Will is nothing if true to form -- totally offbase when writing politics -- but hitting it out of the park when writing about baseball:

"Selig has been -- baseball is a game of inches, but this is not a close call -- the greatest commissioner."

I, myself, am not a baseball historian, so can't compare to the likes of Landis or Kuhn (but didn't one of them failed to integrate baseball -- and the other introduced the DH ???) , but this is an impressive list of accomplishments:

(again to quote Georgie-porgie):
-- a quickened pace of games (in three seasons, 12 minutes have been shaved from the average game length)
-- interleague play
-- the unbalanced schedule
-- three divisions
-- partial realignment
-- wild card teams (the last two World Series winners were wild cards)
-- increased revenue sharing ($250 million this year; $20 million in 1992)
-- the competitive balance tax on the highest payrolls.

I gotta give credit to Selig for this
1) he truly loves the game of baseball
2) he truly care about the future of the game
3) (and this will be the bone of contention) -- the steps he is taking will provide for a bright future for the game

Selig really understands that in today's society, baseball has to compete against a myriad of other sports and, more importantly, other entertainment opportunities. If no one watches, it doesn't exist.

Baseball purists / troglodytes (ignoring the fact that the game is beautifully identical to that played in 1900 or 1940 -- 3 strikes, 4 balls, 4 bases, 9 players, 9 innings -- long for those long-gone mythical malamudian days of, say 1938 Peoria, Illinois, when a 16-year-old boy on a Saturday afternoon had these choices:

5) swim and fish down at the river
4) read a book
3) listen to the Cubs on the radio
2) listen to the Cards on the radio
1) grab his glove and bat and head to the park to actually play the game

Today's 16-year-old in Peoria, Illinois can:

1) watch 80+ channels on the cable TV -- NASCAR, MTV, "Saved by the Bell reruns", "Queer Eye" ...
2) download the latest song from The Darkness on his I-pod
3) cruise the mall for chicks
4) cruise the Internet for porn
5) play soccer
... oh yeah ... and ...
101) listen to the Cubs on the radio
102) listen to the Cards on the radio
103) grab his glove and bat and head to the park to actually play the game.

Will: \"Our Resilient Pastime\"

[ April 04, 2004, 10:59 AM: Message edited by: DCBucky ]

I dissent.

Bud Selig has been an awful commissioner. I'll even put aside the issues over which reasonable minds can differ: inter-league play; the three-division set-up, which in turn necessitated the wild card; the juiced ball. And I'll even give him credit (indirectly, via Sandy Alderson) for QuesTech, which has visibly improved the quality of umpiring through equalization (since a select few pitchers, see, e.g., the Braves rotation 1993-2002, no longer benefit from blatantly favorable strike zone).

Bud Selig is responsible for --

1. Cancellation of the World Series in '94, done strictly as a bargaining chip in labor negotiations.

2. The three-year long experiment of Major League Baseball "ownership" of the Montreal Expos. Not only did this mean that a non-competitive franchise took up space in one division, but the team was used for gimmicks such as the 22 "home" games on the road in Puerto Rico. The fact that the team over-achieved (but wasn't really ever in the hunt for a playoff spot) due to the herculean efforts of Frank Robinson and Omar Minaya does not absolve Bud.

3. Blatantly bending the rules for the benefit of select group of favored owners. See, e.g., the rules being ignored to benefit John Henry's Boston Red Sox in (1) the A-Rod negotiations and (2) the Cliff Floyd trade in 2002. The fact that Larry Lucchino (and to a lesser degree, Theo Esptein) muffed the A-Rod negotiations does not, again, absolve Selig. Selig's blatant favoritism towards the Red Sox has made George Steinbrenner into somewhat of a sympathetic figure, and that is just plain unforgiveable.

