Talk:World Baseball Classic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 World Baseball Classic is maintained by WikiProject Baseball, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of baseball and baseball-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
WikiProject Baseball To-do:
edit 

Contents

[edit] Redo this Page

I moved 95% of this page to 2006 World Baseball Classic. It is seriously time to pare this page down to more general WBC-related items and move 2006-specific things to the appropriate page--DaveOinSF 22:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National Wiki Links?

Why have the wiki links to the sixteen nations been replaced by non-working wiki links to "national baseball teams?" --feitclub 07:16, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

maybe because we're more concerned with the actual teams and not the nations. once teams are formalized, i'm sure the subsequent wiki pages will appear.

I have added that Nicaragua and Colombia have a chance of replacing Cuba if the decision to ban Cuba from playing stands.

There are only 15 nations playing. Puerto Rico is a territory of the United States.

Puerto Rico is a nation, it's just not an independent state.

[edit] "Format" extention

"Each team will play the other three teams in their pool once. The top two teams move onto the second round, where the top two teams of Pools A and B (Pool one) as well as Pools C and D (Pool two) will compeate against each other in the same format. the top two teams from each pool will enter a four-team single elimination bracket, with the Pool champions and runner-up's facing each other in the simi-finals. The winners of those games will play each other to determine a champion." was added to the Format section of this artical was added by Dr. cribbit. If this is untrue, feel free to remove this portion of the artical. Editors are welcome to add links, correct spelling errors, ect. -Dr. cribbit

[edit] Television?

Do we know of any TV sponsorship/coverage in any nation? If I'm curious, im sure many other people out there are also. Clarkefreak ∞ 22:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm assuming they haven't made them yet. Chances are they're going to post it on the WBC website when they get the TV thing all figured out. Dr. Cribbit

I added a listing of things confirmed so far. CapeFish

[edit] Controversy Section

I added a section about some issues that the WBC is having. I know that political issues are sensitive, but I am presenting the facts with proof to back it up. You are welcome to discuss it here, please do. Kenimaru 07:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Sources Needed- While I see your point of view, I think a link of some sort to where this is pointed out as true "controversey". International issues are sensitive as you said. But right now, I don't think it deserves a portion on the page. Unlike the Team Cuba issue, which was a true controversey, these maybe only "mistakes". Wikipedia is not a place to start a "controversey" if an editor feels there an issue. A controversey needs to be documented, like everything else on this article, and in this encyclopedia.

Because of this, I am going to say, it does not belong. If you can provide a set of sources, that show the a large "outrage", than I believe it should stay. Kenimaru or anyone who feels similarly, please see if you can locate these sources. Wxthewx99 02:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I just added several sources. 1. As for the name change, U. S. Congressman Tancredo has addressed on the issue, it could be a mistake by the MLB, but the name changing did indeed happen. 2. As for the commercial, I believe I am posbbly the few that actually noticed it, more discussion and proof are available if you go to the image section. 3. As for uproar, issue (1) is a common practice in Olympic games, so it might not cause an "uproar," as for issue (2), like I explained, no one has really noticed, yet. (Chinese New Year vacation in Taiwan) Kenimaru 03:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I just browsed here from the main page and I think the controversy section is not well structured at the moment. It mainly contains pre-tournament controversies, which is nice, but then suddenly show game controversies (but probably just some - those related to the USA). I think these should be split. There should be chapters about preparation, tournament itself and later maybe about follow ups. I do not know anythink about the subject so I am unable to fix it. That is why I am critisizing. --Jan Smolik 22:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Who Gets to Play

Apart from being "invited" by MLB, how were the nations/teams chosen to participate? Are there any plans to change that in the future? Were any nations/teams protesting their exclusion from the tournament?

Go to the WBC website and click about. Theres a FAQ list that includes that very question. -Dr. Cribbit


That doesn't really answer the question though. Who determined that these are the nations that are best at baseball? There are other countries which compete internationally and there are other countries which have produced players which play professionally. This is even more troublesome given the eligibility standards which allowed so many American-born players to compete for other countries.

[edit] Who Could Play for Whom?

What were the rules around qualification to play for a country? How was Mike Piazza eligible to play for Italy? What was preventing other less-talented nations from recruiting MLB players?

  • Piazza's father is Italian. Thus, he can play for them. Also, "other, less talented nations" did recruit MLB players: Andruw Jones of Curacou will play for the Netherlands.
  • The rules of eligibility are listed at http://www.worldbaseballclassic.com/2006/about/index.jsp?sid=wbc . There isn't really any recruiting of players. Piazza was eligible for both the USA and Italian teams according to the rules and he chose Italy. He could not have chosen to play for any other country. Curaçao is a territory of the Netherlands so presumably Andruw Jones is a Dutch citizen. The only thing that would stop any team from having MLB players is if they didn't have any MLB players meet the eligibility requirements for their country. The Italian team is made up of a lot of Major and minor leaguers who were born in the USA simply because there are a lot them with Italian parents. WLevine 04:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Should the eligibility standards become part of this article? That was a frequent question I heard during the event. --SuperNova |T|C| 05:41, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copy and Paste of Tie-breaking procedures

The section on tie-breaking procedures is a direct copy and paste from the WBC official site at http://www.worldbaseballclassic.com/2006/stats/stats.jsp?t=l_sta&lid=160&sid=wbc . Is this allowed? If so, we should at least explain what the WBCI is (World Baseball Classic Inc., an MLB subsidary) as it isn't mentioned anywhere else in the article.

