how does this work now? the League winner of the All Star game is automatically awarded the World Series Championship after the LCS, or something just as stupid and arbitrary as that that eliminates the team's actual accomplishments. at least the NL knows halfway through the season they are just playing to be NL Champs since the WS is already determined apparently by the All Star game. even then I think they are waiting too long to determine these things. why wait and let teams settle these things by their own accomplishments when we have things like coin tosses, oh, which baseball also uses. we could settle the WS in spring training with a best of 7 heads/tails competition and save us all the ups and downs of 162 game season.
Huh? Was this a serious post, or meant as a joke? The winning league of the All-Star game gets home field advantage in the World Series, rather than the old way where each year it would switch back and forth. It's a stupid concept, but not nearly as bad as you made it out to be.
Not just this game, but a 13 year streak where they haven't lost in addition to dominating interleague play. The NL isn't even close to the AL's level right now. Obviously if you take a roster of the best the NL has to offer it's going to be a good team, hence the close score, but still not enough to beat the AL.
Your post was incorrect. "WOOOOO!!! The AL proves yet AGAIN that it is a vastly superior league. Awesome." This game by itself didn't prove anything. "Obviously if you take a roster of the best the NL has to offer it's going to be a good team, hence the close score, but still not enough to beat the AL." It's against the best the AL has to offer. What is your point? You act like the NL sent its best players against the AL's worst or something. The AL's best barely beat the NL's best. That proves the AL is vastly superior? If you want to draw a conclusion from the game, it would be that the leagues are similar in talent, because it was a very close game. I agree that the AL is a superior league right now, but what you said is simply not accurate.
You either don't get it or are just trying to be a douchebag. My point never was that this game alone makes the AL better, my point was that this game was more evidence in a long line of evidence that says that the AL is better. Which is why I said they "prove again" they are better, with an emphasis on "again". I never said the game itself made them better, just that it was more evidence that it is. And the conclusion would not be that the leagues are similar in talent. At least, that wouldn't be a LOGICAL or correct conclusion. You might say that the best players in the NL are almost but not quite as good as the best players in the AL, but there is absolutely no way to make any assumption whatsoever about the other 300+ players in either league from a game in which they didn't play. Either way, this is my last post on this. If you want to play your semantic bullshit game you love so much go find junc, but I don't have the patience to get sucked into your nonsense. The bottom line is I was talking about the big picture, with last night's game just a part of that. If you don't want to see or accept that fine, but I've made it as clear as I can and am done here.
I feel like the two of you get into a lot of really retarded arguments over really retarded semantics and word twisting. Haven't been keeping score, but this one is all on Yis.
except the farther you go back the less relevant it becomes to whether the AL is superior to the NL today. fact is, of the last 8 world series, it is tied 4-4. that's a short enough time frame to create an accurate picture of whether one of the leagues is better, and it certainly doesn't reflect one. if the AL is so superior, how come it's best team can't consistently beat the NL's in recent history. you can say I am conveniently choosing a time frame that reflects the NL's ability, but I don't see how the Toronto Blue Jays winning back to back or the Yankee dynasty at the beginning of the decade reveals whether today the AL is better than the NL.
Now you're getting all cranky because I pointed out that your obnoxious post was factually incorrect. "You might say that the best players in the NL are almost but not quite as good as the best players in the AL, but there is absolutely no way to make any assumption whatsoever about the other 300+ players in either league from a game in which they didn't play." Right. I agree. It doesn't represent the league as a whole. So how did the game prove yet again that the AL is vastly superior? Since you want to take your ball and go home, I'll answer for you: It didn't.
Not that I really care about the conversation, but in addition to the ASG dominance by the AL, they've also beaten the NL in the other head-to-head match ups over recent history as well. In interleague play since '99, the AL has 1461 wins to the NL's 1307. In World Series play, the AL has 27 total games won to the NL's 20. The AL has won 6 of those World Series matchups to the NL's 4.
Um who cares? For all the crowing about who is a better league basically anyone in contention can still win the World Series from either league so who cares? When I find the first pitch more interesting then the game itself and actually root for all of my team's players to play in the All Star Game as little as possible it shows you how much this argument truly matters
Actually, I think everyone is pretending to care a lot more than they actually do. I think we can all agree that the ASG is one of the biggest wastes of time in all of sports (in every sport.)