4. The All-Star game tie.

5. Moving "his" home team to the National League, when there was no legitimate reason to do that, just so his Brewers could have all those home games packed with Chicago Cubs fans. Oops, I know, it wasn't "his" Brewers, it was his daughter Wendy's totally independent team. The 10-year-plus stinkiness of the Brew Crew during Selig's tenure does not, once again, absolve Selig.

6. The non-reaction to the developing steroid scandal, which is due to the "chicks dig the long ball" factor. Fans and the sports media could very well react extremely negatively if proof surfaces that a number of recent records -- esp. the home run records -- were done on the juice.

I offer no opinion as to Selig's effect on baseball economics, since baseball teams have, since time began, generally been completely disingenuous with their accounting, whether it's been to cry poverty to the MLBPA or to city governments in jurisdictions with stadia over the age of 10. It's almost as bad as Hollywood accounting. So I don't think any figures relative to revenues has any comparative validity. And I may be mistaken on this last point, but isn't attendance down slightly despite all those glorious retractable roof nouveau-retro taxpayer-subsidized baseball palaces came on line?

Selig's legacy is not as rosy as George Will would have you believe.

I have to agree with some of the points that Charlie made. But also, the reintroduction of the unbalanced schedule came after the balanced schedule w/3 divisions concept came into existence. The fact that each league has 3 divisions makes one of them weaker every year, so probably a team gets into the playoffs that shouldn't. But, you can counter that with the fact that the wild card has been so successful. Ideally, I think they should go back to 2 divisions, but keep 2 wildcards. Only risk: you could get a 3rd-place division team in, but then again you pretty much have that now with the "weaker" division each year still having its representative because that team was able to beat up on 3-5 division opponents.

Yuck. First of all, most of the "accomplishments" cited are a matter of taste. Is it really a good thing that an NL team might win a pennant race because they were beating Detroit and Tampa Bay, under different rules, while their division rival was losing to the Yankees and Oakland? The wild card makes no sense in combination with the unbalanced schedule.

As to the quickened pace of games--yes they're shorter than they were three years ago, but are they much shorter than when he came in as commissioner? He presided over their ballooning length for years.

His choice of statistics to express competitive balance is highly selective. When four teams make the playoffs instead of two, the numbers of different teams naturally increase. Still, the Yanks have won six division titles in a row, and the AL pennant six times in 8 years. Atlanta has nine consecutive division titles Oakland three of four. This is hardly impressive competitive balance compared to say '81 to '87 when the AL had seven different teams in the world series in seven years, six different division titleists in the East, five in the west, and only one team won more than 100 games. The Braves have won 100 games 5 times in the last 7 years.

As to his understanding that fans have other options, well, has he really successfully improved the popularity of baseball compared to other sports? Understanding the problem isn't useful unless his strategies to combat it are successful. Will is being extremely dishonest pulling out attendance figures from 1950 and 1970 and crediting the improvement to Selig. Mean attendance in 1991 was 26924, so nearly all the improvement in baseball attendance took place before Selig became commissioner.

So I look over George Will's "accomplishments" and I see nothing much compared to the huge negatives Charlie has so nicely outlined for us.

[ April 04, 2004, 03:44 PM: Message edited by: JC ]

JC, don't mean to knit pick but the Braves have won 11 consecutive division titles, in '94 the season came to a stop and there was no division winner. Bobby Cox has one more consecutive division Title, the one he won the year before becoming the Braves' skipper. That only adds to your argument as fewer teams are winning more titles. Selig doesn't seem to want to do anything about parity among the teams such as instilling a salary cap. That could be the fault of the players union, but if I were a player who was not on the Yankees or the Braves, I would be pushing for a salary cap. The luxury Tax is a joke! What's a little more chump change when you can spend as much as you want then say a few Hail Marys then be on your way. i would include the Mets with their High High High payroll, but that just wouldn't be fair.

CITT -- your comments # 4 and #5 just don't hold water. With due respect, the All Star game tie? Sorry -- but who really gives a damn? The all-star game has descended to rank of the Pro Bowl or even worse, the NBA all star game. It's a stupid but fun exhibition showcase -- plus the fact in M'waukee the managers used all their pitchers -- that was out of Selig's control. Maybe a PR problem ,but beyond that -- nada. What would have you done??

