Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Quick shots on last night's game

Everyone is all over the place on last night's World Series game that didn't reach a conclusion. Some quick thoughts:

  • Bud is like Charlie Brown; he just can't seem to do right, and even when he does, he looks terrible doing it.


  • Should the game have even been started? Considering both teams agreed to give it a shot, the answer is YES. Unless, of course, the banks of meteorologists could tell with certainty that the weather would get worse before it gets better.


  • I think he did the right thing in postponing the game. I also like that he would have insisted that the game be played to it's conclusion, no matter the date.

  • Why, if it was pre-determined that if a game was unable to be finished, it would resume at a later date, even if it was "official" by definition with a winner determinable, did we and the players did not know this?


  • If the managers knew that if the weather forced a postponement without truncating the game, why didn't they (especially Maddon) protest to have the game postponed once it got really nasty out?

  • How on Earth did Upton get that big a jump on Hamels after Hamels threw over there a half-dozen times?


  • How can Upton wear pants that hang below his cleats with no elastic to keep them tight to the leg without tripping?


  • Complaining about the start times is redundant and fruitless. That bed has been made and we're stuck with the pre-game lasting from 8pm EST until 8:30. Until MLB's contract with Fox expires and they force the decision with the next network to start the games earlier, this problem will continue. Remember, it IS about the money, stupid!


  • Regular season games start roughly at 7pm. They are punting that start time (and by proxy FINISH time) by an hour and a half. If it was good enough for 162 games, why not keep it going in the post season? Would you rather have more viewers from 7-8:30pm or from 11:30-1am? Where are the more valuable viewers?


  • Considering that both teams are East Coast-based, shouldn't that be a consideration with regards to start times? If it were an East/West coast match-up, I can better understand the later starts. But when both teams are in the same time zone, shouldn't they have some preference?


  • My baseball-loving 8-year-old son goes to bed at 8:30. He has to mope his way to his room as the first pitch is being tossed. I have to leave him notes so he knows what happened when he wakes up. Way to get that next generation hooked, MLB/Fox.


  • I read this somewhere (can't remember, sorry) and I thought it was a fun idea: Rather than being forced to listed to McCarver and Buck, why don't they allow the home team to use their home town broadcasters for the game? Sure there are probably contractual hurdles, but the concept is pretty cool.


  • How different was this rain from the midges last year in Cleveland that swarmed on Joba? Couldn't they have done this last year?


Your take?

4 comments:

tHeMARksMiTh said...

But the had bug spray last year. There's no such thing as rain spray silly. As if the bug spray actually helped.

Jason @ IIATMS said...

Except that it became UNPLAYABLE. The field has a tarp. The bug spray clearly didn't work, did it? So just as the crew tried to play as long as the field was playable and not dangerous, at some point they decided it was unplayable. Last year, they should have said the same thing. Except Torre should have been out there, on the mound with Joba, refusing to let him throw another pitch.

Carl the Big Fool said...

I am also bewildered by the start times. Huge numbers of people on the east coast are turning off their TV sets around 11 PM. Only Philly die-hards like myself watched the conclusion of game 3 pushing 2 AM. (I'd say "and Tampa die-hards," but I'm not sure they exist.) Maybe the ratings are better for the first inning, but over the course of the broadcast I can't imagine the numbers hold up that well.

Also, Fox sucks ass.

Jason @ IIATMS said...

Carl, we're eye-to-eye on this one. I'd love to see some data that shows me that the viewers from 11:30pm-1am are more "valuable" than the 7-8:30pm viewers.

Granted, these times were set BEFORE the teams were determined but why not allow for some flexibility?

And for those out West getting upset for missing the early part of the Series...wait, there isn't anyone upset, is there? It'd be one thing if the Dodgers were playing but with 2 teams from the same time zone, it makes sense to start them at their usual scheduled (7pm).