While the majority of baseball fans are most likely greatly anticipating the latest incarnation of this star studded spectacular, count me in the minority that could care less about it. No, I'm not some bitter Yankee fan who is angry that only 3 Yankees were named to the team (It was actually 1 too many in my opinion), but consider me just a frustrated fan, who longs for the time when the game actually means something again.
The All-Star game hasn't mattered for nearly 40 years. In my entire life-time, I haven't seen an All-Star game that actually did.
I know, I know, now you're thinking, "but Chris, the game decides home-field advantage in the World Series, this time it counts!" Really? It counts now, so why does Major League Baseball still get it wrong? Confused? Let me explain...
We're supposed to be held under the guise that the All-Star game is a crucially contested match-up of the American League and National League where the winner receives the ultimate prize of being awarded home-field advantage in the World Series, yet they don't treat it like it does.
There are a few reasons that prove the All-Star game is nothing but a cheesey exhibition game (which is what it's supposed to be!), filled with players who could truly care less about the importance of the outcome. I'll outline all of MY problems with the game and then offer you the solutions I've come up with that would at least appeal to my interests.
Do you think the Washington Nationals lone representative Ryan Zimmerman really cares about winning, so the National League gets home-field advantage? If you just answered yes to that question, just stop reading right now, because well, you're an idiot and I don't need your support from the mental institution you should be committed to. OF COURSE HE DOESN'T! His team isn't going to be there, hell his team won't even be out of last place for the next 5 years. The only time "World Series" and "Ryan Zimmerman" should be put into the same sentence is when you say "Gee, I wonder what room in his house Ryan Zimmerman is going to watch the World Series this year?"
Problem 1: Players from every team needing at least one mandatory representative
Solution 1: If the game really does matter, every team doesn't need a representative. No offense to you personally, Ryan Zimmerman, because you are indeed having an All-Star worthy season. But, I'm talking about the years that a player only makes the team because his team is required to have a representative. (See: 2003; Devil Rays, Tampa; Carter, Lance)
If the game does matter, like Bud Selig wants me to believe, well, then only the best players who are deserving should be there. Voting for the All-Star game is nothing more than a ballot stuffing popularity contest for your favorite players. And, while I'm complaining about the selection process, I'm sick of seeing the respective managers of each squad, rewarding their team for hard play by favoring their players as reserves, over other teams (the Joe Torre special).
Problem 2: Fans voting for un-deserving players
Solution 2: Take the voting for the All-Star game starters, away from the fans. Simple as that, it's happened before do it again. (In 1957, after a ballot stuffing scandal saw 7 Cincinnati Reds players selected as starters, Commissioner Ford Frick discontinued fan voting). That way, the fans aren't having players go to the All-Star game based on name recognition only. I'm sorry, but Mark Teixeira and his .275 average does not merit him getting the starting first baseman job over Kevin Youkilis. Nor does Dustin Pedroia and his .303 average, 4 home runs and 40 rbi, deserve the starting second base job over Aaron hill and his .292, 20 and 60. (this was at least rectified when Pedroia opted not to play due to personal reasons and Hill was awarded the start). If the game truly is to be taken seriously as a critical game, then I want the players and coaches around the league to vote for who they think is deserving. (this could very well back-fire, but it worked from 1957 to 1969, we can make it work again).
Problem 3: Managers selecting their own players as reserves for the All-Star team over much more deserving players on other squads.
Solution 3: Have the players and coaches league wide vote on not only the starters, but the reserves as well. I didn't think it was fair in 2004 when Joe Torre took 8 players with him to the All-Star game. Just as Terry Francona did in 2008 when he selected Jason Varitek and his .218 batting average to the All-Star team. Or, this year with Joe Maddon selecting Carlos Pena and his .228 average with 24 home runs to the team. I'm supposed to believe that the league I'm supporting is pulling out all the stops to win, while our manager is playing favorites with the roster? I'm sorry, but Pena and his .228 average is not having a more All-Star worthy season than Miguel Cabrera and his .321 average. Don't tell me it's because Pena is leading the league in home runs with 24, because Cabrera is among the league leaders with 18 and he's struck out TWO TIMES fewer than Pena. In a late inning, pinch hit situation, with the game on the line, who would you rather have hitting? The man who strikes out 36% of the time in Pena, or the man who GETS A HIT 32% of the time in Cabrera? My point exactly.
If the All-Star game was such an important contest, then shouldn't the coaches actually manage it, as if it were just that? Every player doesn't need to get into the game in order for your league to have the best chance to win.
