What is more important to you in MLB, winning or how you played the game?

Question

I believe A-Rod is a great player and I respect his abilities, how could you not with the numbers he puts up. However, if you watch him he always seems to be in the middle of controversy the way he playes the game. Once again, the other night against Boston, his slide into second base on a force play was brought into question when he came up with his arms flying and kept Boston second baseman Dustin Pedroia from throwing the ball to first base for a double play. This is not just a question about A-Rod and it is not a question about the Yankees vs Red Sox. Is it okey to do whatever you have to do to win the game, and is this a good lesson for our children?

Answer 1

I think your question goes hand in hand. What I mean is how the game is played to help you win.
Will there be cheating? Always
- extra pine tar on a bat
- any kind of lubricant on a pitcher's hand
- wearing something shiny or using a multi colored pitching glove

Will there be strategy? Of course
- intentional walks
- suicide squeeze
- hit and run

Will there be dirty play? Absolutely
- breaking up a double play
- protecting your players (if your hitter got beaned, bean one of their guys)
- plowing into the catcher to make him drop the ball

All these things affect the game. How the game is played, what happens during a game, and so on. You do what you can to win.

Answer 2

Basically, I see it as hard nose baseball. The way the game should be played. It's a force play, he was trying to stop it from being a double play. As long as he is sliding into second base and not away from the base then this is ok. I'll let everyone know I'm not an A-Rod, Yankees, or Redsox fan. I just love the game and I've seen the quality of the play go down in the past few years. Do you think Pete Rose ot Ty Cobb would just let the opposing team have an easy double play? Hard nose baseball, gotta love it!

Answer 3

It should be about how they play the game. But with the outragous contracts that there are in professional sports today, the heart is gone in the game. Guys today either play to win or play to get that big contract.

It makes me miss the days of baseball, back in the 80's and early 90's when I was a kid and really got into watching the game. Guys like Kent Herbek, and Kirby Pucket, Ozzie Smith, George Brett. Those days, yes there was cheating back then, but at that time you had the pine tar scandal, not steroids.
I know there's alway been the problem with guys using a corked bat, I'm more worried about guys using steroids.

But I think that how you play the game sends a much better lesson to kids.

Answer 4

ok. First, it wasn't domicile field for the gang with the suitable checklist; it would substitute between AL and NL each and every 300 and sixty 5 days. 2d, domicile field income purely makes a distinction while the communities are gently matched. If one group is severely greater powerful than the different, then being on the opposing stadium won't make plenty distinction. third, it replaced into replaced to make the interest greater suitable. And, examine out the MLB All-famous man or woman interest - people watch and the gamers relatively attempt to win, no longer purely like the present NHL All-famous man or woman interest (what replaced into that score, 15-14? And it aired on as against?) or the drawing near NBA interest. and don't even initiate with the pro Bowl - how many gamers bypass that??

Answer 5

I have nothing against going all out for winning... as long as you play by the rules and don't go out to hurt someone. No player's career should be shortened or put in jeopardy just because some clown wants to make ESPN's highlights. (The Bean-ball was outlawed many years ago)
This is one reason I never (that's never) watch Hockey. I want to see a game won or lost by talent, not by which team can beat up another in fights. If I want to see a fight I'd turn on a boxing match.
I know there are Hockey fans who will disagree and that's fine. Different strokes for different folks.

Answer 6

Winning is what their paid for. As far as the slide, it was nothing. Just another thing for the sports media to demagogue. Alex barely touched him. It was more of a distraction then anything else. No one on the Red Sox complained. Ty Cobb or Pete Rose would have done allot more damage, and would been considered heroes for it. We would have looked at that slide today and say " Back then they played with heart. No one plays like that today. The game was better then."

Answer 7

Whatever it take, if it is within the rules of the game, is the path to go down. You could have called the runner out at 1st on interference, which makes it an illegal play. AROD is not a good example for our children.

Answer 8

Dude, I'm a Cubs fan, winning can't be too important to me. It should definetely be how they play the game. These guys are role models for kids, and they need to show good sportsmanship.