And as for moving the Brewers to the NL -- well M'waukee was an NL city longer than an AL one. It's a good fit. Face it- the Cubs could sell a ton of tickets up there!

And he's taking on the 'roids situation by the horns. Working with the players union ain't no piece of cake. It's the union's fault the '94 Series was cancelled -- not Selig's.

Methinks George Will wants to be the next commissioner so he's buttering up Selig in the hopes that Bud will push for him when the time comes. At the very absolute best, giving him the benefit of the doubt in every way possible, Selig is mediocre.

Wrong on both counts, my friend.

The All-Star tie -- in addition to being a PR nightmare -- led directly to the creation of that awful "All Star winner gets World Series home advantage" rule, which was a transparent attempt at bringing relevancy back to the All Star game after the tie. If not for the tie, then Selig never would have ordered making World Series home-field advantage dependent on the results of an exhibition (which means it's more than a "stupid but fun showcase").

As for M'waukee being in the National League team longer than the American, what kind of math do they teach people in Madison? The Braves moved from Boston prior to the start of the 1953 season. They left for Atlanta 13 years later in 1966. Prior to 1998, M'waukee was a NL city for a grand total of: 13 seasons.

The present incarnation of the Milwaukee Brewers came into existence in 1970, after one season as the Seattle Pilots. For the next 28 seasons, they played in the AL before Selig switched them over the NL in conjunction with the Arizona Diamondbacks/Tampa Bay D-Rays expansion. This was totally unnecessary. Even though Jerry Colangelo wanted to be in the NL, and Selig acceded to his wishes, it would have made sense to put both teams in the AL, as each league then would have had one Florida franchise and one Mountain time franchise. Then, the AL would have been the 16-team league and the NL would have been the 14-team league.

And, don't forget, Milwaukee was an AL city long before it was an NL franchise. One of the original franchises in the American League was the Milwaukee Brewers (the name resurrected when Selig stole baseball out of the more-viable Seattle market prior to the 1970 season). The AL Brewers played one season, 1901, before moving to St. Louis to be rechristened "the Browns."

M'waukee was an AL city twice as long as it was an NL city -- and it was an original AL city to boot. To think that Selig moved the team over the NL for any reason other than Cubs games is simply swallowing Ugly Bud's spin and regurgitating it.

And for Will to think that an owner who truly loves the game, and loves his franchise, would move a team to a different league just so another team's franchise could pack his ballpark eight or nine times a year, well, that's not just swallowing spin, it's digesting it. Might well have been a smart business decision, but it's not showing love for the game or the team.

[ April 04, 2004, 09:03 PM: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]

Joe in Philly hits a home run.

This is a completely ridiculous and inaccurate statement, and one that insults me personally and professionally. It is typical of one who is both ignorant of what our job is really like and of one who is subjectively and stereotypically biased. :mad:

Questec has been debated endlessly here and in other places. It is a travesty and a debacle of the most serious order, for many reasons the public does not know or won't understand. You haven't a clue as to what has gone on to improve umpiring over the last several years. I can say this because I am on the joint committee designed to work with umpire training, evaluations, and rule interpretations.

For the hell of it, HERE'S an interesting article on this.

The work to improve umpiring at the major league level has nothing to do with Questec. I suggest you learn the facts before you spew such media-generated bullshit.

[ April 04, 2004, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: The Umpire ]

Umpires hate QuesTec for the same reason surgeons hate malpractice attorneys: neither enjoys having their God-like status questioned, especially not by someone/something "beneath" them.

All I know is this:
- Before QuesTec: blatantly different strike zones called for the benefit of a select few veteran pitchers (e.g., Greg Maddux)
-After QuesTec: no more blatantly different strike zones

Is that change due to QuesTec? Dunno. But the timing is awfully suspicious.

