Page 7 of 154 FirstFirst ... 567891757107 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 3833

Thread: 2013 World Baseball Classic

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Minnesota USA
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Sweet_Bokke View Post
    Under Italian law they have just as much right to play as those born in Italy. There is no 'generation limit' on the heritage rules for being an Italian citizen, so anyone who has a father/mother or beyond (as far back as you can legally prove basically) that is Italian they have just as many rights to Italian citizenship as those born in the country

    Sian xx
    Make rule that you have to be a citzen of that country for at least 4 years or something like that. It might discourage some American players from going through all that work.

  2. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by Sweet_Bokke View Post
    The 'East Africa' team was implemented to give Africa some representation at the Cricket World Cup because we were banned at the time thanks to our apartheid policies. They were essentially a team of weekend-cricketers who went 0-3 and were knocked out in double quick time. That was their one and only appearance as a cricket team, so I wouldn't say it was exactly a historical sporting combination, more like a one-off, although I wouldn't be totally against it, for the other reasons you mentioned.
    Digging a bit further, I don't think East Africa was cobbled together to play in place of South Africa. From what I can find East Africa had been around as a team since 1958 - about 12 years before South Africa got banned. And they had officially joined the ICC in...1966, again before South Africa got banned. And it seemed to last as a team representing Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania until 1980, so 1958 to 1980 is a decent stretch of time. It then morphed into a Uganda-Tanzania team until 1989 when it then took onboard Malawi and Zambia (becoming the "East and Central African cricket team") until 2003 (wow didn't think it lasted that long).

    It seems the original East Africa team coincided more or less with the first attempt at integration in East Africa with the original East African Community (1967-1977) and it's predecessor organizations (starting around the late 1940s).

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweet_Bokke View Post
    As for the 'Soviet-Bloc' team, I'm not exactly an expert on European matters, but would that idea be terribly popular with the former Soviet-bloc Countries that tried for so long to gain independence from Russia?
    Which is why I made sure to state that it would only be if the other former Soviet countries' baseball governing bodies and the players themselves agreed. So if just Russia and Belarus' baseball bodies and players like the idea then it would be just those two. If it was every ex-Soviet country's baseball governing body and players that wanted to do it, then it would be all of them. Nothing forced.

  3. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by spark240 View Post
    You say this as if the legal condition of citizenship was more important than physical ancestry and cultural background and personal feelings....
    It is. Feelings can change easily. Laws....not so easily. Besides, the legal condition of citizenship is important for a lot of things - like entering the country you are supposed to be representing. In a some sports (especially rugby) the legal aspect is downplayed because the main countries basically have freedom of movement amongst each other (so since France doesn't require Australians to have visas to visit or vice versa then the "grandfather rule" doesn't run into trouble as an Australian with French grandparents can easily play a home international for France simply by visiting France for the match). In others though (such as soccer), the legal aspect is the be all and end all because the governing bodies (such as FIFA) do not want the ridiculous situation to arise where someone has a relative from a given country or was actually born there (e.g. the USA) but due to the citizenship laws (for instance I think the Netherlands and some other continental European countries had signed up to some international agreement some time which basically disallows dual citizenship for their birth nationals) said player cannot actually enter the country they are supposed to be representing legally. So for instance if some fella's was born in India and then moved to the Netherlands he would (legally) have to renounce his Indian citizenship (unless he got an exemption). Now he may still "feel" Indian, but according to Indian law his Indian citizenship is automatically terminated upon acquisition of a foreign one. So if an Indian coach seems him playing for Feyenoord and wants to recruit him to play for India he will hit a big roadblock - India employs a universal visa regime, so our Indian-Dutch player will have to get a visa (which could always be denied for the most obscure reasons) to play in the country he is supposed to represent.

    For now with baseball this situation might not arise since the most likely circumstances are that the WBC will be played in the USA for the foreseeable future and all MLB players are legal residents there anyway (and since Puerto Rico is a US Territory and part of the US Customs Zone unlike some other territories then all MLB players would have no trouble playing in Puerto Rico). Likewise if WBC matches were held in the Dominican Republic it wouldn't be a problem since the Dominican Republic does note require visas for American citizens. If baseball grows to be anything remotely as wide as soccer though then rules based on things other than citizenship (legal papers) will lead to headaches.

