tischler@ihlpg.UUCP (Mark D. Tischler) (06/13/85)
I suspect one of the other networks would love to televise the World Series, even if it is during the day. Is there any reason why Major League Baseball can't pay a small penalty (for their foolishness) to get out of the contract with ABC (ABC is garbage as far as I'm concerned) and ask for the highest bid among NBC, TBS, WGN, and CBS? I agree with Jon -- the jerk who signed the contract with ABC should be crucified for his stupidity. It's a real shame whenever television controls sports. -- Mark Tischler (312) 393-7199 (home) (312) 979-5123 (work) ihnp4!ihlpg!tischler
david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (06/13/85)
> I would not be able to watch the Cubs if they play day ball, but > I still cast my vote for tradition in baseball, and justice for > a team that has played without lights forever. Why should the Cubs, > and Cubs fans, pay for someone elses mistake? Simply put, the World Series is the property of ALL baseball fans, not just the fans of the teams that make it. When we discuss this subject, it should be in the context of what is good for all fans, not just Cub fans. I think it is undeniably in the interests of the fans in general to have weekday games played at night. It is probably in the interests of the fans to have weekend games played at the home team's normal time for such games. David Rubin
jmh@ltuxa.UUCP (cecw 64lt503310-Jon Mcecw) (06/15/85)
In reference to David Rubin's remarks on the Cubs playing at night because the World Series belongs to "ALL fans": I have strong objections. 1) If indeed the WS is for ALL fans, then you should be supporting the opposite view. If SOME games (say at Toronto) are played at night and some during the day (at Wrigley), then not only the "prime time" fans, but also the fans who work nights, or who have supported the Cubs all year during the day, would get a chance to see WS action. Why should we only let night viewers watch? 2) I happen to believe that it is in ALL fans best interests to keep the game fair to the teams playing. Would it be fair to the Mets to pitch Gooden every game in th WS just because the networks say "Gooden gives us better ratings"? ALL fans would benefit by seeing a great pitcher, but the Mets would lose something they had all season long , a rested pitcher with Gooden's talent. No, David, I think the fan is much better off when one team doesn't get an advantage they didn't have during the regular season. 3) I can hardly belive that such an avid fan of the game (you), who vehemently opposes cheapening the game by the DH, artificial turf, etc. (as seen in many articles you've posted), would turn around and try to ruin a long tradition of day-Wrigley field baseball just to satisfy personal need. I thought you would think that "baseball" was above that. As I said before, I would miss seeing them play during the day also, but I wouldn't THINK of changing the circumstances under how a team got to the WS, just to benefit me. You may as well play a 7-game All-Star series if the WS is to suit ALL Fans. It would be meaningless. Isn't the WS suppose to test which team is the best for the year, and not just a promotional event? I realize that there are many different opinions to these statements, and that's fine. these are just how I see baseball, right or wrong. I tend to sanctify it, which may not be realistic, but I find no' other sport which is still as close to "wholesome" (whatever that means) as baseball. Anyway, I almost fell from my chair when I saw David Rubin's comments, so I just had to answer. I promise not to take up so much of your time again, Jon Hanrath ihnp4!ltuxa!jmh Naperville, Illinois
david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (06/17/85)
[ ">" = Jon Hanrath] > In reference to David Rubin's remarks on the Cubs playing at night > because the World Series belongs to "ALL fans": > I have strong objections. > 1) If indeed the WS is for ALL fans, then you should be supporting > the opposite view. If SOME games (say at Toronto) are played at > night and some during the day (at Wrigley), then not only the > "prime time" fans, but also the fans who work nights, or who have > supported the Cubs all year during the day, would get a chance > to see WS action. Why should we only let night viewers watch? I think it would be a conservative estimate that 95% of baseball fans are working during weekday afternoons. No doubt, there are some fans who would be deprived of seeing the games because they work the night shift, but the overwhelming majority of fans benefit from night scheduling, Monday through Friday. > 2) I happen to believe that it is in ALL fans best interests to > keep the game fair to the teams playing. Would it be fair to > the Mets to pitch Gooden every game in th WS just because the > networks say "Gooden gives us better ratings"? .............. First, it is the position of the Cubs that they would prefer playing at night and that whatever disadvantages are derived from the day/night issue manifest themselves in their being forced to play during the day. If you REALLY want to see the Cubs play without disadvantage, ask Dallas Green when he'd like his team to play. His answer will be in favor of night ball. So the appropriate question is: should the political clout of the folks who live near the park saddle the Cubs with a disadvantage and baseball fans of non-Cub stripes with unwatchable games? It would be unfair to compel the Cubs to play somewhere other than Wrigley, but it is not unfair to compel night play. > 3) I can hardly belive that such an avid fan of the game (you), who > vehemently opposes cheapening the game by the DH, artificial turf, > etc. (as seen in many articles you've posted), would turn around > and try to ruin a long tradition of day-Wrigley field baseball just > to satisfy personal need. I thought you would think that "baseball" > was above that. As I said before, I would miss seeing them play > during the day also, but I wouldn't THINK of changing the circumstances > under how a team got to the WS, just to benefit me. You may as well > play a 7-game All-Star series if the WS is to suit ALL Fans. It would > be meaningless. Isn't the WS suppose to test which team is the best > for the year, and not just a promotional event? Night ball (made it big in the 1940's), like the DH (1970's), turf (1960's), domes (1960's), platooning (made it big in the 1950's), relief specialists (1940's), et. al. is a relatively recent innovation (after all, the first night major league game was only played a half century ago). Some changes are good, and some changes are bad. Night ball is good, as it it makes the game routinely accessable. It would be tidy if the World Series favored the team which is best suited for a 162-game season, but that has never been the case. All teams change their rosters and the way they play substantially for the post-season (cf. "October Baseball", a variation on the typical "Summer Baseball"). You don't apparently object to teams going from a five-man rotation to a three-man rotation, or using top starters in relief, or carrying two fewer pitchers into post-season play to carry more hitters, or pinch-hitting far more frequently. You probably are uncomfortable with, but unwilling to revolt against, changes in the season and even the climate. Because the World Series has off-days, it helps teams with little rotational depth and good hitters on the bench, while hurting teams with much starting pitching and scant bench hitting. These effects seem much greater to me than any the Cubs would suffer if they played night games at Wrigley. > ................................................................... > Anyway, I almost fell from my chair when I saw David Rubin's comments, > so I just had to answer. Glad to hear someone reads them! David Rubin {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david