Recent injuries at MLB ballparks have renewed discussions of expanded safety netting at the major and minor league level.  Some have suggested netting from dugout to dugout while others have taken it one step further and would like to see netting from foul pole to foul pole.  A class action law suit by an Oakland A's season ticket holder contends that Major League Baseball has been negligent in terms of guaranteeing fan safety and has demanded further safety netting.

Those who argue that MLB is not doing enough point to the fact that seats are now closer to the action than ever before.  The players are stronger than they were in years past leading to balls coming off the bat with greater velocity.  Cell phones and other electronic devices have led to increased distractions at the ballpark and often fans are pushed to use their devices during games by Major League Baseball.  It has been said that by MLB not taking proper precautions, they are not being as family friendly as they should be, and it would be better to be proactive than have a young child seriously injured or killed by a foul ball.

All of these arguments have some truth to them; however, the question remains just how responsible MLB is and should be in ensuring our safety from objects leaving the playing field during games?  For over 100 years, MLB has protected themselves by simply indicating that fans are responsible for their own safety.  It's clearly printed on ticket stubs and signs throughout the stadium.  It has always been understood that you enter a Major League Baseball game at your own risk.  Baseball is a dangerous game.  Anyone that has ever played the sport can attest to that, and fans that have attended enough games have seen someone injured by a screaming line drive foul ball.  Still, that warning has always loomed large over the fan experience.

Most fans simply assume that if they get hurt, it's on them and they can't sue the team or league.  Yet, in a modern society where litigation is an ever present fact of life, that is increasingly no longer the case.  The family of the young fan tragically killed at the Columbus Blue Jackets hockey game in 2002 received an out of court settlement of roughly $1.2 million dollars.  That incident led to expanded netting in the NHL. 

Those that advocate for increased safety measures argue that expanded netting doesn't detract from the experience and is not intrusive.  Those who disagree say that it creates a screen door effect that is visually intrusive, makes picture taking more difficult, and overall simply adds a layer separation between the fans and the game.  Those against netting point out that fans who are concerned about safety can choose to sit in areas where they are less likely to be struck by foul balls.  Teams themselves have shown reluctance to implement increased netting since it would be premium seats that would be obstructed.  At minor league ballparks, it would be the majority of seats that would be behind nets.

It's interesting to watch the evolution of thinking on this.  Modern society has conditioned us to believe everything is safe...and everything that isn't inherently safe needs to be made as safe as possible even if we have to resort to overkill to reach optimal levels of safety.  And, if everything isn't made as safe as possible, there is an army of lawyers salivating to go to court.

I was thinking about this during a recent trip to Arizona.  I attended 2 games at Chase Field and the next day went to the Grand Canyon.  The Grand Canyon is a national park.  It is funded by the United States government.  It is also an extremely rugged and dangerous place.  People die there every year.  Yet, we are still free to have almost completely unfettered access to the rim of the canyon where one wrong step  or one loose rock could lead to a fall of up to 4,000 feet. 

I'm sure there are some who would like to see it, but we don't see these calls for the government to place protective railings all the way around the rim.  It's simply understood that you have to be careful and you are ultimately responsible for your own safety.  If you ask me, this is how is should be. 

The Grand Canyon is a beautiful place and it would lose something if we lost free access to this wonder of the world.  Baseball can't truly be compared to something as amazing as the Grand Canyon, but it's the same idea.  Baseball would lose some of its charm and accessibility if we go overboard with safety measures that aren't really necessary.