    Quote Originally Posted by spark240 View Post
    Legal papers are a construct, which may be intended in some sense to recognize an "actuality," but they are not more meaningful to me than the realities they may or may not encapsulate.
    That may be true, but it wouldn't fly in any court of law (at least in those countries where laws count for something). And technically feelings are constructs of the mind - they aren't anymore meaningful than legal papers in that regard (they may be even less meangingful since they don't constitute "hard evidence" - you can't change something that is already printed, you have to re-print it with the changes. Feelings though can change and nobody can prove you had had different feelings to beginwith unless it was recorded on hard copy format like film). Feelings do not have to reflect reality. Just ask those "hobbits" from the Russian census.

    Quote Originally Posted by spark240 View Post
    I think the tournament's present rules for player qualification are just fine; there are several conditions under which a player may be eligible for a given team, of which legal citizenship is just one; from among the total pool of all eligible players, each country's own federation chooses an actual roster on their own criteria. I imagine most countries would field teams primarily or entirely of players who are both native-born and legal citizens--if they felt that would give them as good a showing on the field as other options--but let them make that decision for themselves.
    I'll agree there. I still don't see how hard it is for those who can get the relevant passports to actually do it though. It's not going to take up 20 years of their life and if they can't be bothered because they know how they feel, they may as well not bother playing because they should already know which team should (or shouldn't win).

    Quote Originally Posted by spark240 View Post
    The only rule detail I'd add would be a provision barring players from switching allegiance after having been listed on any particular roster.
    Definitely agree there. Wouldn't want players jumping from roster to roster. If they get picked and they indicated they wanted to play for a team they should give their full attention to that team.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by ShawnC View Post
    So for instance if some fella's was born in India and then moved to the Netherlands he would (legally) have to renounce his Indian citizenship (unless he got an exemption). Now he may still "feel" Indian, but according to Indian law his Indian citizenship is automatically terminated upon acquisition of a foreign one. So if an Indian coach seems him playing for Feyenoord and wants to recruit him to play for India he will hit a big roadblock - India employs a universal visa regime, so our Indian-Dutch player will have to get a visa (which could always be denied for the most obscure reasons) to play in the country he is supposed to represent.
    This example supports my point exactly. This legal condition is self-evidently absurd. The Indian-born player is Indian by any commonsense understanding of identity. It would be ridiculous for the WBC to say he was not eligible to play for India if he wished (if India was fielding a team).

  5. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by spark240 View Post
    This example supports my point exactly. This legal condition is self-evidently absurd. The Indian-born player is Indian by any commonsense understanding of identity. It would be ridiculous for the WBC to say he was not eligible to play for India if he wished (if India was fielding a team).
    Huh? How? I just noted that India's own laws say that he is not Indian if he takes up any other citizenship. So how is he going to play in India for the Indian team in any sport if he gets denied a visa to go to India? Likewise, Dutch law requires our fictional ex-Indian to officially renounce his previous citizenship in order to be considered Dutch. It has nothing to do with what the player feels or how people perceive him. It would not be ridiculous for the WBC to say he was not eligible for India if he wished since India is his former state, not his current state. What would be crazy is if the WBC were to say he was eligible for India and then he couldn't go to India to play in front of a "home" crowd because some visa officer turned him down for some minor reason.

    And how would commonsense understanding of identity describe someone who was born in Germany to parents who were not German citizens?

    Someone born in Germany to a couple of tourists will not be given German citizenship (unlike someone born in the USA to a couple of tourists). So if you or I were to be born in Germany while our parents were tourists (and our parents came from say Namibia), we would have a very difficult time entering Germany because we would need a Schengen visa (either Schengen zone-wide or Germany-specific) and no visa officer is going to simply grant a visa because we happened to born in Germany to tourists and now wished to play for the German baseball team in the baseball world cup.

