PDA

View Full Version : Owners Approve Changes to Tie-Breakers


PaleHoser
01-15-2009, 02:43 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20090115&content_id=3745318&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Coin tosses will no longer be used to determine site for one game playoff for division title or wild card. Head-to-head record will be used as criteria.

Additionally, playoff games shortened by rain or other factors will become suspended games regardless of score or inning. All playoff games will be played to completion.

I think both changes are good for the game.

Iwritecode
01-15-2009, 02:52 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20090115&content_id=3745318&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Coin tosses will no longer be used to determine site for one game playoff for division title or wild card. Head-to-head record will be used as criteria.

Additionally, playoff games shortened by rain or other factors will become suspended games regardless of score or inning. All playoff games will be played to completion.

I think both changes are good for the game.

Well, it says it will "begin" with the H2H records. I'm curious to know what they use if the teams were tied in H2H.

gobears1987
01-15-2009, 02:58 PM
Well, it says it will "begin" with the H2H records. I'm curious to know what they use if the teams were tied in H2H.
They'll probably go the NFL route and use division record, league record, and a whole host of things before they get to coin toss.

Nellie_Fox
01-15-2009, 03:17 PM
This still leaves the issue of one team perhaps having one more head-to-head home game that particular season, and winning the head-to-head by that one game. So, they'd get rewarded with home-field advantage because they had home-field advantage.

beasly213
01-15-2009, 03:44 PM
This all started because the Twins were crying about having to come to Chicago.

Here's some news for you Twins, if you don't get spanked by the Royals you don't have to come here!

Also if the Sox don't crap against the Indians the first two games the Twins wouldn't have had to come here because the division would have already been decided.

Jim Shorts
01-15-2009, 03:58 PM
This all started because the Twins were crying about having to come to Chicago.

Here's some news for you Twins, if you don't get spanked by the Royals you don't have to come here!

Also if the Sox don't crap against the Indians the first two games the Twins wouldn't have had to come here because the division would have already been decided.

I disagree. This started because Dan Patrick and the Eastern Sports Programming Network whined. Not unlike Jim Rice's introduction to the HoF.

HomeFish
01-15-2009, 04:27 PM
Nothing they do can take my "2008 American League Central Division Champions" t-shirt away.

tacosalbarojas
01-15-2009, 06:17 PM
I disagree. This started because Dan Patrick and the Eastern Sports Programming Network whined. Not unlike Jim Rice's introduction to the HoF.
I believe Joe Nathan spearheaded the players' union effort to get this changed. That probably had a greater effect than Patrick and ESPN.

Milw
01-15-2009, 06:24 PM
This still leaves the issue of one team perhaps having one more head-to-head home game that particular season, and winning the head-to-head by that one game. So, they'd get rewarded with home-field advantage because they had home-field advantage.
Yeah, but it's still better than a coin flip.

getonbckthr
01-15-2009, 06:36 PM
I disagree. This started because Dan Patrick and the Eastern Sports Programming Network whined. Not unlike Jim Rice's introduction to the HoF.
Dan Patrick hasn't been at ESPN for at least 2 years.

Tragg
01-15-2009, 06:52 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20090115&content_id=3745318&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Coin tosses will no longer be used to determine site for one game playoff for division title or wild card. Head-to-head record will be used as criteria.

Additionally, playoff games
It should be division record. In fact, I would go by division record and to heck with the tiebreaker.

TDog
01-15-2009, 06:52 PM
It isn't that much fairer than a coin flip. The schedule can be more random. Last year the White Sox made two trips to St. Petersburg, but the Rays only came to Chicago once. Had the teams tied for the wild card, the White Sox would have been better off with a coin flip to determine the playoff site.

As long as head-to-head records aren't used to determine who makes the postseason, but only who hosts playoffs to get into the postseason, it isn't such a big deal.

Vernam
01-15-2009, 07:17 PM
Only way this rule change will help the Twins is if they get in a tiebreaker again this year. Their home-field advantage has an expiration date of October 2009. The whiny ****s.

Vernam

Woofer
01-15-2009, 07:52 PM
I have a feeling that if the Twins would have won the tiebreaker, there would have been no change.

JB98
01-15-2009, 07:54 PM
We would have won Game 163 even if it had been played in Minnesota.

I agree with the changes. They seem reasonable.

