Baseball
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Baseball
The Baseball World Classic (as well as MLB spring training) is only a few weeks away and provisional rosters were revealed today. As usual, it seems that the American roster is fueled by ambivalence and old guys [spoiler]probably greenies too.[/spoiler]
I enjoyed the first two tournaments, especially because of games like this:
XgUaM_9upfc.
Looking back at the USA 2006 roster; I don't know how the they lost it, never mind that they didn't even make it to the finals.
For the 2 baseball fans on here- are you looking forward to this? Think Japan will defend their title again? The winner this year gets to officially call themselves world champion now.
Here are the pools with the international baseball federation rankings next to each country in parenthesis:
Pool A
*hosted in Japan at the Fukuoka Yahoo! Japan Dome
Japan (3)
China (18)
Cuba (1)
Brazil (20)
Pool B
*hosted in Taiwan at Intercontinental Baseball Stadium
South Korea (4)
The Kingdom of the Netherlands (7)
Australia (10)
Chinese Taipei (5)
Pool C
*hosted in Puerto Rico at Hiram Bithorn Stadium
Venezuela (8)
Puerto Rico (12)
Dominican Republic (13)
Spain (16)
Pool D
*hosted in the United States at Chase Field and Salt River Fields at Talking Stick
United States (2)
Mexico (11)
Italy (9)
Canada (6)
Pool B has got to be the weakest of the 4; and the converse is true for Pool C. New Teams in the Tourney: Brazil and Spain- Panama and South Africa did not qualify this cycle.
I enjoyed the first two tournaments, especially because of games like this:
XgUaM_9upfc.
Looking back at the USA 2006 roster; I don't know how the they lost it, never mind that they didn't even make it to the finals.
For the 2 baseball fans on here- are you looking forward to this? Think Japan will defend their title again? The winner this year gets to officially call themselves world champion now.
Here are the pools with the international baseball federation rankings next to each country in parenthesis:
Pool A
*hosted in Japan at the Fukuoka Yahoo! Japan Dome
Japan (3)
China (18)
Cuba (1)
Brazil (20)
Pool B
*hosted in Taiwan at Intercontinental Baseball Stadium
South Korea (4)
The Kingdom of the Netherlands (7)
Australia (10)
Chinese Taipei (5)
Pool C
*hosted in Puerto Rico at Hiram Bithorn Stadium
Venezuela (8)
Puerto Rico (12)
Dominican Republic (13)
Spain (16)
Pool D
*hosted in the United States at Chase Field and Salt River Fields at Talking Stick
United States (2)
Mexico (11)
Italy (9)
Canada (6)
Pool B has got to be the weakest of the 4; and the converse is true for Pool C. New Teams in the Tourney: Brazil and Spain- Panama and South Africa did not qualify this cycle.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
Anyone else watching? Or at least following a bit?
The Netherlands have been very exciting to watch. And anyone else sweating bullets when it looked like Canada may beat the US?
What about the Canada-Mexico brawl?
Admittedly, I have not been able to follow as closely as I would like, especially with the Asian teams...but I am rooting for someone to knock off Japan here. It's time for a new champeen
The Netherlands have been very exciting to watch. And anyone else sweating bullets when it looked like Canada may beat the US?
What about the Canada-Mexico brawl?
Admittedly, I have not been able to follow as closely as I would like, especially with the Asian teams...but I am rooting for someone to knock off Japan here. It's time for a new champeen
Re: Baseball
Don't watch pro sports, only the Olympics.NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:Anyone else watching? Or at least following a bit?
Hockey players moonlighting in baseball?NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:The Netherlands have been very exciting to watch. And anyone else sweating bullets when it looked like Canada may beat the US?
What about the Canada-Mexico brawl?
NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:Admittedly, I have not been able to follow as closely as I would like, especially with the Asian teams...but I am rooting for someone to knock off Japan here. It's time for a new champeen
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
Typhoon wrote: Hockey players moonlighting in baseball?
No, but it was a lot of posturing for teams that were quickly eliminated.