    Besides, whether we believe a legal condition to be absurd or not (and I don't think it is because different countries and cultures have different views on identity and thus create different citizenship laws), the fact remains that these legal conditions can greatly affect the sport in question - just ask the Northern Ireland Football governing body who now face the prospect of losing players to the Republic of Ireland due to the Good Friday Agreements (laws) despite the rules drawn up decades ago by the FA, SFA, FAW and IFA to overcome the fact that Northern Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales do not have separate citizenship and there is no way to prove a player is English, Scottish, Northern Irish, etc (for example what would call a person who is born in Scotland to parents who were born in England and Wales and who in turn had grandparents born in Northern Ireland?)

  6. #156
    Quote Originally Posted by ShawnC View Post
    Digging a bit further, I don't think East Africa was cobbled together to play in place of South Africa. From what I can find East Africa had been around as a team since 1958.
    It seems the original East Africa team coincided more or less with the first attempt at integration in East Africa with the original East African Community (1967-1977) and it's predecessor organizations (starting around the late 1940s).
    First attempt at integration? When did these states win independence from British East Africa? not until after 1958, perhaps?

    ... I don't have time now to do more than grab this from the long article on Kenya at wikipedia.
    The first direct elections for Africans to the Legislative Council took place in 1957. Despite British hopes of handing power to "moderate" African rivals, it was the Kenya African National Union (KANU) of Jomo Kenyatta that formed a government shortly before Kenya became independent on 12 December 1963.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by ShawnC View Post
    Huh? How? I just noted that India's own laws say that he is not Indian if he takes up any other citizenship.
    (rubs head)

    He is from India. He is Indian. Changes to this or that legal document don't change the reality of his past, and the person that his experiences have formed. If I relocate to Japan and get citizenship there for some reason, I am a citizen of the Japanese state, but I am not Japanese.

    No offense, but I find it hard to believe that you really don't understand this.

    Quote Originally Posted by ShawnC View Post
    So how is he going to play in India for the Indian team in any sport if he gets denied a visa to go to India?
    ...
    What would be crazy is if the WBC were to say he was eligible for India and then he couldn't go to India to play in front of a "home" crowd because some visa officer turned him down for some minor reason.
    I think it would be unlikely that a visa would be denied. If it was, yes, that would be crazy, but it would be the visa rules which were cracked, not the tournament's.

    Quote Originally Posted by ShawnC View Post
    And how would commonsense understanding of identity describe someone who was born in Germany to parents who were not German citizens?
    It would depend on their ethnic and cultural background and the context of their family upbringing and the larger society, of course.

    You are aware that Germany has a whole population of German-born people of Turkish descent who are still identified as Turks? Their parents weren't tourists, either; they were permanent residents, but German society isn't notably assimilative. American society being a different context, children of immigrant populations identify as Americans to a much greater extent... but depending on their family, they may also have a strong identity with the land of their ancestors. (The differing rules of citizenship show that laws may reflect different social conditions to a certain extent, but the laws are not, themselves, the society.)

    I'm not saying it can't get complicated. Often one person can legitimately claim the heritage of several peoples. That's another part of my point--the absolute status reflected in legal citizenship (you "are" this, not that) does not reflect the reality of the human experience.
    Last edited by Pere; 04-03-2009 at 12:57 PM.

  8. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Wendt View Post
    First attempt at integration? When did these states win independence from British East Africa? not until after 1958, perhaps?

    ... I don't have time now to do more than grab this from the long article on Kenya at wikipedia.
    The first direct elections for Africans to the Legislative Council took place in 1957. Despite British hopes of handing power to "moderate" African rivals, it was the Kenya African National Union (KANU) of Jomo Kenyatta that formed a government shortly before Kenya became independent on 12 December 1963.
    Since this diverges from baseball and I can't relate the answer to baseball in any way I will PM you the answer.

  9. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by spark240 View Post
    (rubs head)

    He is from India. He is Indian. Changes to this or that legal document don't change the reality of his past, and the person that his experiences have formed. If I relocate to Japan and get citizenship there for some reason, I am a citizen of the Japanese state, but I am not Japanese.
    So if my great-grandmother comes from India and I look Indian then that makes me Indian even if I can't understand a word of Hindi and my Indian culture only amounts to knowing how to make curry and roti?