Well, if he uses his product as Kyan instructs and zuszhes his shirt sleeves correctly, #3 should go better.

I saw this on a blog:
Apart from the "sycophantic" part, is that true, that he's on a "blue-ribbon economic panel"? I did various Google searches and couldn't find anything. Bit of a conflict of interest there, but that's never stopped Will before.

Hardly. Normally, I would take offense to such a stupid comment; but since it stems from ignorance, I'll excuse it.

You just don't seem to have any clue why Questec is not the answer. Even the company's corrupt and underhanded history doesn't matter to you. There's a reason why Sandy's right-hand man left MLB, and it wasn't because he \"wanted\" to, either.

Prove it. You don't even have any halfway decent circumstantial evidence. Instead, you have some conspiratorial and bullshit belief that umpires "favor" certain pitchers, then some inaccurate, two-dimensial machines come in and somehow magically change the way these same umpires are calling pitches. If this wasn't such ridiculous nonsense, I'd be laughing even harder.

Sorry, Ump, but I have to say that you were the one who started with the condescending post in this thread. If you felt insulted by someone else's opinion, too bad. This is a not a sports professional board, so nobody has to prove anything, and can merely express their opinion if they so choose. Besides, you yourself haven't proved that the introduction of Questec had absolutely no connection to the umpire's improvement in calling balls and strikes, correct or not. So take it easy there Umpire.

[ April 05, 2004, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: pat125 ]

Any, and by any I mean ALL, of those that watch baseball with any regularity know how inconsistent the strike zone is in major league baseball. One doesn't need to conjure up conspiracy theories to verify this. Ask the fans, ask the people that watch baseball.

And while you're at it, ask them if these inconsistencies have decreased in the last couple of years, especially last year.

My buds and friends say, YES. And while this is only our perception (and not likely to be proven or disproven), MLB umpires should know that their work/performance is subject to the same vagaries.

Oh, so what if the strike zone is sometimes inconsistent. It's always been like that, but has it affected the game in the long run? If we want umpires to be "better," I'd start with complaining more about them giving double plays when whoever's covering second base clearly doesn't touch it.

Don't pitchers and batters generally not mind a wide strike zone, as long as the outside strike is consistently called a strike?

I'm with the Ump here - this Questec bullshit is unnecessary, and harmful to the game, undermining the hard work of the men in blue. Why is MLB really using it? To improve the calling of games? It feels like some sort of anti-union maneuver designed to give the suits false positives on "bad" umpires or something.

And do we need computers in every nook and cranny of society? The ads behind home plate are bad enough.

[ April 05, 2004, 04:34 PM: Message edited by: FeverDog ]

It is not up to me to prove anything. Charlie was the one who made the claim that Questec has improved umpiring. I say prove it.

Considering it's only used in a handful of parks, he's going to be hard-pressed to come up with this proof. And what about those parks that don't even have Questec. Are you saying that we have one strike zone in them and another zone in the Questec parks? If so, then that questions my integrity, and there is nothing more serious and insulting to me than for one to question my integrity.

I said it here already: Questec has done NOTHING to improve umpiring at the major league level. The training and development program, with which I am deeply involved, is the reason why umpiring has improved--in several respects.

You folks have NO idea just what kind of program we have for this. It's an extensive one, to say the least. We are strongly in favor of improving umpiring in every sense. Because of this, the training and development program was established and continues to undergo enhancements itself.

The Umpire Says:

Then for godsakes, give us an idea of the training program. Don't simply tell us that we're "too ignorant" to understand. That's the f***ing arrogance that baseball fans can't and won't tolerate. That kind of thinking will virtually assure Questec's future.

PS: I'd suggest some homework: "How to Win Friends and Influence Destiny" is a must read for you.

He doesn't need to prove anything. He stated his opinion; he never claimed to be stating a provable - or disprovable - fact. Immediately resorting to such an aggressive and negative tone because you diagree with CITT's opinion makes this forum a less enjoyable place for the rest of us.