SOX ADDICT '73
01-15-2009, 08:00 PM
I have a feeling that if the Twins would have won the tiebreaker, there would have been no change.
It would be a beautiful irony if the crybaby Twins didn't even sniff the postseason for the next decade or so.

Woofer
01-15-2009, 08:46 PM
It would be a beautiful irony if the crybaby Twins didn't even sniff the postseason for the next decade or so.

I'd be fine with that.:cool:

Madscout
01-15-2009, 08:56 PM
It would be a beautiful irony if the crybaby Twins didn't even sniff the postseason for the next decade or so.
I second that.

TheOldRoman
01-15-2009, 09:37 PM
Eh. I don't mind the change, but I'm sure much like the "tuck rule" game in the NFL, mediots will talk of our tiebreaker last year as some horrible outrage that caused the new rule. This is actually much less fair than a coin flip (see Nellie's post), but as long as the rule is in place before the season starts, nobody has anything to complain about. I'm looking at you, Joe Nathan.

thomas35forever
01-15-2009, 10:47 PM
I agree that these changes are reasonable, but it still kind of pisses me off that we were involved with the first debate I can remember about the tiebreaker system. If the Twins were indeed behind it, then **** 'em even more.

DumpJerry
01-16-2009, 06:50 AM
What will Rick Hahn's kid do now?

TommyJohn
01-16-2009, 07:31 AM
I agree that these changes are reasonable, but it still kind of pisses me off that we were involved with the first debate I can remember about the tiebreaker system. If the Twins were indeed behind it, then **** 'em even more.

Tell me about it. That's how it was for the first 100-some odd years of baseball, and no one ever complained. Now, baseball history will remember the 2008 Twins as a great team that was the victim of a horrible injustice.

SoxandtheCityTee
01-16-2009, 08:51 AM
We may never, never meet again, in a Game 163
But I'll always, always keep the memory of
That put-out at the plate,
The long ball by Thome,
The Blackout looked so great
No, no they can't take that away from me
No, they can't take that away from me.

downstairs
01-16-2009, 10:50 AM
Eh. I don't mind the change, but I'm sure much like the "tuck rule" game in the NFL, mediots will talk of our tiebreaker last year as some horrible outrage that caused the new rule. This is actually much less fair than a coin flip (see Nellie's post), but as long as the rule is in place before the season starts, nobody has anything to complain about. I'm looking at you, Joe Nathan.

Less fair than a coin flip? Makes no sense. Head-to-head is more fair than a coin flip for sure. What if we sweep Cleveland during the season, and lose the coin flip to them?

I will agree that pure division record (and league record for wild card) should be used first- then maybe head-to-head.

But those are details. This new rule gets us back to what baseball is all about- play everything on the field.

TDog
01-16-2009, 11:43 AM
Less fair than a coin flip? Makes no sense. Head-to-head is more fair than a coin flip for sure. What if we sweep Cleveland during the season, and lose the coin flip to them?

I will agree that pure division record (and league record for wild card) should be used first- then maybe head-to-head.

But those are details. This new rule gets us back to what baseball is all about- play everything on the field.

The schedule itself is unfair in the number of games many teams play home and away against an opponent. When one such opponent plays in a park with a surface and ceiling unique to their home, head-to-head records can be more unfair than a coin flip. As I noted earlier, had the White Sox and Rays tied for the wild card, a coin flip would be more fair than the head-to-head records.

ChiSoxFan81
01-16-2009, 06:42 PM
I don't really mind the change, but why now? How many prior play-in games have been held by flipping a coin to decide home field? No one whines until this year. It's not like the Twins destroyed the Sox in the regular season. It was 10-8. I didn't hear anyone complaining last year when the feel-good Rockies hosted the game. Was that different somehow because it was "only" for the wild card?

The H2H formula isn't perfect either, as has been mentioned. The example of one team having more home games during the season leading to their better H2H record is a perfect example. I really thought a coin flip was the fairest way (and I've thought this since well before last season). All you have to do is win one extra game during the season, and the coin flip doesn't mean anything. If you get to that point, you leave it partially to chance, but of course home field doesn't guarantee victory either. You know well in advance of the end of the season the results of the coin flips. I just wonder what kind of logistics problems this new format will cause, especially if the 2 teams play the last regular season game against each other, which would tie the H2H series.

Dibbs
01-17-2009, 11:29 AM
Less fair than a coin flip? Makes no sense. Head-to-head is more fair than a coin flip for sure. What if we sweep Cleveland during the season, and lose the coin flip to them?