    Put it this way - a fictional Mr. G was born in Yugoslavia. He grew up in Yugoslavia and on the census he calls himself a Yugoslav (having parents from Serbia and Croatia). Now Yugoslavia legally ceases to exist. It doesn't change his past or his experience or how he feels, but he is not a Yugoslav anymore. So as much as he may feel Yugoslav, he would not be able to play for a Yugoslav baseball team in a world cup because of those legal documents which say that the country which he feels a part of "doesn't exist".


    I think it would be unlikely that a visa would be denied. If it was, yes, that would be crazy, but it would be the visa rules which were cracked, not the tournament's.
    Except neither you, nor I can be sure the visa would be granted. Unless you've actually had to apply for a visa, it's easy to underestimate just how arbitrary visa issuance can be for some countries. There are quotas and such and the visa officer could just be having a really bad day and doesn't like the look of your face. At the end of the day, visas are granted at the discretion of the embassy official, if they don't want to grant it they don't have to.

    And what good would it be claiming the visa rules were cracked? The organizers of the tournament would be even more cracked if they went about life as though they could over-ride visa rules. If the organizers complained they are not likely to get the visa rules changed since in most cases those who are in charge of the rules couldn't care less about sports tournaments like the baseball world cup over the security issues on which those rules were supposedly based.


    It would depend on their ethnic and cultural background and the context of their family upbringing and the larger society, of course.
    Which would mean that commonsense application of identity to players for a national baseball team could not be applied with any kind of certainty. Why would some ethnic and cultural backgrounds automatically result in a person being considered as being from that background despite being generations removed as opposed to some others?

    You are aware that Germany has a whole population of German-born people of Turkish descent who are still identified as Turks? Their parents weren't tourists, either; they were permanent residents, but German society isn't notably assimilative.
    It's because only recently were children of permanent residents granted German citizenship upon birth. Before that permanent residents may as well have been tourists in terms of the nationality law.

    There is something similar with the Palestinians in Lebanon and Syria.

    So those Turks in Germany from the 1960s-1980s and those Palestinians in the Levant could not play for the German, Lebanese or Syrian baseball teams at home and away since if they went away for an extended period for a tournament they may find themselves unable to return "home" to play.


    American society being a different context, children of immigrant populations identify as Americans to a much greater extent...
    Due to differing laws. It has very little to do with how others perceive them. You are born in America and therefore you are American. However if you are born in Germany you may not be a German.


    I'm not saying it can't get complicated. Often one person can legitimately claim the heritage of several peoples. That's another part of my point--the absolute status reflected in legal citizenship (you "are" this, not that) does not reflect the reality of the human experience.
    True, but as you said it (laws) reflects human society which is the sum of human experience. If most Indians and Japanese did think that dual identity was something their countries could accomodate then they would have changed the laws. As it is nobody disagrees with the laws in those countries to get them changed and hence accept the underlying assumptions in those laws. Likewise with Germany and its birth citizenship rules.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    796
    Italy's WBC team in no way represented Italy's overall baseball talent.

    End of Story.

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    464
    Wow this thread has turned technical and dull!

  12. #162

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweet_Bokke View Post
    I might be wrong about this, but as far as I am aware-

    I think this particular loophole was caused by MLB having to 'tweak' the rules slightly to accomodate players from the Dominican Republic, who under Dominican Law, give up their rights to citizenship if they become citizens of another country

    Because of this MLB changed the rules slightly to ensure that players who were so obviously Dominican could represent their country despite not being able to under 'normal' circumstances, they could then represent their country without having to actually own all the paperwork. They couldn't just have this rule for one country and another rule for the rest, so they had to implement it for everyone, which opened the door for Italian-Americans to represent Italy

    There is also a bit of disagreement over this issue in South Africa, with some people not being happy with the amount of overseas-based players on the roster

    Sian xx
    dude, with all your respect you clearly have no clue whachya saying man

    dominicans have dual citizenship, and under dominican law, any person who's parents and/or grandpaernts are dominican citizens (included naturalized citizens) or where born in the dominican republic are consider dominicans, and don't even need to apply for dominican citizenship or a passport and dont' need to have a domincan birthcertificate either; also if you were born there and your parents enter the country LEGALLY, you are consider dominican under dominican law even if then you go back to your parents' country and never go back.What'smore , a dominican who has acquired a new citizenship is inmidiatly given the dual citizenship (don't need to apply for it cuz it's automatical) that's y MOISES ALOU could play for them in the last classic even though he was born in Atlanta.


    so the reason they had that rule is cuz they are playing under IBF rules which is the one that has that stupid rule, to begin with, and that's y in the 2004 olympics, the Greece Team played with a team made up mainly of americans

    get you facts straight
    Last edited by lewis; 04-04-2009 at 05:28 PM.

