The World Series (2 Viewers)

I don't think the Tigers can take the pressure. Errors this time did them in. I went to bed before ending. Tonight there should be celebration in St. Louis. I don't think the Tigers have it or deserve it. Last year Chicago White Sox won and they are my favorite team. Leadmen
 
Sheesh. What kind of fan are you. You're only down 3-1. It's not 3-0. Winning when you're down 3-1 is not impossible. It's been done. Your team did it the Cardinals in 68. You just need to stop making errors, get decent pitching and a few hits. You're facing Weaver tonight. He can be rattled. Buck it up, Spanky!!
 
Of course the rest of the world still want to know why you US guys call it The World Series considering you don't play any other countries :)

I don't follow baseball but I do collect baseball style caps and I have an old white LA Dodgers cap with the 'LA' in blue writing. I guess the Dodgers still have a team, we don't hear much about American Baseball downunder.
 
Oz,

Calling it the World Series is probably a misnomer from when nobody outside the US played it. Of course, that's changed and the baseball authorities would like to make it more international, which is why they staged the World Baseball Classic earlier this year. I think baseball is popular in Australia. I know there have been a few baseball players from Australia in the Major Leagues.

Yes, the Dodgers have a team. They were one of the original 8 teams when the National League was founded in the late 1800s. They were originally the Brooklyn Dodgers. Brooklyn is one of the boroughs of New York city. New York originally had three teams: the Dodgers, the New York Giants (now the San Francisco Giants), who played in the borough of Manhattan, and the New York Yankees, who still play in the borough of the Bronx and are also known as the Bronx Bombers. The Yankees were originally the Baltimore Orioles who then moved to New York and were known as the New York Highlanders until they changed their name to the Yankees. When the Dodgers and Giants left town, they (five years later) were succeeded by the Mets (my team), who as a tribute to the old Dodger and Giant teams, sport the colors blue (Dodgers) and orange (Giants) in their uniform.

As an aside, there is another team in existence today called the Baltimore Orioles. They were originally the St. Louis Browns but the Browns never did very well and won only one league championship in their history, in 1944, when most players were serving in the military. After the war ended and the players returned, the Browns resumed their losing ways and in 1953 or 1954 moved from Saint Louis to Baltimore.

Getting back to the Dodgers for a second, they were originally called the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers, so named for those who managed to avoid getting hit by the trolleys that used to be part of urban life in those days.

That's probably more information than you wanted I'm sure :)
 
I suspect you're a bit of a baseball fanatic Brad :)

I've never seen a baseball game in Australia. I guess there are plenty of guys downunder that play the game but it doesn't seem to make the sports segments on tv here.

I also had a green hat with 'A's' in gold on the front, I only bought it because it had the same colors as our Aussie Green and Gold. What team would that have been Brad? Btw, my wife says I now have far to many caps, and jackets for that matter. She says it's dumb me having a dozen or more jackets as we live in the tropics - because I like them I say. I think I have a collecting problem :)
 
OzDigger said:
I suspect you're a bit of a baseball fanatic Brad :)

I've never seen a baseball game in Australia. I guess there are plenty of guys downunder that play the game but it doesn't seem to make the sports segments on tv here.
:)
Click to expand...

Your not missing much.
 
jazzeum said:
If you have nothing to add, is there a reason to make this comment?
Click to expand...

I used to be a fan, but now find the game incredibly boring. The strikes, steroid use, and obnoxious, overpaid players probably have not helped. The fan base has shrunk to a mostly older male group (golfing crowd) who formed positive images of the game in their childhood. That does not bode well for the sport in the coming years. The first thing I would do is eliminate about ten of the teams and try to improve the overall quality of the game which has diminished significantly in the ESPN rush for dollars. Then shorten the season by about 30 games. 162 is beyond human endurance - both fan and player! Brad - aren't you glad you asked?
 
I too think there is too many games per season to please ESPN and the high wages. Baseball into Nov. Basketball into June. Also, it seems to me that once they get the big contract their playing diminishes. ESPN is one reason cable TV rates keep going up. Now they want to put sports on a pay-per view sport channel.
I watch College football and those talking heads at halftime interrups showing the college's fine marching bands. I know my daughter worked hard with Michigan State band and went to Rose Bowl. You would never know it because they don't show the kids.
Also the rip off of cities, counties and states needing new stadiums all the time. Add taxes and let the schmo's pay for it. Money is no object. Relax and have a five dollar beer at the game and a five dollar hot-dog. Michigan has major job problems with the high unemployment rate but we got a new baseball field and a new football stadium in Detroit. I like sports but I sure won't pay to see teams on pay-per-view. I will have more time to work on hobbies. Sorry about complaing but getting fed up with cry babies professionals. Leadmen:mad:
 
Combat said:
I used to be a fan, but now find the game incredibly boring. The strikes, steroid use, and obnoxious, overpaid players probably have not helped. The fan base has shrunk to a mostly older male group (golfing crowd) who formed positive images of the game in their childhood. That does not bode well for the sport in the coming years. The first thing I would do is eliminate about ten of the teams and try to improve the overall quality of the game which has diminished significantly in the ESPN rush for dollars. Then shorten the season by about 30 games. 162 is beyond human endurance - both fan and player! Brad - aren't you glad you asked?
Click to expand...