I will agree that pure division record (and league record for wild card) should be used first- then maybe head-to-head.

But those are details. This new rule gets us back to what baseball is all about- play everything on the field.


I believe it is less fair than a coin flip if the teams are playing uneven H2H games. A coin flip is 50/50. Whoever has more home games has a clear advantage of having a beter H2H record.

So yeah, it is less fair until they change the horrible scheduling.

Whitesox029
01-17-2009, 11:43 AM
Maybe the NFL should use all-time Head-to-Head records instead of coin flips to determine first possession in overtime.

Seriously... This really is all because of the Twins' whining.
I think a bigger deal was made out of it because the Twins DO have that huge home-field advantage that the Padres wouldn't have necessarily had in '07, being that Petco and Coors are both natural baseball stadiums. This, however, is precisely the reason why this is stupid. The logic that's being used is that because the Twins would have had a greater advantage than any other home team, it's especially tragic that they didn't get it. With most other combinations of teams, you wouldn't hear a word.

TheOldRoman
01-17-2009, 03:44 PM
Less fair than a coin flip? Makes no sense. Head-to-head is more fair than a coin flip for sure. What if we sweep Cleveland during the season, and lose the coin flip to them?

I will agree that pure division record (and league record for wild card) should be used first- then maybe head-to-head.

But those are details. This new rule gets us back to what baseball is all about- play everything on the field.As I said before about homefield in the World Series, I think the best way is either a coin flip or alternating every year. Something arbitrary like a coin flip gives a team a 50% chance, same as the other team. As Nellie pointed out before, if the Sox were 9-0 at home against the Twins and they were 10-0 at the dome against the Sox, does it make it fair to reward them for having had an extra head to head home game against us by giving them another home game? I chose poor wording earlier, but I think there are situations in which assigning homefield based on head to head could be unfair.

SoxandtheCityTee
01-17-2009, 04:18 PM
As Nellie pointed out before, if the Sox were 9-0 at home against the Twins and they were 10-0 at the dome against the Sox, does it make it fair to reward them for having had an extra head to head home game against us by giving them another home game? I chose poor wording earlier, but I think there are situations in which assigning homefield based on head to head could be unfair.

Here's one: when year after year the same team hosts the final series of the year between the two teams. Sure, every game all season counts the same, but for a crucial late season series it shouldn't be that one team has to be in the other's park more than half the years. It needs to alternate.

Giving home field for the play-in game to the same team that already had home-field advantage for an uneven number of regular-season games is so obviously unfair that MLB would have to change the rule again, if it ever happened. (I'm talking about the 10-9 scenario where each team had won all its home games.)

chisoxfanatic
01-17-2009, 07:19 PM
It isn't that much fairer than a coin flip. The schedule can be more random. Last year the White Sox made two trips to St. Petersburg, but the Rays only came to Chicago once. Had the teams tied for the wild card, the White Sox would have been better off with a coin flip to determine the playoff site.
Don't forget that, in the two trips to St. Petersburg, they were three- and four-game series, while we got a single three-game series here against the Rays. I think this kind of scheduling is absurd! The same thing happened to the Yankees a couple seasons ago, where they had to come here for a three- and four-game series, while we went to Yankee Stadium later for only a single three-game series.

If they are going to schedule a team to play an opponent twice on the road and once at home, that four-game series SHOULD be the series at home. It is not right for a team to have to play four more games in the other team's ballpark in any given season!
We would have won Game 163 even if it had been played in Minnesota.

I agree with the changes. They seem reasonable.
I cringe when thinking of the horrors that would've happened if the game were at the Dump Dome. Thome's HR probably wouldn't have happened, as they'd have found a way to turn on the A/C unit or something else would've gone wrong there. I can't wait til this coming season is done, and no more games will be played there.
It would be a beautiful irony if the crybaby Twins didn't even sniff the postseason for the next decade or so.
I could live with the Twins never sniffing the postseason for the rest of their history, have last-place finishes often, and are forced to contract due to a lack of interest, making their new ballpark deal a horrible investment.

WhiteSoxFan84
01-18-2009, 01:17 AM
This still leaves the issue of one team perhaps having one more head-to-head home game that particular season, and winning the head-to-head by that one game. So, they'd get rewarded with home-field advantage because they had home-field advantage.