[edit] New Flag

Venezuela officially altered their flag while the Baseball competition is underway. Is the flag used at the World Baseball Classic going to change? If not, then the flag used won’t be the Venezuelan flag. [1]

No clue; don't worry about it though, it's being discussed at Commons. -- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 04:48, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Final Standings?

Since there are no head-to-head games between those unqualifying teams, the tie-breaking procedures don't apply here. Is this ranking meaningful?--NullSpace 09:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

  • The tie-braking is done by RA/9. It is meaningful because it could determine the groups for the next WBC.
  • The first 4 orders of the tie-breaking procedures tell us only the head-to-head games between the tied teams should be taken into consideration. Since there are NO head-to-head between some of those unqualifying teams, why shall we break the ties? BTW, I think the groups for the next WBC shall be also based on geography.--NullSpace 16:01, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
    • The ties should be broken so we can have an idea of who finished where in the standings, thats the point of a tournament. And yes, geography plays a role in determining the pools as well. I think, for the next WBC, they should make it more international. This one felt VERY American. I say one Asian pool played in Korea/Japan, one pool played in the US, one in Toronto at the Rogers Centre, one in the Dominican Republic at Estadio Quisqueya. In the second rounds and beyond, they can centralize the tournament in the US in the finals and maybe one of the semifinals. Get more international umpires and no Bob Davidson, who made both of the major blown calls in the tournament. Also lets get some MLB umps.
  • Ties should not be broken because there isn't a standard way to break ties in this situation we are talking about. We are just making up tie-breaking rules, which are a mangling of the official tie-breaker rules. In fact, we shouldn't be ranking these teams at all, even based on just wins and losses. It /is/ meaningless. How is a 1-2 record comparable to a 0-3 record at all, if the teams have played no common opponents? 199.111.244.122 02:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] US flag section

I reverted a poorly-written edit suggesting that the flag on the US uniforms worn by players and sold at stadia is incorrectly displayed "backwards". In view of this, inter al., I don't believe the uniform formatting to be in error; surely the directionality of the flag was intentional, whatever may be one's questions about the propriety of such directionality. Joe 00:11, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] section on US disappointment?

I wrote a section about team USA's poor performance.... here it is:

Team USA, after going 2-1 in Pool B, was eliminated on a tie-breaker after losing to Mexico and going 1-2 in Pool 1. Many fans and members of USA baseball are upset at the underachieving performance at this innagural WBC. Observers will point to a couple reasons why team USA performed with such mediocrity. Because of the timing of the tournament, the American players (as well as most of the Dominican Republic team and various MLB players scattered on other teams) did not have any games behind them this season and were understandably out of shape; in fact, they did not even report to their MLB teams before joining the WBC squad. Team Japan and team Korea, however, are almost done with their spring training programs, and that combined with a greater regard for the importance of the WBC has allowed many other teams to enter the tournament more prepared. Moreover, team USA manager Buck Martinez, in addition to trying to win the games, felt he had an obligation to get all of his players prepared to rejoin their MLB squads, even if it meant platooning players, changing pitchers when it was not necessarilly to team's best interest, or giving every player on the squad a chance to start. Incidentally, Jeff Francoeur, a player who started against Mexico because of this policy, comitted a costly base running error in the 5th inning. It is clear to all concerned that USA baseball should start to be more methodical with its decision making if it wants to maintain its status as the premier baseball power.

One editor, J3wishVulcan keeps delting the section, citing no specific reason. Vulcan, what issue do you have with it? It probably needs a little editing, but I think a section like this is needed. Discuss.

Problems with the section:
1. It smacks of POV on the part of Americans.
2. It is all original research.
3. It reads as if it is trying to justify the American losses (citing indifference, spring training progression, manager obligation)
4. Wikipedia is not centred around America, as this section is.
Hope you understand why it's being deleted.
-- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 06:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
This section would only be relevant if equivalent subsection titled "Country X's disappointment" was created for every country apart from the winner, otherwise it could be argued that it biased the main article. (MarkG).
Obviously the world does not revolve around America, but the fact is, some countries are more prominent in certain arenas than others. Baseball is America's national passtime, and it's team of MLB all-stars was expected to win, or at least do much better than they did. I don't think a section highlighting this is unreasonable. I see the POV argument, but the idea that this should be deleted on the grounds that team USA is not more noteworthy than other teams is foolish. If it were the World Cup, Brazil would get more notoriety than other teams.
I am from non-baseball country, so I am neutral. I think the article could be improved with describing the games, and also by evaluation of play of individual countries and reaction of local media. Of course US would be first as most editors are from there but I do not think that matters. On the other hand text quoted higher is unsourced and thus probably original research. If properly sourced POV would not cause problems. Actually, large criticism sections from US games seem to be more america-centric than the section above. (OT:BTW:This format was tried in Ice Hockey and there were exactly same problems.Players did not play best before season. My country (Czech) had suffered big losses with weak opponents in this kind of tournament.Actually in ice hockey it is discontinued now.) --Jan Smolik 22:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you could add it to USA Baseball or create a new aricle under Category:National baseball teams. --Saintjust 10:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Season conflict