Well, I didn't really ask but here goes. Are the players overpaid? Yes, but they also have a skill that most others don't and if you have such a skill you get paid for it. I don't think the players are more obnoxious than they've been before. I don't see the fan base shrinking. Attendance is at record levels. Someone is going to the games.

I don't think you need to eliminate any team or if you do maybe a couple at best but it's not going to happen. The game is the same as before: it's still paid by nine players against nine and it's still the hitter vs. the pitcher.

162 is a long season but that's what makes the game beautiful. It's a marathon. That's what the game has always been about. You can't win the pennant in April or May but you sure can lose it. This year watching the Mets, all in all, from Spring training to the bitter end was the most fun I've had for awhile and, generally, pretty satisfying. I'm sorry the season will be ending this weekend.

In an ideal world, the season would go back to 154 where it was before expansion in 1960. However, that's still only 8 games.

I've been a fan for 40 years so the called rush for dollars has been there since before ESPN existed. This rush exists because the owners treated the players like slaves until Curt Flood said no mas. The balance has gone the other way but hopefully it's coming to the middle again.
 
Leadmen said:
I too think there is too many games per season to please ESPN and the high wages. Baseball into Nov. Basketball into June. Also, it seems to me that once they get the big contract their playing diminishes. ESPN is one reason cable TV rates keep going up. Now they want to put sports on a pay-per view sport channel.
I watch College football and those talking heads at halftime interrups showing the college's fine marching bands. I know my daughter worked hard with Michigan State band and went to Rose Bowl. You would never know it because they don't show the kids.
Also the rip off of cities, counties and states needing new stadiums all the time. Add taxes and let the schmo's pay for it. Money is no object. Relax and have a five dollar beer at the game and a five dollar hot-dog. Michigan has major job problems with the high unemployment rate but we got a new baseball field and a new football stadium in Detroit. I like sports but I sure won't pay to see teams on pay-per-view. I will have more time to work on hobbies. Sorry about complaing but getting fed up with cry babies professionals. Leadmen:mad:
Click to expand...

John,

Baseball going into late October has been this way ever since I can remember, at least since the beginning of divisional play since 1969. This didn't happen overnight.

In New York, each of the Mets and Yankees have their own channel. I have to pay for it but it's not much. There is no god given right to get sports free. If you go to the ballpark, admission is not free. If paying a little more means we get that extra player we need, I'm all for it, as I think most fans would be.

I think it's wrong for muncipalities to fund these stadiums at the expense of education, housing and so forth. Here in NY, the Yankees and Mets are getting new stadiums but they're paying for it themselves.

Hobbies and sports-watching are recreation and people need their recreation. I'm quite sure that if the Tigers win, you'll be very happy and it will make you feel good inside, even if for only a moment.
 
I agree sports is a recreation along with hobbies. I still feel players have no loyalty to their teams. Players like Derek Jeter is an exception. He stays with the Yankees. I get to know players and next season there gone. If they got a couple of more hits or points they go somewhere else next season. Sure I would feel good if Tigers, Pistons or Bears win. But maybe it is because teams I get use too are not together next season. I get frustrated working on hobbies also but I don't miss freezing or soaking wet at Nov. football games. I would still like to see Detroit win.:) Leadmen
 
I couldn't blame any sports player for lack of loyalty these days because players were treated rather poorly in the past based on movies etc I've seen. I think this was the same in most sports when the players were poorly payed amatuers that needed other full time employment to make a living.

We are currently having a big arguement in Australia because pay tv channel owners such as the Packer family want to have sports all to themselves with very little sport on free to air tv. It wouldn't worry me that much really as I can take sports or leave it these days. But back in my youth most sports stars were my heroes, but not anymore.

I guess we just loose some of that admiration of sports stars as we mature ourselves and discover that they are just humans with a great deal of temptation. For example much is said about the Australian cricketer Shane Warne and the women he always seems to be chasing, despite being married. Of course the truth is that the women are more likely chasing him. And frankly I've always found it difficult to knock back offers from females, it's just that I don't get many offers these days :)
 
When teams like the Cards build shrines to McGuire who abused steroids and then refused to answer questions before Congress like a gangster then things have changed for the worse. He would have been shunned in the past. MLB needed some good publicity after the strike so they let McGuire and Sosa bulk up like King Kong for the fake home run marathon. Now no one cares that Bonds just passed Ruth's HR mark. Remember when Aaron did it and it was a national event? The ratings are at all time lows.
 
Don't forget Sousa's corked bat. The paper said this and last year's ratings are the lowest ever. I think if it was a larger market teams playing the ratings would be better. Leadmen
 
The ratings for this series and the steroids have no relation to one another. If you had New York or LA against the Tigers, the ratings would be better.

The things with Sosa and McGwire happened before the public was aware of the steroids problem so at the time the home run chase looked to be real.

Regarding breaking Ruth's mark, it was an event when Hank did it because 714 was the record. When Bonds got 715, it wasn't the record anymore. That's why it was a non event.

Try as you might, you can't tear down this great game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top