Monthly Archives: March 2008

Nearly there …

After waiting impatiently for the best part of five months, the regular season is nearly upon us.

The A’s-Red Sox game is scheduled to start at 10.05 GMT tomorrow (Tuesday) morning.  It promises to be an amazing occasion with Daisuke Matsuzaka, the prodigal son, pitching for Boston and Joe Blanton on the mound for Oakland. 

NASN subscribers can either watch the game live or tune in to a 2.5 hour-long repeat edition at 18.30.  MLB.com will provide full coverage via MLB.tv, Gameday Audio and the Gameday service.

It’s going to be something of a staggered start this season, with the two games on Tuesday and Wednesday and then three days off before the Braves and the Nationals launch another year of Sunday Night Baseball on Five.

Despite the opening series in Japan knocking things out of kilter, I will leave my predictions for the ’08 season until Saturday and Sunday.  (What is it with predictions, anyway?  We all get burned by them each year and yet we never learn our lesson.)  As a sneak preview, I’ll reveal that the Orioles will not be listed as my favourites for the AL East.   

More WBC 2009 details announced

The World Baseball Classic 2009 tournament was officially launched at a press conference staged in Tokyo yesterday.

With Japan being the reigning champions and the Tokyo Dome set to stage the MLB season opener between the A’s and the Red Sox tomorrow, it was a fitting place to announce details relating to the first round of the competition that is a key part of MLB’s globalization plans.

It says a lot about the success of the inaugural staging of the event in 2006 that the news has predominantly been met by only positive comments. It’s human nature for a new event to be looked at with a certain amount of trepidation, but the outright hostility towards the competition from some quarters within the U.S. was quite shocking. Thankfully, many sceptics were won over and while some logistical problems are still there in the background (not least the inevitable disruption the WBC will cause to the pre-season preparations of MLB teams), there now appears to be much more good will towards the tournament.

There are plenty of details still to be announced in regards to the format and venues for the later rounds, but the plans for the first round show that the organizers are determined to build on the foundations laid in 2006.

There will be at least two new host nations in 2009, with the Rogers Centre in Toronto and Foro Sol Stadium in Mexico City both staging one of the first round pools. The Hiram Bithorn Stadium in San Juan, Puerto Rico and the Tokyo Dome will host the other two pools, reprising their roles from the 2006 event. Arizona and Orlando have been dropped from the event and in truth it seemed as though the two Spring Training bases were only used last time for the sake of convenience.

I’ve stated that there will be “at least” two new host nations because this announcement does leave one issue up in the air. The President of the Dominican League, Leonardo Matos Berrido, had previously stated that the Dominican Republic would withdraw from the tournament if they were not chosen to be one of the hosts. It’s possible that they may have been given one of the two Round two pools, although more likely this threat was simply shrugged off by the tournament organizers. The WBC would be much the poorer without a Dominican Republic side in it, so you would hope that a compromise has been reached. Certainly David Ortiz’s supportive comments at the press conference yesterday seem to suggest that the players believe the baseball-mad country will be represented at the event once again.

The other stated change is in relation to the so-called ‘advancement rules’.

The basic tournament format will be the same as that used in 2006. The first round contains four groups of four teams, with two teams from each going forward into round two. This second round will involve two groups of four teams, with two from each making the semi-finals and the winners heading to the grand final. The semis and the final will be one-off, ‘winner takes all’ affairs.

However, the round-robin format has been scrapped, apparently “to avoid the kind of convoluted tiebreaking procedures the World Baseball Classic rules committee instituted for the inaugural 2006 tournament”. These are the same tiebreaking procedures laid out in the IBAF’s rules and used in other international tournaments, so I’m not sure why they are such a big issue. Their alternative method hasn’t been explained particularly well in the press release, but in essence the idea is that as soon as two teams have lost two games, the other two teams in the group will advance.

During the previous tournament, I highlighted the brackets as something that could be improved upon and they’ve partly addressed this through the introduction of “cross-over Semi-Final games”. This means that the winner of Pool A faces the runner-up of Pool B etc rather than the top two in Pool A facing each other again. Quite why they didn’t work it that way in the first place is still a mystery to me. In 2006, we had the strange situation whereby Japan and Korea faced each other in the first round, the second round and the semi-final and it still looks as though they would play each other in both of the first two rounds (if they both get through round one).

Personally, I would prefer a slightly different structure, which I’ll explain later in the week. Still, the ’09 plans do sound like an improvement all the same and it’s difficult not to be excited about the event. Quite a few Major Leaguers ducked out in ’06 and were quickly regretting their decision when they saw what a great experience it turned out to be for all of those who took part. With the hope that even more of the top players will be representing their countries, it should be quite a spectacle.

Links and Fangraphs

One of the tasks I’ve been meaning to complete recently is expanding the list of links in the sidebar.

