alternatehistory.com

We all know that the form of baseball MLB evolved rules form came from America made by Abner Doubleday sort of. Ok, honestly he didn't, but he compiled a list of rules that MLB baseball evolved from. Sure, he wasn't the originator of the rules. There seemed to be a precursor baseball in 17th century England, but not only did it not completely take off, it's a little different than what we have today.

Well, what if the English Crown sponsored some baseball in 1500s? Have 30ish teams compete for 55 for 6 playoff spots. Most wins play one championship series. Their challenger is made up by 5 teams competing for the spot. Three division champions and two "wildcard like" teams play. So the best season needs to win one series. The three division champions (best of each geographical location who aren't the best of England) would need to win 2 series to face off the best one. And the wildcard-like teams would face off each other for a series, need to win 2 series against the champs, and then be able to face the big champ. A monetary payout of 24-8-7-1 is made very year. 24 goes to the winning team, 8 to the second place, 7 for the third place, and 1 for everyone else. Tickets are sold to spectators and the crown pockets 70% of it (which offsets some of the subsidies)

Instead of the origins coming from New York, it comes from a place in England, and I chose Lancashire just because.

Medieval age England had everyone practice longbow skills. It was pretty much a required sport. By Henry VII's time, the longbow isn't usefulness, but the musket was gaining prominence. Aside from penetration, there was the fact one could carry over 7 shots and powder for each arrow a (cross/long)bowman might carry. And the musket didn't tire its user. So by the 1500s, we can have "optional sports"

Why might the crown support something like this? For his own entertainment. Think of them as expensive jugglers. Who's paying for this? Well, I'll hand wave it. Let's say Lancashire gets better soil than its OTL counterpart and the tax on the extra yield is exactly what the crown subsidizes on the sport. So this doesn't make TTL's crown more poor than OTL counterpart.

Now here's the rub. No mechanization, so how do we make the baseballs? Well, Shakespeare's plays involves Tennis balls, like Henry V. So, why can't a craftsman make a ball like today's baseballs? it won't be as consistent as a machine, but the average diameter and elasticity can be the same even if there is variance. I don't see why tennis balls are easier than baseballs.

And let's say the "old baseball" never has the designated hitter position. Someone can come up with that rule if they think of it, but we'll say it never takes off in Britain, the originator of TTL baseball. I wonder if we end up with concepts such as "earned runs," "batting averages," and "saves." Or maybe people will just look at each player playing individual games to evaluate how good they are instead of stats. I would imagine a sport with an older origin would be less number driven.

And now, we just need to figure out how to make the sport spread tot he Americas and Europe. this will be tough as Americans will dump everything British from their culture after getting away.

I think if MLB still forms in TTL and isn't butterflied away (which it probably will be, even if America has baseball it won't be what we see in OTL), David Ortiz might be out of a job given how many fly balls he dropped at the Twins in OTL and in 2007 World Series. OK, honestly American baseball if it came would be different than it is today.
Top