 |
| The 1st two games of the World Series will be in the NL, making it a real possibility a NL team wins the 2011 World Series |
In 2003 Bud Selig and the MLB Players Union agreed to a temporary deal through 2003-'04 that would award home field advantage in the World Series, to whichever team won the All Star game. After two years it was extended for the 2005 and 2006 season, where it was made permanent thereafter. The rule has faced countless criticism since it was made permanent, with opposing sides saying that it home field advantage should be based off who has the better record, not who wins an exhibition game, where 1/2 the players don't go due to injury, or personal reasons. It has been brought up countless times by members of the media, often going unanswered or with the common answer of "the system works fine as it is now". It is a question that has many arguments, but you are either for it or against it, and I am against it
Starting the first two games of the World Series at home can be the two most crucial games of the series. If the home team sweeps at home and heads into Game 3 with a 2-0 series lead, it is nearly a lock they will end up as World Series Champs. It happened with the Giants last year playing at AT&T Park, taking both games and going on to win Game 3 and Game 5 in Arlington. In fact of the past 25 World Series the team with Home field advantage won 22 out of the 25 times. The difference between an AL team going on the road and having to decide what to do with their current DH, leaves them with a critical problem. While in the NL going to a team in the American League and deciding who to play as your DH and how to handle a more powerful lineup for your pitcher, is also difficult as well. An entire series that decides who is the best team in baseball is effected by a meaningless exhibition game in early July.
The rule has been in play since 2003 and we likely won't see any change until Bud Selig is no longer Commissioner of baseball, but it is a rule that should be changed. If baseball wants to establish a reasonable more fair system giving home field advantage to whichever team has the better record is the best way to do it. There is a reason no other professional sport makes its All Star game about changing the result of the Championship just so it can seem important. The All Star game is for the fans to watch all their favorite players at once and put the best against the once a year. There should be no reason for it to effect the World Series, and the sooner a change is made, the better.
The MLB All-Star game shouldn't decide homefield advantage, because, as you said, it's an exhibition. Just decide the WS by who has a better record. If both teams have the same record, perhaps have a tiebreaker such as which team had the better interleague record. If that's a tie too, do a coin flip. It wouldn't make sense to me to look at a team's record within the conference, since this is the World Series.
ReplyDeleteThe NBA Finals tie breaker is similar, in that the first tiebreaker is head-to head; the second is inter-conference record; then a coin flip.
To alleviate the concern of a MLB All-Star game ending in a tie, just make a rule that forbids ties. If all the pitchers are used up, go to position players. This game is for entertainment, and it's an exhibition. Using position players as pitchers (or pitchers as position fielders) is entertaining too. Also, this is similar to how an official MLB game would be conducted too, after a certain point. So even that would be following normal game rules.