Tony Clark, executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association made an appearance Saturday in Port Charlotte to speak to the Tampa Bay Rays, the 29th of 30 teams on his spring training tour.

Clark spoke with the media afterwards, addressing a number of issues.

On the players wanting a voice in pace of game:

“They should have a voice in everything. That’s why the communication tools we have in place and the support that we have provided guys gives them every opportunity to weigh in. They are the ones who are going to be affected by it the most. As much as decisions made away from the field is something that often happens to the extent to the guys need to have an opportunity to weigh in, they should. To have rules that are going to be put in place that are going to govern what you are going to do on the field – and it may the one opportunity you have to make and stay in the big leagues. So if you make a wrong call, or you have a rule or consideration that affects you, you’re not afforded an opportunity to do what you need to do and perform optimally, that’s a problem.

“Whether it’s instant replay or home plate collisions or pace of game, there’s open dialogue between us, Major League Baseball and the umpires union, such that nothing that was put in place should have an adverse effect on the game or the guys’ ability to perform. If it does, we will need to address it.

“At the end of the day you want to make adjustments to keep the game moving as the culture and interest may chance, but to the extent anything that is done that adversely affects the way he player performs is not beneficial to anyone. That’s one of the things we can collectively agree on.

“The hope is that the decisions that were made this year are ones that creates new habits and that guys can get comfortable with and are comfortable with.

“If there is something that is not right and they are having an issue with it, there is disagreements with how things are being discussed or being applied, let us know. We’ll sit down with Major League Baseball and the umpires so that guys aren’t negatively affected.

On feedback from the players on the new and proposed speed-up rules:

“There appears to have been a lot of misinformation out there. A lot of what had stuck early were not 100 percent accurate. There are rules, considerations and guidelines in place, but the idea is to keep the game moving, to see if a few minutes can be found on the back end without negatively affecting the game itself.

“The idea is to use between inning clock as a gauge. A lot of players had no idea how long it took them to warm up in between innings. Or from a batter preparation standpoint, you’re in the on-deck circle and staring at the umpire and trying to watch the pitcher because you don’t know how many he’s got left or when he might be ready to go or when you’re back from a commercial break.

“Now you have a reference point. You know when it’s 20 seconds or less, they’re back and everybody can go. A lot of guys said that’s going to be helpful. A lot of the fluff was when they were back from the break and when the first pitch was thrown. If we can take some of the fluff time out and stay closer to the break, then without affecting anything else, we find some extra time on the back end.

“You couldn’t violate it in spring training if you wanted to. They may let you know you violated this or that. The idea here is to get guys comfortable, not punish people.

On MLB commissioner Rob Manfred’s thoughts of banning or limiting defensive shifts:

“It hasn’t been proposed. I’m sure guys will have ideas by the end of the day. Rest assured any considerations beyond what is in place now will be a very interesting conversation to have.

“It’s very dangerous. Our game is 125 years old and has remained relatively the same. When you start tinkering with the game instead of what’s going on around it, you’re playing a dangerous game. The guys on the field are the ones most invested and the ones most affected by any changes that happen.

On the blocking-the-plate and instant replay rules evoked last season:

“Instant replay improved as the year went along, the process and protocol both on the field and in the replay center. The concern was it disrupting the flow of the game. I can genuinely suggest it did. The games got longer when you included historic levels of instant replay. You’re always walking that very fine line: Let’s make improvements, but are those improvements creating more issues that we are going to have to address down the road.

“It got better as the year went along where the time and the efficiently of the rulings improved. Our hope is that continues for this year.

“Home plate collisions is another one where you are taking a part of the game that has always been a part of the game. It’s a delicate tap dance when you are creating a rule that affects runs going on or coming off the board in short fashion.

“There were challenges along the way, clarifications that were made toward the latter part of the year that removed some of the concern that existed with how certain plays were being called. Coming into this year, we are hoping guys are more comfortable with that and it’s more settled as well.

On the evolution of protective caps for pitchers:

“There’s been a lot. We are fortunate because we have a lot of former pitchers on staff that have been a part of this process all the way through, as well as a lot of guys who have offered input.

“Where we were and where we are is better. We still have a lot of work to do to get guys comfortable with whatever product is available. The first protective helmet that came back was gigantic.

“Guys are wearing the most protective helmet. We’re still trying to get there with the pitcher’s cap. There are options available. Mr. Torres wore one of them. There are options going around spring training that would be an improvement to the bigger cap.

