Banning aluminum bats

The state Legislature is considering a ban on youth baseball and softball leagues using aluminum and composite-material bats, a move prompted by the cardiac arrest of a 12-year-old pitcher who was hit in the chest with a line drive off an aluminum bat. (See our stories in the South Brunswick Post and The Cranbury Press.)

I was ambivalent about the proposal initially, mostly because I remember the bats from my youth. But I have to say that the arguments against the ban are pretty weak and the potential dangers too great not to take this proposal seriously.

The arguments against the ban are pretty straightforward:

— baseball and softball, in general, are dangerous because they both involve a fast-moving projectile and inexperienced fielders

— wooden bats, because they break, will lead to greater replacement costs

— and the heavier wooden bats might discourage some smaller or weaker kids from playing.

None of the arguments really hold water, however, when examined rationally.

First, it is true that the games are dangerous, but that does not mean that the state should just throw its hands in the air. Imposing limits on the equipment that can be used (bat type and/or size), requiring the use of specific safety equipment (helmets, etc.) and establishing other rules (distance between bases or location of the pitcher’s mound) are of compelling public interest. And it is clear that he Little League and bat manufacturers have no interest in addressing the concerns.

Second, broken bats will need to be replaced, but the cost of wooden bats is significantly lower than some of the better aluminum (which can cost several hundred bucks), meaning that you can buy several wooden bats for each aluminum or composite bat you would otherwise purchase.

Third, the lighter aluminum bats might be easier for smaller kids to swing, but they also enhance the games of the bigger kids, possibly widening the skills level further and discouraging the smaller kids from participating — the exact argument made against wooden bats. Basically, this is the proverbial red herring and should not even be part of the discussion.

Proponents argue that the safety concerns are so great that the ban is necessary. But few studies have been done about the difference between the bats, but one, conducted in 2002, backs up those who are seeking the ban. As reported on 1010 WINS radio:

A 2002 study by Brown University said balls hit off an aluminum bat averaged 93.3 mph, compared to 86.1 mph for wooden bats, and found 2 percent of balls hit off wooden bats exceeded 100 mph, compared to 37 percent hit off metal bats.

The study did not look at safety, only performance, and it remains unclear whether injuries are on the increase. The Consumer Product Safety Commission, for its part, has said that safetu differences between the two kinds of bats are minimal.

But what seems obvious to me at this point is that we need to really ask ourselves what benefits we are getting from aluminum bats, while also looking at the Little League diamond with an eye toward changing its dimensions to reflect the needs of today’s bigger players. Ban the bats, expand the diamond and let’s see what happens. It can’t hurt to err on the side of safety on this one.

And there is the side benefit of possibly slowing the game down for kids and forcing them to learn the nuances of baseball and softball and not to always rely a fast bat to drive the ball into the outfield.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

Author: hankkalet

Hank Kalet is a poet and freelance journalist. He is the economic needs reporter for NJ Spotlight, teaches journalism at Rutgers University and writing at Middlesex County College and Brookdale Community College. He writes a semi-monthly column for the Progressive Populist. He is a lifelong fan of the New York Mets and New York Knicks, drinks too much coffee and attends as many Bruce Springsteen concerts as his meager finances will allow. He lives in South Brunswick with his wife Annie. View all posts by hankkalet