  13. #163

    Lightbulb whachya all think of my Idea???

    [QUOTE=Rally Monkey;1477254]
    Latin America: Colombia, Nicaragua, Brazil;
    Europe: Germany, Spain, Czech Republic;
    Asia: Philippines;
    Africa: Nigeria.
    QUOTE]

    Y would they wanna add 3 more teams from latin america??? aren't there enough!!!!!!! I mean. besides Nicaragua, the rest all suck including Colombia that even though they have 2 Major leaguers they have lost with their full roster to really weak teams like honduras, costa rica, guatemala, brazil, ecuador, jamaica, Virgin Island and argentina. and I know a bunch of colombian and neither like baseball.

    4 countries from europe makes more sense than having 3 from the americas, as a matter of fact from latin america only Nicaragua should be allow to play since ther are alreay enough american countries and all the other countries on this side of the world suck awfully !!!!!!!!!

    and about spain, well let's just say that a countgry whose whole team is from cuba, Venezuela, and the Dominican rep. shouldn't be allow to participate unless the can form a team with spaniards only, something that would make them way too!!!!!!!!!!!!!! weak, and the same goes to great britain, scotland, wales, Irland and Northern Irland whose whole teams are make up of americans, canadians, australians and south africans

    the phillipines should be in the next since the sport is quite popular there, but no other country from asia has a clue on how to play this thing, (the only reason why thailand is in the IBF ranking is cuz the particepate in the asia games, but that doesn't they are actually good at it, they have never won anything)

    and about africa: well, ghana has no bussiness here, if look at the resolts of the last couple of tounaments in Africa, gana always does pretty good (most of the time winning by an emormous difference) but then when it comes to play againts NIGERIA they always lose in a really ugly way, so nigeria is the closest to thing to South africa right now

    also the must let New zeland play for the chance to qualify if you wanna make this a fair thing, I mean, ok australians are ally good and all but WHY DO THEY ALWAYS AUTOMATICALLY QUALIFY FOR EVERyTHING ??? if the MLB wanna make things even more fair have autralia, and south africa in the next classic and make a qualifying round among NIGERIA, NEW ZELAND, and GHANA, for the other spot in the region.

    then, places like GUAM, CURACAO,Netherlands Anilltes, Hong Kong, San Marino and AURBA shouldn't be allow to play cuz THEY ARE NOT COUNTRIES !!!!!!!!!!!!!! BTW Puerto Rico is a country (afilliated with the U.S. but still a country)

    maybe if they include a country with cricket tradition and teach them the game, and train them with time (starting now would be ideal), in 2013 the may end up with a decent team, in the case of India for example they can combine their best crickets players with idians who play basaeball in the U.S

    from my point of view, the new 8 countries added should be :

    the Americas:
    1-NIcaragua
    2-the winner of a qualifying round among: Colombia, Honduras, Costa rica, guatemala, brazil, ecuador, jamaica, Virgin Island and argentina
    3- the second place of the qualifying round among: Colombia, Honduras, Costa rica, guatemala, brazil, ecuador, jamaica, Virgin Island and argentina

    Asia:
    4 - Phillipines

    Europe:
    5- Germany
    6-the winner of a qualifying round among: sweden, Croatia, Austria, Spain(with only spaniard players not their cubans, dominicans, and venezuelan ones), France, Russia, Czerch Republic, and belgium
    7-the second place of the qualifying round among: sweden, Spain, France, Russia, Czerch Republic, and belgium