Japan is in a real good position here, but the Dominican team is really ramped up this time around and they look unbeatable right now.Typhoon wrote:NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:Admittedly, I have not been able to follow as closely as I would like, especially with the Asian teams...but I am rooting for someone to knock off Japan here. It's time for a new champeen
Anyone out there who missed the US-Dominican game missed one hell of a game. The teams seemed evenly matched and it could have gone either way. Some are saying it was a huge win for the Dominician team to beat a team full of MLB American players. From here on, with David Wright out, the US really took a blow. Tomorrow's elimination game will be Puerto Rico vs US. The winner plays the Dominican Republic for seeding purposes- the loser of that game plays Japan in the semifinals; the winner goes on to face the surprise underdog Kingdom of the Netherlands.
We are almost at the end here. It's a shame more American players aren't so keen on playing in this thing- and there is no excuse for some of the younger stars like Mike Trout and Bryce Harper to hold out of the tournament. I expect the US to beat Puerto Rico but I have a gut feeling that they don't have enough to overcome (or at least take an edge over) the Dominican team.
I'm seeing a Japan-Dominican final (which I'm pretty sure if a repeat of the first tournament.)
Re: Baseball
lLFf8ipUHB8
The final was a well played match between the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico with the DR the winner.
The final was a well played match between the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico with the DR the winner.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Re: Baseball
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... ideo-games
A minor league baseball team in Pennsylvania will become the first professional sports franchise to offer urine-controlled video games in its restrooms when the season starts in April.
ultracrepidarian
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
So disappointed in Team USA and it goes beyond how indifferent Americans and American players are to the tournament; there was more than enough talent for them to get past Puerto Rico and to have beaten the Dominicans. That said, I can't wait for the next tournament.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
You were a little off there.jerryberry wrote:Dodgers 80 & 82 Oct 1st.
These playoffs have been terrible for rooting interest purposes. The games haven't been too bad though. I don't think my stomach and take more St.Louis and Boston World Series grossness.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
We are coming to the end of Derek Jeter's illustrious career. He's, unfairly, a polarizing figure in the sport for being so uncontroversial, private and...boring.
And it's unfortunate because any narrative about Jeter always involves all these non-baseball related tales that people react strongly to. It sells his talent short- he has missed out on 2 MVP [1999, 2006] awards because of everyone's focus on those "intangibles" of his instead of the fact that he may be the greatest hitting shortstop since the deadball era. (He also makes a strong case for the award in 1998, 2000, 2001, 2004 and 2009.) It is Honus Wagner, Jeter, Arky Vaughn, Cal Ripken and then A-Rod...and of course with A Rod, you get into steroids and changing positions. Ernie Banks and Robin Yount both have their cases diminished by their moves away from shortstop. Anyway...
He has been the face of baseball for the last 15 years, and maybe the most famous ballplayer on the sport's most famous team since Mickey Mantle. It's going to be a big chance for Major League Baseball.
U1Y8qvZDaHI
And it's unfortunate because any narrative about Jeter always involves all these non-baseball related tales that people react strongly to. It sells his talent short- he has missed out on 2 MVP [1999, 2006] awards because of everyone's focus on those "intangibles" of his instead of the fact that he may be the greatest hitting shortstop since the deadball era. (He also makes a strong case for the award in 1998, 2000, 2001, 2004 and 2009.) It is Honus Wagner, Jeter, Arky Vaughn, Cal Ripken and then A-Rod...and of course with A Rod, you get into steroids and changing positions. Ernie Banks and Robin Yount both have their cases diminished by their moves away from shortstop. Anyway...
He has been the face of baseball for the last 15 years, and maybe the most famous ballplayer on the sport's most famous team since Mickey Mantle. It's going to be a big chance for Major League Baseball.
U1Y8qvZDaHI
Re: Baseball
Sq7zPVr_XeY
I don't follow baseball, but my friends that do assure me that this was one of the weirdest games ever played.
As does this sports writer:
Flippin' out
kdNjB7IlKmQ
I don't follow baseball, but my friends that do assure me that this was one of the weirdest games ever played.
As does this sports writer:
Flippin' out
kdNjB7IlKmQ
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
Oh, it definitely was one of the strangest playoff games ever.Typhoon wrote:Sq7zPVr_XeY
I don't follow baseball, but my friends that do assure me that this was one of the weirdest games ever played.
As does this sports writer:
Flippin' out
kdNjB7IlKmQ
Some people are calling it a classic just for its peculiarity; I'd hesitate there since most of it turned on errors and sloppy play. But it was very exciting to watch.