My objective for the links section is to include sites that will specifically interest a British baseball fan, both for established fans and for newcomers. There are countless places where you can find long lists of links to baseball sites, so I want to be a bit selective here. The four main MLB news sites are already listed and I will be adding in a few more general baseball sites, but from there the idea is to focus on British (and European/International) sites. We already have a decent selection of sites listed relating to the British scene and I’m also interested in linking to any sites about MLB by other British fans. So if you have any suggestions of sites that fit this criteria, please add a comment to this post below.

This outstanding task was brought to mind when reading a blog post by Jeff on Lookout Landing (an excellent Mariners blog) in which he provides a summary of some of the sites he visits most frequently for statistics. It’s a good introduction to some of the best resources baseball fans can access and I’ll be adding a few to my own list. Indeed, my slight neglect of the links section is epitomized by the absence of a link to one of the sites Jeff mentions.

Fangraphs

Fangraphs is one of my favourite sites because, as the name suggests, it compliments the normal stats pages with a wide variety of illuminating graphs. I guess some could see graphs as a sort of ‘dumbing down’ exercise; something to attract the sort of person who skims through a book to look at the pictures. However, that would be snobbish nonsense. Whether it’s baseball stats or complicated financial information, in the right circumstances graphs can be the best communication tool.

I’ve posted about Fangraphs’s Win Probability Added graphs in the past, which are a great way to chart the ebb and flow of games, but a new non-graph feature has been added to the site in the last ten days or so that I really love. David Appelman has added pitch type and velocity stats to the pitcher profiles for the past three seasons (the 2008 data will be added as it is created this coming season). The information is collated and disseminated by Baseball information Solutions and is absolutely fascinating.

As an introduction, here’s what I found out while going on a quick tour around the data.

The obvious place to start was with the two Cy Young winners from 2007.

Fangraphs tells us at the bottom of the ‘Season stats’ page that C.C. Sabathia looked to his fastball to get the job done around 61% of the time last year, with an average speed of 92.9MPH. The average speed of his fastball has actually decreased a little each year: 93.7MPH in 2006 and 94.7MPH in 2005. You would need more information to draw any conclusions as to whether that drop is significant or not, but it’s interesting to note nonetheless. Comparing his 2007 to the previous two years, Sabathia used his changeup more frequently in ’07 and completely cut out his curveball that he had used sparingly in years past.

The National League’s top pitcher, Jake Peavy, used his slider considerably more often in ’07 compared to the two previous years. We can also see that Peavy is using his changeup less often, reducing the percentage from 15.3% in 2005 to 7.4% in 2007. However, it’s worth noting that 4.8% of the pitches he threw in ’05 were unidentified by BIS so it’s possible that the 15.3% figure is a little on the high side.

Fangraphs also provides us with lots more data and graphs, including one graph that charts the percentage of balls put in play that were groundballs, flyballs or line drives. The 2006 NL Cy Young winner, Brandon Webb, is well known for being a sinkerball pitcher and the GB/FB/LD chart shows this quite dramatically. In each of the last three years, over 60% of balls put in play off Webb rolled along the ground waiting to be scooped up by Arizona infielders. Compare this to Eric Milton’s chart and you can see why he was so ill-suited to the cosy confines of the Great American Ballpark. Since 2002, he has consistently been around the 50% mark in terms of balls in play being flyballs. It’s no surprise when you click over to the HR/9 chart to see him consistently well above the league average in terms of giving up homers.

Back to sinkerballers, Chien-Ming Wang has a similar GB/FB/LD chart to Webb’s and both throw their sinking fastball approximately three times out of every four pitches. As for Wang’s Yankee team mate Andy Pettitte, he has noticeably reduced his use of a slider in the last two years. Back during his great 2005 season with the Astros, Pettite threw his slider nearly 15% of the time, compared to just 6.8% in ’06 and 4.8% in ’07. The slider is known for being a pitch that puts extra stress on the elbow and considering this has been a constant source of pain for Pettitte, perhaps he has consciously moved away from the pitch to extend his Big League career? Certainly a better idea than using HGH.

Joba Chamberlain meanwhile went to his slider 34.4% of the time in ’07, throwing it at an average speed of 86.4MPH. Some guys would be more than happy to hit that mark with their fastball! He certainly provides a different challenge to that posed by Tim Wakefield. One of the pitch type headings is ‘KN’ for knuckleball, so naturally I searched for Wakes’s profile. In 2007, around 83 per cent of his pitches were knuckleballs. 13.6% were ‘fastballs’ (at an average of 74.2MPH) and he also lobbed in the occasional curve (about 4%). Wakefield’s knuckleball averaged out at 66.8MPH, but this is a good example of where the average speed tells you a limited amount. For someone like Wakefield, the key is that his bread and butter pitch provides a certain amount of variation all on its own. Some will be 70MPH, some 62MPH.

That’s just a very brief look at what is there for you to explore. It should come with a warning though: this is very addictive. You look at one pitcher’s profile and it immediately sets your mind off on another trail. This is not the sort of site to visit if you are just looking to kill ten minutes before setting off to meet someone!

