Major League Whiners
Let it be said first of all that I don't hold with Major League Baseball. It's too big and too polished for its own good. And there are too many parties interested in maximizing revenue above all else.
No, give me minor-league ball. I once saw a bottom-9th, 2-out, bases-loaded bunt down the 3rd-base line that scored two runs at a low single-A game. (There were a couple of errors on the play.) I saw a tied AAA game end in a cloud of dust at the plate with a victory for the home team. I've heard the home-plate ump swear when a foul tip clipped his foot.
But you know, sometimes the guys in the majors do things remarkable enough to attract even my attention. The Houston Astros did that yesterday: they started whining about, of all things, having to play with their stadium roof open. And this is unfair because, they claim, it takes away their home-field advantage.
Call me crazy, but I thought home-field advantage accrued simply from, you know, playing at home, through the comfort of familiarity and good vibes from the home fans. Well, I guess the Astros interpret "good vibes" a lot more literally than I (or MLB, for that matter) — they had twice as many wins as losses with the roof closed, but only half again as many with the roof open. Once they recognized the pattern, they started keeping it closed all of the time: because they use the extra noise to psych their opponents. (I've never heard anyone whine about having been distracted because it was too quiet. No, the advantage they get from the closed roof comes from unnecessarily subjecting visiting teams to artificially-louder crowd noise [yes, the roof is sometimes necessary just to play the game, like when it rains. When it's dry, though, the roof is unnecessary. The simple fact of the retractable roof is prima facie evidence of being aware of this].)
To use your retractable roof to take advantage of an unintended benefit is analogous to using performance-enhancing drugs. Those drugs are legal for purposes other than enhancing performance. Using them otherwise is unsporting because, given the illegality of doing so, it provides an unfair advantage over the honorable. Using your roof expressly to put the visiting team at a competitive disadvantage over and above that of being the visiting team is no less unsporting. (And, yes, there is a sporting difference between purposely not retracting your retractable roof for that reason, and having your home-field in a stadium with a non-retractable roof.) No, home-field advantage comes solely from playing at your home field, not from manipulating it for extra advantage.
When they lose the Series (and, with the White Sox up 3-0, it is when and not if), I hope the Astros and their fans have enough class not to blame it on an open roof. What about, oh, I don't know, ability and effort? Shouldn't those be the determining factors? If you need a roof to win (I won't say "play your best" — make of that what you will), you don't deserve to be World Champions.
Ah, well, these days, level playing-fields don't have much cachet anyway.
No, give me minor-league ball. I once saw a bottom-9th, 2-out, bases-loaded bunt down the 3rd-base line that scored two runs at a low single-A game. (There were a couple of errors on the play.) I saw a tied AAA game end in a cloud of dust at the plate with a victory for the home team. I've heard the home-plate ump swear when a foul tip clipped his foot.
But you know, sometimes the guys in the majors do things remarkable enough to attract even my attention. The Houston Astros did that yesterday: they started whining about, of all things, having to play with their stadium roof open. And this is unfair because, they claim, it takes away their home-field advantage.
Call me crazy, but I thought home-field advantage accrued simply from, you know, playing at home, through the comfort of familiarity and good vibes from the home fans. Well, I guess the Astros interpret "good vibes" a lot more literally than I (or MLB, for that matter) — they had twice as many wins as losses with the roof closed, but only half again as many with the roof open. Once they recognized the pattern, they started keeping it closed all of the time: because they use the extra noise to psych their opponents. (I've never heard anyone whine about having been distracted because it was too quiet. No, the advantage they get from the closed roof comes from unnecessarily subjecting visiting teams to artificially-louder crowd noise [yes, the roof is sometimes necessary just to play the game, like when it rains. When it's dry, though, the roof is unnecessary. The simple fact of the retractable roof is prima facie evidence of being aware of this].)
To use your retractable roof to take advantage of an unintended benefit is analogous to using performance-enhancing drugs. Those drugs are legal for purposes other than enhancing performance. Using them otherwise is unsporting because, given the illegality of doing so, it provides an unfair advantage over the honorable. Using your roof expressly to put the visiting team at a competitive disadvantage over and above that of being the visiting team is no less unsporting. (And, yes, there is a sporting difference between purposely not retracting your retractable roof for that reason, and having your home-field in a stadium with a non-retractable roof.) No, home-field advantage comes solely from playing at your home field, not from manipulating it for extra advantage.
When they lose the Series (and, with the White Sox up 3-0, it is when and not if), I hope the Astros and their fans have enough class not to blame it on an open roof. What about, oh, I don't know, ability and effort? Shouldn't those be the determining factors? If you need a roof to win (I won't say "play your best" — make of that what you will), you don't deserve to be World Champions.
Ah, well, these days, level playing-fields don't have much cachet anyway.
posted by Dr. Bubbles at 12:27
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home