Game Six of American League Championship Series was a 'classic' type of classic. Both teams played great, crisply, and it all turned on the athleticism of the Kansas City Royals center fielder Lorenzo Cain and his exciting dash from first to home on a single.
8j45g7BbD64
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
The National League playoffs have had its share of excitement as well, like in the LA Dodgers NY Mets series:
223PCnEGV1U
223PCnEGV1U
Re: Baseball
Well, congratulations are certainly in order to the USA for making it into the World Series.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
you are just jealous you didn't think to make up a tournament and then only invite yourself.Typhoon wrote:Well, congratulations are certainly in order to the USA for making it into the World Series.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
The origins of the name predate the current series, when there were dozens of professional leagues and hundreds of amateur ones, many which already entitled their league champions as baseball champions of the United States. Something more grandiose to describe tournaments between professional leagues and the Spalding Guide of Base Ball (which was Major League Baseball's semi-official annual up until the 1960s) encouraged the name from the 1880s on. Of course, not only was that guide published by the same sporting goods company which had a large hand in popularizing baseball in the US but had an vested interest in spreading it world wide (and spent a fortune in the 19th century trying to do so.) Spalding believed that it was only a matter of time before the rest of the English speaking world, then the world at large, would compete in a worldwide baseball championship which would be the natural extension of the professional tournaments held in the US. And when that happened, they would be buying their baseball equipment directly from the Spalding sporting goods company, natch. Imagine that!
![Cool 8-)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
The full name started out as something like the World's Championship of Professional Baseball (though I don't think that was official,) which was shortened to the World's Series by newspapermen and then gradually it lost the possessive in media and became simply, the 'World Series'.
Re: Baseball
the only sport i follow with anything approaching a devotion is cricket, which happens to be the baseball for everyone else.
its world championship is also a bit dodgy, its really only a commonwealth sport and the top 4-6 teams are a million miles ahead of the rest who arent even good enough to make up the numbers.
shame the games are too different for a potential half/half crossover which allowed for a competition.
its world championship is also a bit dodgy, its really only a commonwealth sport and the top 4-6 teams are a million miles ahead of the rest who arent even good enough to make up the numbers.
shame the games are too different for a potential half/half crossover which allowed for a competition.
ultracrepidarian
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
The Kansas City Royals defeated the New York Mets and are Major League Baseball's 2015 World Champions.
It is the 2 World Series win for the Royals in team history.
It was also the first World Series post-expansion to feature two expansion era* franchises.
*The MLB's National League and American League each consist of 8 teams considered** founding members. Starting in 1961, 14 teams overall were added to both leagues to reflect population changes and growth of the game into new markets. The last expansion teams (The Arizona Diamondbacks and the Tampa Bay Rays) were added in 1998.
Under the present postseason format (which dates back to 2012,) there is about a 20% chance of this scenario occurring. It's a bit simplified though, because to get that probability, one has to assume all franchises start the season with an equal chance to make the world series. This has obviously never been true. And there has been an historical disadvantage to expansion franchises for all the reasons you could imagine.
It is not for nothing that the two teams in this world series (the Mets and Royals) are two of the older expansion teams- the Mets in 1962 and the Royals in 1969.
They are also arguably the two most successful expansion teams thus far- the Mets have now been to five world series and have won two pennants while the Royals have been to four and have now won two. The Toronto Blue Jays and Miami Marlins are also expansion teams which have two world series wins apiece. So it is a 4-way tie for most expansion franchise world series victories.
Another neat thing is that the Mets (in 1969) were the first expansion team to win a World Series, and it would take 16 years for it to happen again with the 1985 Royals.
**I say 8 teams each considered founding, or charting members- but that may be a bit out of date. Starting about two years ago, the New York Yankees ceased to be historically connected to the original Baltimore Orioles in certain circles. The previous consensus was that Baltimore was a charter franchise of the 1901 American League and simply continued as the New York Highlanders (then Yankees) from 1903 to present- essentially the time span popularly linked to the present Major League Baseball consisting of the American and National Leagues. The contemporary account is that the league suffered a contraction in Baltimore but expansion into New York and that the present day Yankees are the first expansion team in the American League. If that is the case, the first expansion team World Series was 1998 between the New York Yankees and San Diego Padres.
However...
