenneth H. Marcus - 2008 - Telos: Critical Theory of the Contemporary 2008 (143):165-170.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-04-28

Downloads
24 (#624,411)

6 months
4 (#724,033)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

A response to contributors.Robert L. Simon - 2016 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 43 (1):129-141.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Utilitarianism.J. S. Mill - 1861 - Oxford University Press UK. Edited by Roger Crisp.
Utilitarianism.John Stuart Mill - 2000 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Exploring Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology. New York, NY, United States of America: Oxford University Press USA.
Are Rules All an Umpire Has to Work With?J. S. Russell - 1999 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 26 (1):27-49.
A Critique of Violent Retaliation in Sport.Nicholas Dixon - 2010 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 37 (1):1-10.
The Ethics of Pitcher’s Retaliation in Baseball.Sean McAleer - 2009 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 36 (2009) 36 (1):50-65.

View all 6 references / Add more references