I don't need to read such drivel. I have no problem in that department.

Can't you people ever come up with something more original? Whenever an MLB umpire dares to defend his job performance, we're met with cries of arrogance. This has become a tired cliché borne of fans who always think they can do our jobs or who pretend to tell us how we must improve. And why? Because their fan favorite Mr. Bonds or Mr. Maddux didn't get a call the fan wanted.

Included in our training and development program are many facets, from the physical to the mental to the financial to the emotional, you name it. Have you noticed that with the exception of a couple senior guys, umpires today are more athletic and in shape? This is no accident. There is an extensive physical health program for us, both in-season and off-season, with a couple specialized individuals who work with us collectively and individually to maintain peak physical condition. I won't get into the other specialists who work with us in the other off-field areas. That's rather uninteresting or boring, but you can read a little about this by going here.

With respect to on-field performance, there are several supervisors (both former umpires and nonumpire personnel), many more than ever before, who constantly evaluate us during our work behind the plate and on the bases. They have many criteria by which we are graded, included, but not limited to, positioning, hustle, body language, signaling, rotational coverage, appearance, etc. Our reviews and evaluations also include video reviews of unusual plays and situations, with discussions of what went right or what went wrong.

We attend mandatory clinics and training sessions during the offseason to ensure we don't get "rusty" and maintain our peak capabilities. We work with MLB personnel to clarify unusual rule interpretations. In fact, all our training and development activities are done in cooperation with MLB administration. Here's but one example.

I'll close this explanation reiterating the stupidity of Questec. How can a computer ever be expected to evaluate something that cannot be mechanically determined? Try telling Questec that a pitch is a strike when the catcher butchers it, for example. And before someone chimes in telling me "it's where the pitch crosses the plate," it isn't, both by rule and by practicality. It took me many years of amateur umpiring to realize this.

While I do not claim that Charlie directly attacked my credibility, anytime anyone implies that certain players get favorable treatment, I will indeed become aggressive, for this is nothing less than an attack on what I hold as most important in my job, that being my integrity. Through my years in both amateur and now professional baseball, I tolerated complaints or questions about my judgment (safe/out, fair/foul, etc.) or other such things; but whenever someone even hinted that I call things differently for one person or another, or that I \"favor\" one person or another, or that I lean more to the home team, for example, my tolerance ends and I promptly dispose of such people. The game depends on the integrity of its umpires to maintain its fairness and its impartiality. Without this, it is nothing.

Even my own mother knows better than to discuss this with me. I hardly ever speak to her about my work because she has forever believed sports officials are \"homers,\" and this insults me. She has never understood who we are or what we do.

This isn't opinion, Munson. This is Charlie attempting to state a fact, one based on no evidence whatsoever. I've always enjoyed Charlie's baseball posts, for he has struck me as one of the sport's more knowledgeable fans here. I'd hate to see him turn into another one of the typical ones because of some misguided beliefs about MLB's umpires.

[ April 06, 2004, 12:10 AM: Message edited by: The Umpire ]

The BumPire sez:

Oh? And how many readers of these posts do you think have been convinced by your insight? Like Hannibal said to Clarice: "Thrill us with your acumen."

Just because the average weight of baseball umpires has gone from 295 to 210, doesn't mean that the strike zone is being called more consistently.

Bumpires are gods no longer. The game of baseball should benefit from the best technology possible. With Questec, we have a 1st step towards making the game more fair, more consistent.

You've got to be joking! It's obvious you still have no clue as to how inaccurate that system is. Again, I remind people that you can't use a faulty, two-dimensional system to guage something that cannot be guaged eletronically. It's no wonder why so many people are against Questec. It's a joke.

