Why isn't there a tiebreaker rule in tournament play?

Nah, lets just do a home run derby.

You start a runner at 2nd, they bunt him to third, a sac fly get him home, the game might still be going on.

You would be better having a homerun derby to decide it past a certain point.

Yep, those long games take a lot of those kids.

And Bryson gets a little cranky.

It makes sense to limit the game time in a tournament setting. Imagine the problems created by an early game going this far over their projected time slot. Both teams know the tie-breaker goes into effect at a certain time so it's fair to both teams. My suggestion would be to give the win to the team with the fewest errors after the tenth inning is completed and the score is still tied. If errors are tied up, then the one with the fewest strike outs, or the one with the fewest walks allowed, then most hits, etc. I use errors as a tie breaker because a team will have done it to themselves, same as strike outs and walks allowed. Their poor play will end up being the price they pay when they are given the loss.

quote:

---

Maybe they should start adopting similar rules to college football with the 2 pt conversion in 3rd OT

Maybe for SEC Tournament play only start putting a man on 1B with 0 outs starting at 12th inning

---

Right - the 2 pt comment is spot on.

Playing a game for 17 innings until 3 am on the second day of the tournament is something that should be avoided if possible.

I mean, we already have a 10 run rule, so we already have established that we can have different rules for SECT play.