I think that MLB should find a way to alter the season so that its best players can be sent to the World Cup of Baseball, WBC, and the Olympics without having it interfere with the season. Perhaps extend it into November if necessary. We did not qualify for Athens, and now we've been eliminated by Mexico. This is our sport, we invented it. Why can't we send our players there? Selig needs to do something or baseball will become less and less popular.

Selig went to the Olympic removal hearings along with many MLB officials and GMs to try to keep baseball from being removed from the Olympics, but didn't have success. 2008 will be the final year of baseball in the Olympics.--66.122.241.57 03:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

The WBC is Selig's effort to promote the game in lieu of the Olympics and the World Cup of Baseball is run through an International Federation without support of the MLBPA? User: Abisai

[edit] Stats

This may be nitpicking a bit, but the ERA section in the final statistics states only "Ten tied with 0.00" while listing the "runners-up" pitchers. Wouldn't it be more prudent to list the 10 pitchers with the lowest ERAs than lump them as 10 anonymous and list the runners-up? I can understand saying "Ten tied" for third place in a category, but this is first place. Yourmotherisanastronaut 05:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2009 WBC teams - Source needed

"According to WBC organizers, the eight qualifiers to the second round will be automatically seeded in the 2009 World Baseball Classic. Remaining teams will have to go through a qualifying system." I cannot verify this on the WBC website or using Google, though it is a significant piece of information for the future of the event. Can a citation be provided for when and where "WBC organizers" said this? Thanks! --SuperNova |T|C| 06:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I have now removed this statement. It was being cited elsewhere on WP, and may mislead readers, so unless it's verified, it has to go. Despite this message being posted for four days, no citation has been provided, even after I added the (Citation needed) template to the article. It should stay out of the article until we have an official, citable statement that says it's accurate. --SuperNova |T|C| 10:05, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I have seen mention of it outside of wikipedia: such as here, but everytime I've seen it, the wording of the claim has been a bit weasly. I suspect its something of a brainstorm or rumor that hasn't been officially adopted. Whitejay251 09:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Whitejay251. That's the first mention I've seen of it, but as you said, it doesn't sound very confident and it's also unsourced. Hmm, I wonder if the writer got it off here? --SuperNova |T|C| 12:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ROC/PRC

okay, I've decided to take matters here. Discuss amongst yourselves whether the Flag of Chinese Taipei Chinese Taipei flag is being used because of PRC or ROC. I think it's a combination of both, quite honestly, and think that a link to Chinese Taipei is good enough. But I don't know about other editors, so I'm dumping it here. Okay, thanks for talking it out. -- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 02:44, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The revert made at 02:50 seems fair. The changes made by user 24.42.40.48 at 01:19 and other related changes by this user IMHO was bias and favored the PRC. The sovereignty of Taiwan and outlaying islands are disputed (since 1949) and the province shouldn't be stated as legally being part one state or the other. A one-china policy should be discussed as to why the Chinese Taipei is needed.

[edit] "Classic?"

I'm confused. How can the first edition of something already be a "classic?"

Haven't you heard about the term "instant classic"? 惑乱 分からん 18:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
It's by analogy with "Fall Classic", another name for the World Series. Andrew Levine 18:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Team stats

Are there any stats (RBI, AVE, ERA, HR) for the whole teams for comparison? --Saintjust 04:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3rd and 4th place teams?

I am wondering what is the justification for Korea being listed as the "3rd place" finisher in the 2006 tournament over the Dominican Republic (listed in 4th place). Officially, both teams finished as "semifinalists," period. There was no 3rd place or consolation game. Moreover, Korea and the Dominican Republic did not play each other in a head-to-head matchup. About the only thing that would indicate Korea as being a higher finisher than the D.R. would be in the overall record category, where Korea had a 6-1 record in the WBC tourney while the D.R. was 5-2. But this is an arbitrary distinction. The bottom line to all this is: there was no official 3rd and 4th place team in the WBC. All you had was the champion (Japan), the 2nd place team (Cuba), and the two semifinalists (Dominican Republic and Korea). Unless someone can cite an official MLB source stating that Korea was the 3rd place finisher in the 2006 WBC, I think that the 3rd and 4th place designations should be done away with and that the Dominican Republic and Korea be jointly listed as semifinalists.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/o/r/Talk%7EWorld_Baseball_Classic_85ac.html"