    Africa and Oceania and rest of the world:
    8- the winner of a qualifying round among Thailand, Pakistan, NIGERIA, NEW ZELAND, and GHANA

    the red countries would be my favorites to win each round and advence to the Wolrd baseball classic, the third spot has one countries in red cuz any one can pull up surprise there, especially Guatemala, even Colombia would be for sure

    let me now what you'll think
    PLZ fell ya'll free to make any comment or suggestion 'bout it
    Last edited by lewis; 04-04-2009 at 06:34 PM.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by lewis View Post
    dude, with all your respect you clearly have no clue whachya saying man

    get you facts straight
    Lewis,

    The international baseball community is a rather small one. There are not very many outlets for international baseball fans to discuss the game. We here in the international forum like to share ideas and discuss different topics in a polite and respectful way. You don't have to agree with the things you read on here, but in the very least be respectful.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by lewis View Post
    San Marino
    San Marino is certainly a country. I'm not aware that they play any baseball there.

  16. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Unit312J View Post
    Wow this thread has turned technical and dull!
    Well don't worry, we can go back to discussing possible venues and teams and how likely each team will do (bearing in mind that we are discussing possible events 4 years in the future when a lot can change).

    I'll just agree to disagree with spark on the issues we've been discussing and we just move on from there.

    So Unit, give us your (absolutely random) predictions for 2013.

  17. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by spark240 View Post
    San Marino is certainly a country. I'm not aware that they play any baseball there.
    That wasn't the only error there, but it was a pretty obvious one.

    I think San Marino does play baseball, but they play it in the Italian league alongside the Italian clubs.

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by ShawnC View Post
    I think San Marino does play baseball, but they play it in the Italian league alongside the Italian clubs.
    You're right! I forgot about that!

    Having checked, it looks like San Marino won the European Cup in 2006 and the Serie A1 (Italian pro league) title just last year.

    My apologies.

    Now, if the Most Serene Republic gets a WBC entry, shall they be allowed Sammarinese-heritage players?
    Last edited by Pere; 04-05-2009 at 04:32 PM.

  19. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by USA09 View Post
    Lewis,

    The international baseball community is a rather small one. There are not very many outlets for international baseball fans to discuss the game. We here in the international forum like to share ideas and discuss different topics in a polite and respectful way. You don't have to agree with the things you read on here, but in the very least be respectful.
    You understand what that guy's writing? Impressive.

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Cape Town, Western Province, South Africa
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by lewis View Post

    get you facts straight

    My bad, I was basing it off an article about the first World Baseball Classic that I read online where this problem was addressed.....blame the author of that, not me! lol

    Edit- It was based off the press conference they had before the 2009 WBC when the issue of citizenship came up and I believe it was Harvey Schiller who replied that if each countries eligibilty rules were used then Manny Ramirez and other Dominican players would not be eligible for the Dominican Republic whereas Mike Piazza would be able to represent Italy, so because it wasn't equal for each country they tweaked things a little bit

    Just one tiny point, I have girly bits and so don't qualify as a 'dude'.....lol

    Sian xx
    Last edited by Sweet_Bokke; 04-06-2009 at 02:30 AM.
    Sian xx

    South Africa Baseball-
    Baseball World Cup- 9th (1974), 15th (1998), 14th (2001), 17th (2005), 15th (2007)
    All-Africa Games- CHAMPIONS (1999 & 2003)
    Olympic Baseball- 8th (2000)
    World Baseball Classic- 16th (2006), 16th (2009)

  21. #171

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweet_Bokke
    My bad, I was basing it off an article about the first World Baseball Classic that I read online where this problem was addressed.....blame the author of that, not me! lol
    hey no problem gal, every1 makes mistake, I mean
    I didn't know San maricno was a country LOL

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweet_Bokke
    Just one tiny point, I have girly bits and so don't qualify as a 'dude'.....lol
    oh well, sorry about that sweety

  22. #172
    Okay, gettin the thread away from the dull technicalities of eligibility..........

    The next WBC seems set to have preliminary rounds, then a first round, then a second round and the semi-finals and final, all involving 24 teams. But there is another possible format for 24 teams which could see a shorter tournament (and hence less chance of injury - which might make the clubs less inclined to oppose player participation):

    Have all 24 teams play in a first round in eight pools of 3 teams. Have the second round teams from this WBC all be placed in a separate pool (effectively seeding them).