The present Orioles are considered a charter franchise but through the Saint Louis Browns (like the Minnesota Twins are a continuation of the first Washington Senators franchise.) The current Baltimore franchise even acknowledges this in their franchise history and every few years, when they are actually playing in a retro-uniform game- will don the Browns uniform. However, there is good reason to apply the reasoning above doubly to the situation which lead to the Browns leaving Saint Louis and the present Orioles starting in Baltimore. And if it is the case the Orioles are an expansion team, the first all expansion World Series would have been 1969 between the New York Mets and Baltimore Orioles. Now, about the murky history of the National League franchises going into the 19th century....
So in other words, none of this matters.
It is the 2 World Series win for the Royals in team history.
It was also the first World Series post-expansion to feature two expansion era* franchises.
*The MLB's National League and American League each consist of 8 teams considered** founding members. Starting in 1961, 14 teams overall were added to both leagues to reflect population changes and growth of the game into new markets. The last expansion teams (The Arizona Diamondbacks and the Tampa Bay Rays) were added in 1998.
Under the present postseason format (which dates back to 2012,) there is about a 20% chance of this scenario occurring. It's a bit simplified though, because to get that probability, one has to assume all franchises start the season with an equal chance to make the world series. This has obviously never been true. And there has been an historical disadvantage to expansion franchises for all the reasons you could imagine.
It is not for nothing that the two teams in this world series (the Mets and Royals) are two of the older expansion teams- the Mets in 1962 and the Royals in 1969.
They are also arguably the two most successful expansion teams thus far- the Mets have now been to five world series and have won two pennants while the Royals have been to four and have now won two. The Toronto Blue Jays and Miami Marlins are also expansion teams which have two world series wins apiece. So it is a 4-way tie for most expansion franchise world series victories.
Another neat thing is that the Mets (in 1969) were the first expansion team to win a World Series, and it would take 16 years for it to happen again with the 1985 Royals.
**I say 8 teams each considered founding, or charting members- but that may be a bit out of date. Starting about two years ago, the New York Yankees ceased to be historically connected to the original Baltimore Orioles in certain circles. The previous consensus was that Baltimore was a charter franchise of the 1901 American League and simply continued as the New York Highlanders (then Yankees) from 1903 to present- essentially the time span popularly linked to the present Major League Baseball consisting of the American and National Leagues. The contemporary account is that the league suffered a contraction in Baltimore but expansion into New York and that the present day Yankees are the first expansion team in the American League. If that is the case, the first expansion team World Series was 1998 between the New York Yankees and San Diego Padres.
However...
The present Orioles are considered a charter franchise but through the Saint Louis Browns (like the Minnesota Twins are a continuation of the first Washington Senators franchise.) The current Baltimore franchise even acknowledges this in their franchise history and every few years, when they are actually playing in a retro-uniform game- will don the Browns uniform. However, there is good reason to apply the reasoning above doubly to the situation which lead to the Browns leaving Saint Louis and the present Orioles starting in Baltimore. And if it is the case the Orioles are an expansion team, the first all expansion World Series would have been 1969 between the New York Mets and Baltimore Orioles. Now, about the murky history of the National League franchises going into the 19th century....
So in other words, none of this matters.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
Hey, baseball is not as American-centric as say American Football and probably beats Rugby and Golf in worldwide numbers.noddy wrote:the only sport i follow with anything approaching a devotion is cricket, which happens to be the baseball for everyone else.
its world championship is also a bit dodgy, its really only a commonwealth sport and the top 4-6 teams are a million miles ahead of the rest who arent even good enough to make up the numbers.
shame the games are too different for a potential half/half crossover which allowed for a competition.
The real reason baseball never caught on in the rest of the Anglosphere is its resemblance to Rounders.
It's an adult version of a British children's game. I'm pretty sure half the rule changes in baseball in the late 19th century were just to cover that up.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Re: Baseball
i doubt it - rounders is very obscure and was never played in my country, cricket has always been the dominant bat n ball sport and all the commonwealth countries play it and despite young kids playing tball or softball, they change to cricket once they are old enough for contact sports with pain.NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: The real reason baseball never caught on in the rest of the Anglosphere is its resemblance to Rounders.