“We get updates all the time. We are working jointly with Major League Baseball to continue to try to make improvements for the guys.

On Tampa Bay pitcher Drew Smyly’s comments through a tweet (“It’s not right that a Cuban 19yr old gets paid 30m and the best 19yr old in the entire USA gets prob 1/6th of that. Everyone should have to go through same process) concerning the signing of Cuban players, namely Yoan Moncada by Boston:

“What the young player from Cuba signed for was simply reflected what his value is. That’s what everybody was paying attention to. There appears to be more value for the younger player that’s being reflected anywhere else. Maybe there’s a conversation should be had.

“The conversation should be ‘Let’s restrict his ability and value’ as much as it could be let’s try to unrestrict some of the others.

“Drew’s acknowledgment was right on point. There is an issue here. But everybody took it one way, but perhaps the consideration may be the other.

“It’s sounds in theory having everybody enter the game the same way is the best way to go. It’s simply not that easy a conversation to have. There’s dynamics that consist in a number of places that prove more of a challenge than to simply take a system that some would argue domestically is broken and dropping it somewhere else just because.

“It is part of collective bargaining and will be discussed at the table.

On MLB’s competitive balance arrangements:

“Every time we sit down at the bargaining table there’s a conversation on how all these moving pieces fit and making sure the moving pieces provide a system that is as balanced as it possibly can be. Some people focus in on payrolls as the balancing point. That’s not necessarily accurate. There are a lot of teams that do very well that don’t have the highest payrolls in the game. There must be some other moving pieces.

“Part of conversation going back to ’94-’95 and has been at the table in ’02 and ’06 and even ’11 is how revenue sharing fits, how certain effects of debt service or competitive balance tax fit into the equation, how certain dollars are allocated in certain directions at certain times to provide support in area where some may need and what others may need.

“That may be a topic of discussion again in ’16 because it always has been. You have a dynamic that some may feel may exist in one, you may have a completely different one that exists somewhere else. In making sure that we have an understanding that we have how any one decision is going to affect any one particular club is going to be crucial to making sure we continue with a program or system of support that gives everybody a chance to put the best team on the field and have a chance to be the last team standing.

“It will be a topic of discussion without getting into a bargaining position right now.

“There are stipulations in the bargaining agreement tied to revenue sharing and how those revenue sharing dollars can be used. As a result, we can enter the equation and be a part of the conversation if we believe there are concerns or issues there. We have been part of conversations – I’m not going to tell you with who or when. In part due to those conversations, decisions have been made moving forward that have proven to be in the best interests of everybody involved.

“We want everyone to do the best they can to put the team on the field at any given time. Sometimes that means a dollar; sometimes that means something else. But to the extent we pay attention to all of it, we do, all in the best interests of the game.

On the stadium issue with the Rays:

“Yes, we share same concern. I’m guessing, because I haven’t, but if you ask the players if they would enjoy playing in a new, flashy ballpark, I guarantee you that a lot of them would suggest new amenities may be great. But to the extent that it directly effects or being directly reflects their ability to compete that’s the concern that resonates the most.

“You have to ask the guys how they feel about the ballpark. But to the extent Major League Baseball has voiced a concern, our sentiments are the same.

On Major League Baseball having another team in Montreal:

“We’re also concerned about the well-being of the industry, so if it makes sense that a consideration be made, we would enjoy being a part of that conversation and be interested in a decision being made that would reflect the best interests of the game.

“As I sit here, I couldn’t tell you if we should have a team in Montreal or not.

On possible expansion:

“Perhaps. I’m not going to be able to give you much other than perhaps. It hasn’t been anything we’ve heard or bantered about to this point, but it’s possible considering how well the industry is doing.

On labor peace in the game since 1995:

“One of the misnomers is labor peace is the commitment. A fair and equitable deal is the commitment. What we’ve been very fortunate to do over the last 20 years is sit at the table and negotiate a fair and equitable deal to where it’s afforded the industry to grow where everybody’s enjoyed the benefit of that growth.

“My relationship with the commissioner goes back 13, 14 years, both when I was an active player and now as an inactive player. The one thing we have that the other leagues and players’ associations don’t, we have a level of continuity as a result. There’s an open line of communication and respect between myself and the players association and the players and the commissioner and the commissioner’s office. As long as those lines of communication are open, there’s a very real possibility that everything keeps moving.

