Is It Poor Sportsmanship to Play Subs Against Contenders?

Question

I think games involving a contender should be played at 100% The rookies and subs still can have opportunities in games among non-contenders. Is it fair for Houston to start three rookie pitchers against the Brewers this week? Where is Bud Selig?

It is a different subject, but I have no problem with an expanded roster. Remember, minor leaguers in quantity are still minor leaguers.

Answer 1

I think it depends on how many rookies, they still have an obligation to field a competitive team, both for their fans as well as for the integrity of the game. In fairness to losing teams, however, this is the time of year they need to use to see how their young players can perform so they have an idea of what they're going to do in the off-season. But yes, it is important to spead them out - starting rookies 3 games in a row, or fielding 4/8 players that are rookies comprimises the competitive integrity of baseball and is not fair to other teams in contention.

Answer 2

There is an unwritten rule that you put the best team out there but at the same time they are not bound by any rule to play only the best players. It has happened several times in the past few years where teams that have given up on their season play young guys with no experience against contenders...it does not always mean a victory for the team in contention...ask Tiger fans about the Royals playing prosepcts and beating them last year.

Answer 3

It's a general unwritten rule to play competitively at the end of the season, even if you have no hopes of making the post season. So, againt contenders, they can rest some players, but typically, most of the key players should be in the line-up.

If not, it could lead to teams swapping players that have an unequal value based on them starting newbies during a playoff run.

Answer 4

I think teams should do whatever is in their own best interest.

Plus, if a team is out of contention, there is a good chance that their rookies, playing for a chance to make onto the team next season will put up a bigger fight than high-priced veterans who are just waiting for vacation to begin (See Manny Ramirez, Sept '06).

Answer 5

It's ridiculous that teams are allowed to expand their rosters so much at this point in the season. For 90% of the year, managers must juggle their bullpen and bench and then, when it comes down to "crunchtime" it becomes a non-factor because they have 5 more bench players and 6 more arms in the pen. It really is stupid.

I know that's not your point, but the whole roster expansion rule, in general, needs to be revised.

Answer 6

particular it grow to be destructive sportsmanship. i myself do no longer think of they must be stripped of their wins because of the fact those wins have been insignificant besides, whether I do have self assurance that the winning team could be allowed to celebrate the place ever they decide for, interior the O, on the O, or perhaps on the Ohio sidelines in the event that they decide for to achieve this. My factor being, all the gamers on that field are over the age of 18 and that they actually could act it. those gamers are meant to be adults, yet they get disillusioned over infantile issues. And Illinois, a similar is going for you, do no longer taunt the losers that is merely as infantile because of the fact the combat grow to be!

Answer 7

Would you be saying this if your team was in contention for a playoff spot and their opponents decided to play 3 rookie starters this week against your team? Just wondering.

Answer 8

Managers can play whomever they want. They probably want to give the new guys some experience. If they win, will you still complain???

Answer 9

You're 100 percent right. Unless their regular starters have injuries they should start.

Answer 10

No. Managers can play whoever they want.