With this kind of thinking, you'll find a flaw in every tie-breaker system possible.

If the Twins were truly a better team than the White Sox in 2008, they would've been able to score a measly 2 runs in the most important game of their season.

Nellie_Fox
01-18-2009, 01:38 AM
With this kind of thinking, you'll find a flaw in every tie-breaker system possible. The coin flip has worked just fine for a very long time. What could be more impartial?

soxtalker
01-18-2009, 08:14 AM
I can't get terribly exercised about this. As someone mentioned earlier in the thread, the Twins incredible Metrodome homefield advantage only lasts for one more year. Their new ballpark is an outdoor stadium, so it probably will play similar to other parks.

I know that there has been a lot of discussion about relative fairness of a coin flip vs. H2H, but I wonder if the change in incentives will affect the intensity of any H2H matches earlier in the season.

WhiteSoxFan84
01-18-2009, 12:19 PM
The coin flip has worked just fine for a very long time. What could be more impartial?

Example...

In 2012, the White Sox and Twins both finish the season 98-64. During that same season, the Sox were 5-5 in Minnesota and the Twins were 0-9 in Chicago (Sox won season series 14-5). Using the highly creative coin flip process, the Twins won the right to host the ultra decisive one-game playoff. How is that fair?

All the coin flip does is let the teams know this, "Your head-to-head matchups don't mean as much, just finish the season with the same record or one game as the other teams".

Love the new rules.

WhiteSoxFan84
01-18-2009, 12:24 PM
I can't get terribly exercised about this. As someone mentioned earlier in the thread, the Twins incredible Metrodome homefield advantage only lasts for one more year. Their new ballpark is an outdoor stadium, so it probably will play similar to other parks.

I know that there has been a lot of discussion about relative fairness of a coin flip vs. H2H, but I wonder if the change in incentives will affect the intensity of any H2H matches earlier in the season.

You must've not heard about their outfield have you? When the road team is on defense, the gaps will be potential to splitting open and players falling into them. Below the field will be a body of water filled with.... piranhas. And not just any piranhas, but EVIL piranhas with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads! Now the Twins will go from being the annoying team hitting a lot of singles, to being the annoying team hitting a lot of doubles and triples :whiner:

SBSoxFan
01-18-2009, 08:41 PM
I can't get terribly exercised about this.

Have you tried talking to a priest? :redneck

SoxSpeed22
01-18-2009, 11:17 PM
Baseball manages to find a way to contradict itself again. They can't have the best record host the world series because preparation is too difficult. If the last series between tied teams is on the last week, preparing for a tie-breaker game is not going to be a problem I suppose. If teams contending for a wild card split the season series (6 or 10 games), then what?
All the 'victim' Twins had to do was beat a last place team at home and none of this would have happened.

Nellie_Fox
01-19-2009, 01:17 AM
I can't get terribly exercised about this.

Have you tried talking to a priest? :rednecksoxtalker's use of "exercised" is correct, and means what he wanted it to. What you are thinking of is "exorcised."

Lundind1
01-19-2009, 01:19 AM
Awwwww Jesus, just shoot me now, please!?!?!? Seriously, I liked the coin toss. It left everything to chance and gambling is good for baseball right???

Really, I understand the other rule change, but the coin toss is really the only fair way to call it because teams from other division with more or less teams in it play less or more games in their own division. IE: National League Central teams play less games against division opponents than say a team from the AL West.

SBSoxFan
01-19-2009, 06:36 AM
soxtalker's use of "exercised" is correct, and means what he wanted it to. What you are thinking of is "exorcised."

:redface: I learned something new today. However, after having looked up the definition and given that soxtalker took the time to respond, I think the topic exercised him/her a little. :smile:

downstairs
01-19-2009, 04:37 PM
The coin flip has worked just fine for a very long time. What could be more impartial?

I don't feel "impartial" is fair, or the right way to determine the home field team.

I actually WANT it to be partial- to the team that fared better in some on-the-field category. Head-to-head, total division, something along those lines.

Anytime you add more meaning to games, they're more exciting. I like the unbalanced schedule, I like this. I like having in-division games mean a little something more.

RadioheadRocks
01-20-2009, 12:58 AM
It would be a beautiful irony if the crybaby Twins didn't even sniff the postseason for the next decade or so.


Hear hear... the Twins were all crying and boo-hooing due to the coin flip; someone call the WAAAAAAAmbulance!