    So these are just rough groupings and they could probably be better organized for travel arrangements and hosts, but it could be something like this:

    Pool 1 - in Japan
    Japan
    Taiwan
    China

    Pool 2 - in South Korea
    Korea
    Philippines
    Australia

    Pool 3 - in Dominican Republic
    Netherlands
    DR
    Nicaragua

    Pool 4 - in Mexico
    Mexico
    Italy
    South Africa

    Pool 5 - in Puerto Rico
    PR
    Panama
    Nigeria

    Pool 6 - in Toronto
    USA
    Canada
    Brazil

    Pool 7 - in Cuba
    Cuba
    Spain
    Czech Republic


    Pool 8 - in Venezuela
    Venezuela
    Colombia
    Germany


    The hosts in each pool will play 2 games and since crowds tend to turn-out to watch their home teams then it would mean at least 2 out of every 3 games should have a decent turn-out.

    The top team from each pool advances to the quarterfinals/second round and from there to the semi-finals and final (in Los Angeles, Anaheim and/or Phoenix and Miami). If they made the second round a straight knockout like the semi-finals and final then that could free up even more time.

    If the second round teams from 2009 are seeded into different pools then it would likely become an effective double-elimination format (any team that loses two matches will obviously finish bottom of the group and hence be eliminated and it would be unlikely that each team would win 1 game apiece in any of the pools - but if they did they could use statistics to separate them or playoffs).

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,324
    The tournament is awfully short as it is. If it gets any shorter I'm going to lose a lot of interest.

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    40
    I've got a lot of thoughts after sifting through 7 pages on this.

    Now that baseball & softball are out of the Olympics, we can lock in to every 3 or 4 years without interfering because I don't think baseball is coming back for 2016.

    That being said, I'd like to see a qualifying tournament and then a 16 team final tournament. Trying to bang through a 24 team round robin to double elimination is just silly during Spring Training. I think we're trying to shoe horn in too many games.

    I would love to see qualifying done similarly to the FIFA World Cup. Each region runs a qualifying tournament in the run-up to the finals for a set number of qualifying births.

    For example:
    North America - 4 births
    South America - 3 births
    Europe - 3 births
    Asia - 3 births
    Africa/Euroasia - 3 births

    For team eligibility, I'm fine with traditional allegiances (ie: Great Britain, T & T, etc), but we need to normalize foreign birth eligibility. Technically, I'm eligible to play for Ireland since my grandmother was born in Dublin. But my neighbor, Tony can play for Italy since like a million years ago he had a male relative from Palermo or whatever.

    You run the qualifying tournament one year before the finals and each region hosts their regional tournament (duh?). The qualifying tournament is a double elimination best of 3 (or best of 5) format. This gives us more games with equitable match-ups. I'd rather see Ireland play a really strong 3 game set against the UK than get blitzed in a round robin game against Cuba.

    And with Europe hosting the qualifier, the TV coverage wouldn't be at What the Hell O'Clock in the morning. SkySport or NASN can bring the games live in prime time. That, I think is the best way to help grow the sport overseas. Particularly if a new baseball country like Israel (traditionally a basketball and soccer country) can field a competitive team, broadcast games live in prime time and then show well in the finals.

    The real problem with running a good tournament is that we're used to a 7 game set in playoffs, and that's just not manageable in this format. A best of 3 16-team single elimination format would run just over two weeks. And that I think is perfect. Any more than that, and people are losing interest, any less than that, and it's who's getting lucky in a one-and-done.

    But regardless of format, we're going to need to start letting countries play into the Classic or its just not going to count.
    Harold Norbert "Harry" Kalas (1936 - 2009)
    Swing and a long drive. Watch that baby. Outta here, home run.

  25. #175
    Quote Originally Posted by spark240 View Post
    The tournament is awfully short as it is. If it gets any shorter I'm going to lose a lot of interest.
    Well if they keep double elimination for the 8-team quarter final or make it a round robin of two groups of 4 I think they would probably fit in 24 teams into a tournament of the same length of time as it is now.

Page 7 of 154 FirstFirst ... 567891757107 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •