wbc tiebreaker system

[west coast orange and black]

apparently, the wbc tiebreaker rules allow for two teams to conspire against a third, because of the way that runs scored enters into determining a winner.

does anyone have info on this?

[aarond23]

Yes it 'could' happen but it was set up for Canada/Mexico and you didn't see the Mexicans stop at 2 runs for the Canadians benefit. I don't think any of these players want to be looked at as cheaters. I think the run of play is what will determine the games not the tiebreaking rules.

[west coast orange and black]

ok. but my question remains: does anyone have info on the tiebreaker rules?

[Agente Libre]

First tiebreaker is head to head record against the other team(s).

Second tiebreaker is (fewest) earned runs allowed.

[Bob Hannah]

ok. but my question remains: does anyone have info on the tiebreaker rules?

Tony, I found this link on the WBC site. Scroll down to "Regulations". Tiebreakers are listed there.

[west coast orange and black]

many thanx for the link.

1. The team that defeated the other tied team head-to-head in a given Round shall be ranked higher in the pool standings for such Round.

2. The tied teams shall be ranked in the standings for that Round according to fewest runs allowed divided by the number of innings(including partial innings) played in defense in the games in that Round between the teams tied.

3. The tied teams shall be ranked in the standings according to fewest earned runs allowed divided by the number of innings (including partial innings) played in defense in the games in that Round between the teams tied.

4. The tied teams shall be ranked in the standings according to highest batting average in games in that Round between the teams tied.
(my italics)

runs allowed?
era?
batting average?

that's balogna.
over here shaking my head and being thankful that mlb simply plays a game to decide.

[Knick9]

many thanx for the link.

1. The team that defeated the other tied team head-to-head in a given Round shall be ranked higher in the pool standings for such Round.

2. The tied teams shall be ranked in the standings for that Round according to fewest runs allowed divided by the number of innings(including partial innings) played in defense in the games in that Round between the teams tied.

3. The tied teams shall be ranked in the standings according to fewest earned runs allowed divided by the number of innings (including partial innings) played in defense in the games in that Round between the teams tied.

4. The tied teams shall be ranked in the standings according to highest batting average in games in that Round between the teams tied.
(my italics)

runs allowed?
era?
batting average?

that's balogna.
over here shaking my head and being thankful that mlb simply plays a game to decide.

Boo!

......

That's all I gotta say about this tiebreaker system. I felt that Canada was the better team (performance-wise, not by talent) in Round 1, Pool B. For 4 innings, USA showed the chinks in their armor, though I'm sad to say that as an American, it's very well the truth. There should be a better way at breaking these ties.

[efin98]

runs allowed?
era?
batting average?

that's balogna.

There's the chance of a 3-way tie and a 4-way tie in the tournament pools, they can't possibly play more games just to settle who will go on. They need a set tie-breaker system by which to narrow the teams down for advancement.

over here shaking my head and being thankful that mlb simply plays a game to decide.

I wouldn't be so sure of that, it's not so cut and paste as you may think. That playoff game only works if you have only two teams vying for the last playoff spot. If there's three or more they have their own set of rules to narrow the field down among the teams just to get down to that one game playoff. It's never been employed by MLB in the years since playoffs were added, but that doesn't mean MLB doesn't have one!