“That doesn’t mean there aren’t going to be challenges. That doesn’t mean they’re aren’t going to be disagreements. The relationship we have with the commissioner and the commissioner’s office has been reflected into what has transpired over the last 20 years. We’ll see how that manifests itself in ’16.

On the pace of the game in relation to the players:

“Ironic enough, there isn’t a consensus by anyone else as to how we got to where we got to.

“The realization is there are a number of factors that have become a part of the conversation as to why the games are now at an average 3:02, instead of what they may have been 15, 20 or 30 years ago. You try to determine what is the cause of it, while trying to maintain the integrity of certain things, but perhaps adjusting a few others, while trying to get to something that has a two in front of it instead of a three, it becomes a shell game, all while trying not to create something that fans are now watching that they don’t want to watch anymore. As much as we’ve always been taught and continue to work to slow the game down, because it moves as fast as it does.

“A lot of what we are talking about is counter intuitive to how we best are prepared to perform.

“Is there any one thing? No. Are there a number of things that enter the equation? It’s a challenge. What happened here with a batter’s box rule that has already been on the books with respect to the formulization of a between-inning break – I can say the same thing to the pitching change timer – the hope is indifferent to all the extracurricular things are floating around. These things can take out some of the fluff without effecting the game and see if we have something that has a two instead of a three.

“Some suggest something that has a two instead of a three in front of it will excite the next generation of fans. I don’t know that that’s necessarily the case. It’s a much bigger discussion that we can have. For now, the hope is what we’ve put in place for this year doesn’t cause more issues and actually can be part of a solution that even if it’s cosmetic suggests that the length of the game is being shortened.

“I’m not saying the players are the ones that have to continue to adjust here. At the end of the day, it wasn’t the players that did any number of things have extended the length of the game. It may lend itself to a conversation that may lend itself to something beyond the season. It shouldn’t continue to be the result of adjustments being made by the players as to where we end up, if we end up beyond what we are doing for 2015.

On the umpires enforcing the strike zone to aid the pace of the game:

“Perhaps. There’s no telling what effect certain things are going to have until you tinker with them and see what you’ve got. Tinkering with them in the fall league and the minor leagues is one thing. Tinkering with them at the major league level is a completely different conversation. You can tinker with them in an area that’s not the big leagues and make assumptions on based on what the result is, that’s not 100 percent the best way to go either.

“We’ll have to see what the strike zone thing looks like, if that’s a consideration they are making. I haven’t heard as much about it, as much as it’s being bantered about. Any considerations that are being made haven’t stuck out too much yet. Any time you start to manipulate a change or adjust anything on what happens between the lines, you’re playing with fire, especially with guys having done or exposed to the same thing their entire careers. You’re making an adjustment that is substantive that’s related to the game being played. We’ll keep an eye on it.

On increasing offense and the pace of the game:

“You can have a 10-8 games that goes 2 hours, 50 minutes. Or you can have a 2-1 game that goes 3 hours, 45 minutes. It’s not that simple a conversation we want more offense without necessarily assuming that it could mean more time or it could mean less time, depending on what that offense looks like.

“If you have a lot of walks during the course of the game, the game is going to be longer. Maybe that goes to the strike zone question. If you have a knock, knock, three-run homer, that line is going to move pretty quick. It’s just not that simple.

“You’ll find fans that love the 1-0 shutout and the great pitcher’s duel. They love it. And then you’ll have others that love the 14-12 and balls hit 500 feet. Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday may be the first one and Thursday, Friday and Saturday may be the other one.

“That’s the great thing about our game. There’s an opportunity at any time to see any of it and/or see something you’ve never seen before, despite the fact the game has been around for 125 years.

“Again, they are nice topics of discussion and good topics to rap about, but making an assumption and trying to create a rule against that assumption and hoping it manifests itself is just a challenge.

On a balanced schedule:

“Nope. It may, but nothing at this point.

On the designated hitter:

“The DH has been a part of bargaining for as far back as I can remember. I anticipate it being a part of bargaining again. What side of the fence that position has taken, don’t know, really don’t know.

“When I mentioned it the other day, it didn’t come from us. I expect it to be talked about or discussed, like it always has been.

“At this point, it could be one or the other or both.

“We will have a conversation with the guys as to what they think. For as many guys who don’t want anything to do with an at-bat, we may have a number of guys who look forward to those who do. We’ll have to see where we end up.