We're all for technology to help improve our performance. We're just not in favor of technology that doesn't work, of which Questec is one example. We knew about its faults before it was implemented. The Questec company was even in a heap of legal troubles before they were brought in. MLB knew this but ignored it. The integrity of the entire Questec company was questioned by many people, not just us. Yet MLB ignored this.

When it finally blew up in their faces, Sandy Alderson sacrificed his right-hand man Ralph Nelson, pinning the blame on him for the debacle.

[ April 06, 2004, 12:38 AM: Message edited by: The Umpire ]

Bottom line there Bumpire: we don't trust you and your brethren to call a consistent game.

You could say we are grasping for straws but your past history leads us to finding other solutions.

We are unsatisfied customers ...

Consistency as defined by the typical fan: Calling things the way they want us to call them based on the way they feel at any given moment.

Fortunately, we ignore biased folks like you. We're used to the baseless criticism, for we realize it's part of the game. One reason why we tend to be as good and hard-working (no immodesty intended here) as we are is because we DO ignore such opinions.

[ April 06, 2004, 12:42 AM: Message edited by: The Umpire ]

Re: Milwaukee to the NL -- remember, Colangelo was bound and determined that Arizona was gonna stay in the NL, and Selig really didn't want the inevitable court fight. And also remember that Milwaukee wasn't the first choice to move to the NL to make it a 16 team league. Kansas City was given the first chance to move, in the hope that having St. Louis and the Cubs visiting every year would help increase their attendance. KC said no, so Selig moved his team.

Re: Umps in better shape -- yes, this is CLEARLY the case -- more umpires are in better shape (and, frankly, are nicer to look at, too!!).

Re: Questec -- the only thing it's done is to unify the umpires and the pitchers in their absolute hatred of the system. Yes, there is a specific strike zone dictated by the rules, and most umpires I've seen at least TRY to follow it (though I can't say I envy anybody who's trying to judge exactly where an object flying at 90+ miles an hour lands precisely). Most pitchers and hitters ask only that pitches be called consistently. I don't remember any howling before Questec, so this sudden desire for uniformity strikes me as a bit unnecessary, and, frankly, unfeasible.

You say that you're fortunate for ignoring "us", with the "biased opinions" .. whatever that means.

But you might re-consider your choices; you have Questec precisely because the Bumpires have been oblivious to the fans' criticisms.

Now get over yourself, get on board and shut up. It might do you some good to listen.

Fan criticisms? What do fans know? There was a lot of booing in Houston last night when two Astro batters were called out for being hit by a chopper on the plate. I was at first puzzled by the calls, but after thinking about what occurred I concluded that the ump's calls were correct. The ump behind the plate called them immediately. Now that's knowledge.

The home plate umpire has the best knowledge and is in the best position to call balls and strikes. How rude of you to tell our Ump to shut up when he CLEARLY knows what he's talking about. He's not the one who needs to "get over" himself here. How would you like to have some amateur question your job performance? Or, worse yet, a fallible computer? (If you always put blind trust in a computer, I hope you don't live in a state with touch-screen voting.)

Hi FeverDog. Most of the people here who are expressing criticism of Umpire are doing so not because he is against QuesTec. I objected because he defended it in an arrogant, condescending way. He could have easily made his point by responding in a more civil fashion. Of course, he had the right to make his point anyway we wanted, but a few of us had a right to call him on his smugness and arrogance. So it is Umpire who should "get over" himself.

I am sure Umpire is more in the know of what goes on regarding QuesTec, and the improvement of strike calls over the years. I'm not questioning that. I frankly didn't like the way he defended his behavior, simply by saying his integrity was "questioned" as if questioning his integrity is a bigger deal to umpires (or himself) than the rest of us, and then express his self-righteous indignation. If anything, the rest of us should be insulted.

This is not a professional discussion board where people have to "prove" every opinion (even if it comes out as "fact"). CITT and others have simply expressed their opinion. He did not have to back up anything if he chose not to. If it was so important for Umpire to counter the opinion with such a blistering post, he should be the one to prove it (but, again, it's Umpire's right to not have to prove it). And, in fact, he hasn't come close to prove that there is no connection (direct or indirect) between the introduction of Questec and the improvement of ball and strike calls.