It's an adult version of a British children's game. I'm pretty sure half the rule changes in baseball in the late 19th century were just to cover that up.
according to wikipedia one of the accepted reasons for the death of cricket in the anglo community in america was you lot not being commonwealth and thusly not included in the international pro circuit.
australia, india, south africa and england are the generally recognised top 4, with pakistan,sri lanka and new zealand being the wild cards.
the west indies used to be in the top tier but have faded away to barely in the top 10 this century - the big problem we have is that the gulf between a pro cricketer (90-100 mph pitching and batters with skills to smash that) and general amateur (<80mph) is so vast that its almost impossible for a new country to bootstrap into the pro league, they just get blown away.
baseball probably has a simmilar problem.
ultracrepidarian
- Heracleum Persicum
- Posts: 11822
- Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm
Re: Baseball
pwnNs2eaOCQ
‘one in a million shot’
‘one in a million shot’
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
The Major League Baseball season has started and due to a dispute between The Yankees television channel and my cable provider over price- I've yet to actually see an inning of a Yankee game (I did catch the Mets and highlights on MLB network.)
I wish I could start out with something more baseball related but, the dispute is related to the sport because the MLB has wedded itself to cable TV money and I don't know how they maintain the finances of the game once cable tv falls to the internet.
I can't say I'm too broken up about it- there are more important things; and I'm not losing sleep over one conglomerate fighting with another...
but if not for baseball, I'd probably chuck television altogether. My cable company sent me a letter exclaiming how they were fighting for the little guy (me) over the price hikes the Yankees are demanding (from the current 4$ a subscriber to about 7$, ) and that they'll be digging in to protect us little guys even if it costs the whole season. Now that sounds nice, but the channel went off air on Jan. 1st and they're still charging me for the old 4 dollar price for a channel that I don't receive and by the looks of it, won't be anytime soon. Where that money is going is one of those mysteries of life, I guess.
Now, it's estimated that without the wedding of baseball to cable, each customer would have to shell out around 350 dollars a year for broadcasting rights to just Yankees games a year. That's about the price for a decent seat at Yankee Stadium- and probably worth it for a customer like me and would be cheaper than getting a whole cable package just for baseball.
But that's the problem the MLB is facing: they are making money hand-over-fist due to a format on the verge of dying. How long can that last? For every customer like me, there are probably 50 who wouldn't want to pay that for a variety of reasons- a good portion of them wanting more variety in their entertainment budget. The future looks bad for the baseball business if cable/tv craps out and they are forced to compete directly with other sports as well as misc. tv/movie type services.
So while none of this is particularly pressing nor directly related to what happens on the field, it is the business of sports television which has been most captivating to me at the start of the 2016 season.
I wish I could start out with something more baseball related but, the dispute is related to the sport because the MLB has wedded itself to cable TV money and I don't know how they maintain the finances of the game once cable tv falls to the internet.
I can't say I'm too broken up about it- there are more important things; and I'm not losing sleep over one conglomerate fighting with another...
but if not for baseball, I'd probably chuck television altogether. My cable company sent me a letter exclaiming how they were fighting for the little guy (me) over the price hikes the Yankees are demanding (from the current 4$ a subscriber to about 7$, ) and that they'll be digging in to protect us little guys even if it costs the whole season. Now that sounds nice, but the channel went off air on Jan. 1st and they're still charging me for the old 4 dollar price for a channel that I don't receive and by the looks of it, won't be anytime soon. Where that money is going is one of those mysteries of life, I guess.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Now, it's estimated that without the wedding of baseball to cable, each customer would have to shell out around 350 dollars a year for broadcasting rights to just Yankees games a year. That's about the price for a decent seat at Yankee Stadium- and probably worth it for a customer like me and would be cheaper than getting a whole cable package just for baseball.
But that's the problem the MLB is facing: they are making money hand-over-fist due to a format on the verge of dying. How long can that last? For every customer like me, there are probably 50 who wouldn't want to pay that for a variety of reasons- a good portion of them wanting more variety in their entertainment budget. The future looks bad for the baseball business if cable/tv craps out and they are forced to compete directly with other sports as well as misc. tv/movie type services.
So while none of this is particularly pressing nor directly related to what happens on the field, it is the business of sports television which has been most captivating to me at the start of the 2016 season.