Problem 4: Managers trying to get every player into the game for at least a little bit
Solution 4: If the game has that much meaning behind it, with home-field advantage at stake, a player shouldn't have his feelings hurt if he doesn't find his way into the game for his 1 at bat, or if he's a pitcher, 1 batter faced. If you want to tout the fact that the winner of this game determines home-field advantage, then hey, my hats off to you, but, you better damn well manage it like it's the 7th game of the World Series and not like it's a celebrity softball tournament.
So the fans vote for the 8 respective starters at each position, the players and coaches around the league then vote for 5 starting pitchers, 3 relief pitchers and 8 back-up players for each position. The manager then determines the final 8 players on the roster. Wait, the fans then get to decide the "All-Star Final Vote", really? So there are 33 players on an All-Star team roster, when at any other point before September 1st, the Major League roster size is only 25?
Problem 5: There are far too many players participating in the All-Star game
Solution 5: 33 players is far too many, have the normal 25 man roster! If Commissioner Bud Selig and the rest of baseball think they need more bodies on the roster, in case the game goes into extra innings and may end in a tie (like the aforementioned 2002), then they should look at solution 4 listed above. Play the game like it really does matter and you won't need the 8 extra players. If the All-Star game is now just as vital to my teams World Series chances as a regular season game, then do you think I'm going to care if Andrew Bailey didn't get to pitch, or that Jason Bartlett didn't pinch hit for Derek Jeter? HELL NO! I want to see the best players on that field for 9 innings, busting their hump with every play. You want to tell me it count, then you better play like it does too.
One of the biggest caveats with the All-Star game in the past was that it was the only time of the year, other than the World Series, that fans were able to see players from the other league. Now, not so much.
Problem 6: Too much of a good thing, can actually be a bad thing. Inter-league play has taken away much of the luster the All-Star game used to possess.
Solution 6: While this has no chance of EVER happening, since Major League Baseball is all about being a financial success and Inter-league play has proven that its a hit with fans, given attendance for those games are higher than normal games, it does tarnish the true tradition of the All-Star game. If you get rid of Inter-League play, you restore some of the old tradition that the game once stood for.
The Major League Baseball All-Star game is an exhibition game, that's what it was meant to be when it was created 76 years ago. It was supposed to be a one time affair, that only became annual because of the success it had.
Problem 7: Having the All-Star game be played for home-field advantage in the World Series
Solution 7a: Well, this is simple, don't have the All-Star game be played to determine who receives home-field in the World Series. Novel concept, huh? After all, the NBA All-Star game winner doesn't determine which conference hosts the NBA Finals. Just as the NHL All-Star game isn't used to decide that either. They are merely exhibition games to showcase the talent and skills of their players. If I'm mistaken, that's what the All-Star game used to be about.
Solution 7b: Or let's just make this really easy. The home team in the World Series used to just switch leagues on a yearly basis. Really? Why haven't they just adopted what the NBA or the NHL do, which hey, makes sense? THE TEAM WITH THE BEST RECORD HAS THE HOME-FIELD!!!! Stop me if I'm making too much sense here.
The All-Star game in baseball used to have a sense of pride factored into it. The American League and National League would never play one another outside of the World Series before, so when they got together in the All-Star game, it was a matter of bragging rights for your respective league. This was the time when you would show them who the best players in the game truly were.
That's why you had such memorable All-Star moments such as Ted Williams breaking his elbow in the first inning of the 1950 All-Star game and staying in the game! That's how important the game was back then. Ted Williams shatters his elbow in an exhibition game, but refuses to come out, because he wants to win.
Or arguably the most talked about and most controversial play in All-Star game history; July 14, 1970, Ray Fosse meet Pete Rose. After an improbable comeback in the bottom of the 9th inning when trailing 4 - 1, the National League forces the American League to extra innings. Playing in front of his home crowd at Cinergy Field in Cincinnati, Pete Rose singles with 2 outs in the bottom of the 12th inning. After moving to second base on single to left field by Billy Grabarewitz, the stage was set. After a single by the next batter Jim Hickman, Pete Rose races around third base heading for home plate. Without slowing down Rose barrels into Cleveland Indians catcher Ray Fosse, jarring the ball loose, winning the game for the National League and separating Fosse's shoulder in the process.
Those are the types of All-Star game moments we won't see now or probably ever again. The game just doesn't have the meaning behind it that it used to. And don't try to tell me that the game actually means something more now than it did 7 years ago when it ended in a tie, since home-field advantage is being determined, because you're only fooling yourself.
Call me cynical, call me crazy or call me whatever you like, I don't care. Just call me when Major League Baseball admits their mistake.
This time it counts? Well, count me out this time.
No comments:
Post a Comment