My opinion is that ball and strike calls improved drastically over the past few years. I don't think QuesTec was directly responsible for the improvement, but it seems to me that it's use started the ball rolling on better umpire calls. Again, this is my opinion, and understand that I can be wrong.

Sorry, but just because Umpire comes on here to defend the "integrity" of umpires does not make him correct. Not to turn this into a P&R thread, but many of us (of different idealogies) who are "amateurs" do question our government leaders (of either party) even though they are (or should be) more in the know. My job performance gets questioned by "amateurs" all the time. I respect the job that umpires do, but I don't think they should be held in some godlike status.

As for Bud Selig (the original topic of this thread ), arguments can be made for all the good and bad he has done for baseball. But it is long past due that a new commissioner of baseball be hired.

[ April 06, 2004, 05:32 AM: Message edited by: pat125 ]

Neither do I, for we are human beings, expected to be perfect on Opening Day and improve as the season goes along.

Yet, when Charlie expressed such an opinion, you reacted like it was an insult to your mother, your church and your soul, wrapped up into one. I certainly can respect someone who loves his work, but you took it way past that point.

And your disdain for the fans of the game is palpable. I personally largely stopped watching baseball, and going to games, after the '94 strike debacle. To give more money and attention to overpaid players/owners who cared more about personal benefit than the game was not something I wanted to see. Yes both Cal's breaking of Gehrig's streak and the Sosa/McGuire home run derby intrigued me, but it hasn't brought me back to the game.

Clearly umpires have to be objective (and I really have never seen clear evidence of "homers" as Umpire says, but the perception that the strike zone wavers, at least randomly if not purposely, is too widespread to be a complete delusion), but they also have to remember that their profession, and their livelihoods, depend on those fans that Umpire is so quick to insult. We may be wrong, but you can argue that point without talking down your nose to us.

I'm not sure how this went from a Bud Selig thread to a Ques-Tec thread, but since it has, I'm throwing my two cents behind the Ump.

I don't want to see baseball ruled by technology, just in the same way that I don't want to see steroids. Take some of the humanity out of it and the game becomes less fun and more like math.

If I were an Ump I'd be pissed off about Ques-Tec. It implies that people think I haven't been doing my job well in the past, and it restricts how I can do my job in the future. Screw inconsistancy - the game has survived for a hundred years with good and bad umps making good and bad calls. It's always been part of the game, and I, for one, want it to continue.

As for the Ump's tone, I think that's a hard thing to judge. When writing a post it is not easy to relate nuance and feeling, let alone irony. As I read the posts, I found the Ump to be a little caustic, considering his audience, but I didn't fing him arrogant or condescending. Charlie implied that Ques-Tec was good for the game - the Ump took offense. Maybe he should have, maybe he shouldn't, but you can't blame him for reacting.

As for Selig - the Montreal debacle is embarrassing and all his fault. Until he fixes that problem, he goes down in history as a failure.

I believe you completely misconstrued my comments. When I state that I ignore the fans, this simply means I don't listen to their biased, ignorant comments. No good sports official does. All spectators have three things in common: (1) A lack of knowledge of the rules (hence the characterization of being "ignorant"), (2) A bias toward one team or the other, and (3) A love of antagonizing the game's officials. This is simply a fact of life, but I can't let it affect my performance. I don't dislike the fans because of this. After all, it's part of the game.

Unlike some of our profession's old-timers, I do not have such disdain for fans. You are forgetting that there is no greater fan of the game than an umpire, myself especially. I love the game more than anything else, which is why I try so hard to do my best. It's not easy, believe me, because I am a demanding perfectionist. I cannot stand it when I make a mistake of any type, and that includes missing a pitch--even one.