Re: Baseball
with cricket their are 2 different models.
england is how you describe, top dollar subscription only on traditional tv and this is considered to be killing the game as the general population doesnt get to see the sport much or fall in love with it.
australia is multi spectrum and free, government law forces the main local games to be on freetv and cricket australia has streaming options to show some of the rest of it, however international games are only available on cable, this makes for massive crowds on during the summer season and a large participation rate with the kiddies because you can get on tv and be part of it all.
the future is paid for streaming for the tragics who want access to all games, no doubts about that, however its in the sports interest to get the big games onto free tv and attract the next generation - when australia moved to free tv it saved the sport from slow long term decline.
england is how you describe, top dollar subscription only on traditional tv and this is considered to be killing the game as the general population doesnt get to see the sport much or fall in love with it.
australia is multi spectrum and free, government law forces the main local games to be on freetv and cricket australia has streaming options to show some of the rest of it, however international games are only available on cable, this makes for massive crowds on during the summer season and a large participation rate with the kiddies because you can get on tv and be part of it all.
the future is paid for streaming for the tragics who want access to all games, no doubts about that, however its in the sports interest to get the big games onto free tv and attract the next generation - when australia moved to free tv it saved the sport from slow long term decline.
ultracrepidarian
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8530
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Baseball
Well, I should qualify it by saying that there are around 30-odd games this summer on *free* tv; and an additional 12 or so will be carried by other cable sports channels- a majority of these games will be between traditional rivals or the bigger market clubs who are more or less annually competitive. In fact, after April (where there are only two of these games, ) there should be about 1 or 2 a week- so it's not like there's bupkis. Also, the "big" prestige games like the All Star Game or the World Series are still on *free* tv, and probably will be for a long time longer. Baseball may be behind American Football (especially in relation to tv), but it still pulls in very good ratings. The World Series, on aggregate, is still perennially a top-ten most viewed program.noddy wrote:with cricket their are 2 different models.
england is how you describe, top dollar subscription only on traditional tv and this is considered to be killing the game as the general population doesnt get to see the sport much or fall in love with it.
australia is multi spectrum and free, government law forces the main local games to be on freetv and cricket australia has streaming options to show some of the rest of it, however international games are only available on cable, this makes for massive crowds on during the summer season and a large participation rate with the kiddies because you can get on tv and be part of it all.
the future is paid for streaming for the tragics who want access to all games, no doubts about that, however its in the sports interest to get the big games onto free tv and attract the next generation - when australia moved to free tv it saved the sport from slow long term decline.
But the idea of stopping a slow, long term decline may be moot- that horse is already out of the barn. Baseball didn't adapt to tv 50 years ago and fell behind the NFL, if they don't get ahead of this whole 'streaming buffet' thing, they'll never stop playing catch-up.
They face two problems:
1) When the NFL embraced TV in the 60s, they invested a lot in making "national" brand teams. They conditioned viewers to watch games regardless of "rooting issues" and today, most of the teams have national followings regardless of geography. Baseball in that time has only become more local- most fans will not tune in for any game which doesn't feature their team. It doesn't engender a guaranteed fan base who will follow the sport (as a whole) if the team in their area stinks.
2) The other thing is that baseball, with all its infamous anti-trust exemption, has a really byzantine market system going back to how they divvied things up pre-radio/early radio era. Teams have "claims" on areas in a sundry manner and have no reason to cooperate or compete. The map only gets worse the further west you go. Right now, the state of Iowa is claimed by 6 different teams. So even if the current streaming offers (which gives you access to all teams except your market, ) people in that state miss out on half the league's games. Here, I'd be cut off from Mets, Yankees and Red Sox games.
None of this will probably change until its too late. But if we are talking about the good of the game, they are going to have to find a way to build national interest and straighten out team "territory" and revenue sharing amongst the owners.
Not happening anytime soon and when it does, it will be too late.
Re: Baseball
this sounds like the frustrations of international cricket, i know the feelings well, while the leagues within a country are usually orgainsed well (unless its pakistan or the netherlands or ..) the premium version of the game is international and thats a small club of haves with zero tolerance for upstarts who dont bring in the profits.
least you only have 1 version of the game to synchronize, international cricket has 3 different variations 5 day, 1 day and 4 hour.
least you only have 1 version of the game to synchronize, international cricket has 3 different variations 5 day, 1 day and 4 hour.
ultracrepidarian
Re: Baseball
Chicago Cubs do it. If anyone wants to get laid today, Chicago is the place to be!
I imagine Typhoon is already en route.
I imagine Typhoon is already en route.