How Close Is Too Close?

Fans want to be close to the action.  People pay a lot of money to go to professional sporting events, and the more you pay, the better you expect your seat to be.  Some people think that paying for that expensive seat also entitles them to something (which it does not).  While others talk about having concerns about for their safety, while still wanting to sit as close to the action as possible (the solution, of course, is don't sit there!).  Which begs the question: How close is too close?

Recent incidents in the NBA and MLB have brought this question to the forefront.  In one, fan safety took center stage.  In the others, it was the other way around.  Those were about fan behavior, specifically about what's appropriate and what crosses the line.  There isn't an easy answer to either one.

The baseball incident took place last week, when a little girl in the stands was hit in the face by a line drive during the Cubs-Astros game in Houston.  Albert Almora, the Cubs batter who hit the ball, was mortified, as were a number of other players on the field.

This, of course, renewed the debate about ballpark netting and what measures MLB needs to take in order to protect its fans.  Countless examples were cited as proof that this happens "all the time" (put in quotes deliberately because it's not nearly as frequent as some would like you to believe).  Kris Bryant went so far as to say that MLB should immediately require every ballpark to extend its netting from foul pole to foul pole.  Which is both impractical and ridiculous.

I won't even get into the cost factor as a reason why Bryant's suggestion is ridiculous.  Instead I'll offer some photos as my proof.  Specifically pictures of the stadiums in Tampa Bay, Toronto and Oakland.  Do you see the amount of foul territory?!  Is there really a need for netting going all the way to the foul pole when the fans are that far away from the field?  Can a line drive even make it into the stands there?  (There's a reason those three teams have won a combined one AL batting title.)

So, that's one argument against requiring the netting to cover all of foul territory.  Another is that a good number of people simply don't want it.  That goes back to my earlier point about the amount of money fans spend for field level seats.  And those fans aren't paying that money to sit behind netting!  A lot of them sit there specifically BECAUSE of the opportunity to catch a foul ball.

Yes, there's a difference between a popup that you can see coming and prepare for and a line drive that comes quickly and leaves you little to no time to react.  But, you assume that risk when you sit there.  They print warnings on the ticket and announce it repeatedly during the game.  Teams are doing their job in that regard.  (And you can't compare it to the net behind the goal in hockey, because in hockey you're not looking thru the net, you're looking thru the glass.)

What happened in Houston was horrible.  Just like what happened with Todd Frazier and the little girl at Yankee Stadium was horrible and what happened last year at Dodger Stadium was horrible.  But that doesn't mean MLB should take a page out of Japan's book and have the ballpark netting go across the entire stadium.  You want to require to go from dugout to dugout, fine.  But anything beyond that should be up to the teams.  Because in some places, they simply don't need it.

Meanwhile, in the NBA playoffs, there have been two separate interactions involving game personnel and spectators who might've been a little too close to the court.  The first is Raptors superfan (and, apparently, team ambassador) Drake giving Toronto's head coach a shoulder rub during the Eastern Conference Finals.  The other took place just a few days ago when one of the Warriors "owners" pushed a Raptors player who went into the stands going for a loose ball.

First, let's talk about Drake, who makes it a point to make sure his presence is very obvious.  Now, I don't get the obsession with Drake and his "music" (which all sounds the same), but that has nothing to do with why I find this situation completely unacceptable.  He literally walked onto the freakin' court and rubbed the coach's shoulders!  (It's a good thing his intent wasn't malicious, but imagine if it was!)

In what universe is that considered OK?!  Just because he's a celebrity that makes it alright?  If it was any other random fan, they would've been cuffed and escorted out of the arena by security.  And rightfully so!  That same standard should apply to everybody.

Then there's the situation with the Warriors' "owner."  He's an investor, not the principal owner, but as a member of the ownership team, the term should still apply.  For some reason, he felt the need to push the Raptors player who was simply chasing after a loose ball.  That situation was handled promptly.  He was immediately ejected from the game, then banned from all Warriors team activities and fined.  The team also issued a statement apologizing for the incident.  Although, his suspension is only for a year, which doesn't seem nearly long enough.

There's only so much the NBA can do about this.  They're not going to get rid of courtside seats entirely.  They generate too much money.  But how about getting rid of those ridiculous seats between the benches and the scorer's table?  The ones where the players literally have to run by fans just to check into the game.  The ones where you're blocked by the coach half the time.  (I've never understood those seats or the ones behind the benches at football stadiums, the ones where you're literally looking at the backsides of offensive linemen the entire game.)

Or maybe they can increase the distance between the courtside seats and the actual playing surface.  After all, it's only in the NBA where fans can reach out and touch the players.  Hockey has glass, while baseball and football have walls.  But just because you can get close doesn't mean you should.  The players and coaches still need room to do their jobs.

Buying a ticket grants you admission to the game.  Nothing more.  It doesn't give you the right to walk out on the court or anything else.  And a person's status, whether it be a celebrity or a team representative or a regular fan, should make absolutely no difference.  Everyone should be expected to behave the same way.

While the situations in Houston, Toronto and Golden State were unrelated and completely different, they all bring the bigger issue to light.  Because there wouldn't be a game without the fans.  Fans want the world, but you also want everyone to have a safe, enjoyable time.  And finding that balance can sometimes be difficult.  Can something be done?  Probably.  What's that solution?  I have no idea!