After a few alarming incidents last year, Major League Baseball opted to require each team to install protective netting down the first and third base lines to avoid having fans get injured by errant bats and foul balls. Famed author Stephen King, who is a season ticket holder for the Boston Red Sox, is in opposition of that new protective netting.
King, who has authored countless best-selling books, penned an opinion piece for the Boston Globe this past weekend to talk about why the protective netting is an intrusion on the fans who sit in those seats and enjoy the view they paid for, which was a paramount issue when the idea of protective netting had begun being discussed.
Here are some excerpts from the piece, but you can read the whole thing here.
"There are questions inherent in the decision to net, and I think they're bigger than baseball. Like when does protection become overprotection? Is the safety of a fan at a public event like a baseball game the responsibility of the organization putting on that event? (According to the back of every MLB ticket sold, the fan is responsible.) When do safety precautions begin to steal away the pure joy of being there?
"I understand the Red Sox bear some responsibility, but I also accept my responsibility to take care of myself - to the best of my ability - when I'm at the ballpark."
"That netting may be a fine mesh, but you're still looking through a barrier instead of right at the thing you came to see. Which means you'd do almost as well to sit home watching the game on TV.
"We live in an increasingly cosseted society, where forces larger than ourselves have taken charge of our safety ... But if we are not to be a nation of overgrown children being cared for by various forms of the MLB brass ("for our own good," of course), we have to take at least some responsibility when we attend a public event. Also, there's something almost ludicrous about wrapping America's baseball stadiums in protective gauze when any idiot with a grudge can buy a gun and shoot a bunch of people. I'd much rather see some action taken on that little problem."
He makes plenty of good points. Yes, there are times when there's simply not enough reaction time to dodge a laser-bream of a foul ball, but those serious injuries are few and far between (perhaps the same chance one has of getting struck by lightning). A lot of the time, fans treat the game as a social event and aren't paying attention or fail to take measures to improve their safety. If you're sitting that close to the dugouts, you simply shouldn't be on your cell phone, and if you are, time it in between at-bats so you're not at risk of getting struck by a ball or a bat. Additionally, young kids probably shouldn't be sitting that close to the action, which is why Tonya Carpenter suffered life-threatening injuries after being struck in the head with a bat at Fenway last year. Carpenter said she was "watching my son's ketchup drop on his lap eating his hotdog" when the bat hit her.
Remember the kid that was nearly hit in the face with the barrel of an errant bat during spring training? He was sitting right behind the dugout playing on his cell phone.
But then again, telling someone where they can sit is a whole different issue.
All in all, the protective netting is a responsible decision by Major League Baseball, but it's a direct result of fans and spectators refusing or failing to ensure their own safety. Now with lawsuits around every corner, the league clearly doesn't want to take a risk with such future incidents, especially as society continues to grow less and less responsible.
Everyone is well aware of the risks that come with sitting in those seats, but all it took was a few untimely incidents to ruin it for a majority of baseball fans that go to games, pay attention and enjoy the view -- not the protective netting -- right before their eyes.