Perhaps you have forgotten my comments in this thread over the last year or so when I have criticized Selig, the owners, or even the players in general for doing things that hurt the game and its fans. Sure, there is a shitload of money in Baseball, but when the day is over, the game is for the fan most of all. I must not forget this, you must not forget this, and Selig and his peers and the players must not forget this. Sadly, IMHO, they have.

I understand your not going back after 1994. You are not alone in those sentiments, nor were you the only one hurt in some respect. I know a lot of Expos and White Sox fans who were quite hurt by what happened in 1994. Perhaps that is another reason why White Sox fans, from what I've been told, intensely dislike Jerry Reinsdorf. I must admit, I can empathize with them, for he is a person who does not care about the game or his team's performance. I've read some comments in this section from MIB and BridgeportJake, two Chicagoans I believe, and some others on how fan unfriendly Reinsdorf is. Sad. Truly sad.

Anyway, back to the topic of this thread. I've said enough. wink

Back to Will, this drivel is par for the course. Selig, as CITT pointed out, has been a disaster as commissioner, perhaps the worst I can recall in my lifetime. I'll take Bart Giamatti, Bowie Kuhn, Peter Ueberroth, even the ineffectual Fay Vincent, over Sell-out-ig any day. God help baseball fans if that con-man* George Will succeeds him.

*Cf. Will, George: the theft of Jimmy Carter's debate briefing papers in 1980, which Will saw, used to prep Reagan, and then praised Reagan's performance on "Nightline" without revealing that he'd seen the stolen papers or his role in prepping Reagan--yep, just the kind of person baseball needs in the top job!

When I turned on TBS last night to look at the Mets and Braves I found nothing but a message that the game was blacked out "due to major league baseball rules." Until last year this never occurred unless the Braves were playing the Phillies in Philadelphia and it was televised on Comcast Sportsnet here. Suddenly now they're blacking out games not involving the Phillies.

This morning on WIP sportstalk radio a caller said he called Comcast cable about it, and was read a prepared statement saying that MLB has changed their rules so that a telecast can be blacked out anywhere within 100 miles of the market of both the home AND away teams. So even though the game was in Atlanta it was still blacked out.

Comcast in Philadelphia doesn't carry any NYC stations that would televise Mets games. And it's not like I'm going to head to either city to buy a ticket. The only reason I can see for such a rule is that MLB wants people to buy their game package on digital cable or satellite.

So much for trying to promote your sport properly. Just another reason that Bud Selig and his suckups like George Will should be moved to the People Who Should Be Shot thread. :mad:

You're confusing two different incidents and making Selig look better by doing so.

When Arizona was first awarded the franchise, it could have been placed in either league. If it had been placed in the AL, then there would have been no need to move an existing AL frnachise to the NL. Colangelo could not have sued over the original plcement of Phoenix in the AL. (Well, anybody can sue over anything, so I should have said: "he could not have successfully sued.")

However, when Selig was bandying around contraction, and the plan was in place to contract one team from each league, Montreal in the NL, and Minnesota in the AL, one team was going to have to move from the NL to the AL. Otherwise, there would have been 15 NL teams and 13 AL teams. 14 and 14 would work much better. The talk was that Arizona would be shifted because one condition upon the awarding of that franchise was that the D-Backs could be moved to the other league without its consent if the move were done within some specificed time period. If my memory serves me right, the contraction plan was being floated right before that window closed. It has now closed.

So Selig moving M'waukee to the NL had nothing to do with any restraints on placing Arizona in the AL.

Good God, did I forget to mention the contraction fiasco as yet another reason why Selig is a miserable failure as baseball commissioner? It didn't happen. But the fact that he even tried is a big black blotch on his record.

[ April 07, 2004, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]

Regarding the whole QuesTec debate in this thread:

I didn't know that acknowledging recent improvements in the overall quality of major league umpiring would be so controversial with: UMPIRES! wink

It's not, provided such improvements are valid ones. Questec is not. wink

Why, thank you. wink