In an ideal world, you would like to place the pitch type/velocity data into a little more context. For example, knowing Wakefield threw a fastball 13.6% of the time is interesting but it would be even more interesting to know if there was a pattern to when he went to that pitch (did he use it more often on a certain pitch count or against a certain type of hitter etc?). BIS could clearly provide that extra level of data, but they would also charge more to supply it (and rightfully so). In fact, some of this extra data is on Bill James’s new subscription website. What Fangraphs is supplying for free is still a treasure trove for baseball fans.

An example of this extra level of data can be found at another blog linked to on the Lookout Landing list. Josh Kalk’s blog, uses the PITCHf/x data from the MLB.com Enhanced Gameday service to produce player cards containing lots of useful info. Kalk is one of a number of people (others include Dan Fox from Baseball Prospectus and Joe P. Sheehan until latterly of Baseball Analysts but now doing an internship with an MLB team) to use this data as the basis for some brilliant research. The process is in its relative infancy though and you have to take Kalk’s player cards with a pinch of salt.

For example, the page on Danny Haren gives you lots of data about the way he uses his fastball, curve, change and cutter (including usage on each pitch count), but this information shows that the system cannot identify Haren’s split-finger fastball. The BIS data on Fangraphs shows that he went to the splitter 23% of the time in 2007, whereas no such pitches are recognised by Kalk. We can solve this mystery partly by noting that Kalk’s data has Haren throwing a change 21% of the time, whereas the BIS data shows it at just 1.5%. So Kalk’s system is clearly recognising the splitter as a change. Such discrepancies are to be expected: BIS is a major stat-collecting company and is therefore going to be much more accurate. Kalk’s system shows a lot of promise though and is worth checking out.

This quick little post about my links section and Fangraphs has somehow turned into a fully-blown article! That’s testament to how exciting and infectious this data is. Find a bit of spare time (a couple of hours should do!) and explore it yourself.

Sports Illustrated Archives online

The Easter weekend is upon us and most places in Britain are staring at a pretty bleak weather forecast.  Snow and sleet for Saturday and Sunday apparently.  They’ve got it wrong plenty of times in the past so hopefully those wintry showers will not materialize.  All the same, it’s looking like a weekend mostly spent indoors rather than basking in glorious spring sunshine (if you can remember what sunshine is).

Thankfully, if there’s any risk of boredom, Sports Illustrated have given us a cure.  They launched the SI Vault yesterday, providing free access to their rich archive of fifty-plus years of great sporting coverage.  It’s rich in the sense that there is a wealth of content to enjoy, but it is also very vaulable from SI’s perspective.  In previous years, they have been able to earn revenue from their archive by selling ‘back-issues’ or publishing collections of old articles, such as the ‘Sports Illustrated: Great Baseball Writing’ book that I reviewed earlier this year.  The internet now allows SI to ‘exploit’ their archive to even greater effect.  They had two choices: generate revenue by making the viewers pay to access it (either downloading copies of single issues or using a subscription service) or attract millions of visitors by making the archives free and generating revenue by selling advertising space.  Luckily for us, SI chose the latter option.

The SI Vault is in Beta mode at the moment and I’ve already encountered a few bugs.  I can’t seem to get any of the articles to load up: clicking the link just takes me to a random bundle of error messages.  I’m sure they’ll get any problems fixed soon enough though.

You can get around the ‘article error’ for some of the issues of SI by using one of the great features of the SI Vault.  Simply click on an issue of Sports Illustrated, select “View this Issue” and it loads up the SI Reader, where you can flick through the issue page-by-page.  The layout is good, initially displaying a two-page spread with buttons at the bottom to allow you to zoom into each page, making the text easy to read.  It looks like these are scans of paper copies (I may be wrong) and looking at a few different examples, some are clearer than others, but they should all be legible.

You can step through the issue by clicking on the standard arrows in the Reader, but it’s more fun to put your mouse pointer over the top or bottom left/right corner of the two-page spread as this ‘lifts’ the corner up as if you were lifting up the page on a paper copy.  Click and it turns the page to the next two-page spread (it looks like you may be able to turn the page simply by ‘lifiting the corner’ and then dragging your mouse pointer as well, although, if so, either the Beta reader isn’t functioning correctly or I can’t quite get the technique right – I’m sure I did it once, but haven’t been able to repeat the trick!).  Alternatively you can display the thumbnails and skip to the section of your choice.

It looks like quite a lot of issues are not currently available via the SI Reader and with the articles not displaying correctly otherwise, access to the archives is limited right now.  But we’re less than twenty-four hours from the launch of this exciting new feature, so we can’t be too critical. 

So if you’re stuck for something to do for an hour or two, why not have a look through some of the classic copies of Sports Illustrated this weekend?  The infamous Mark Fidrych/Big Bird issue from June 1977 would be a good place to start.

Ball Four by Jim Bouton

Ball Four by Jim Bouton (Wiley, 1990), 472 pages.

In recent times, Michael Lewis’s Moneyball prompted a sizeable backlash from the baseball establishment, yet that reaction was nothing compared to the shock, horror, anger and bitterness that raged upon the publication of Ball Four in 1970.

Jim Bouton was an outspoken relief pitcher who decided to keep a daily diary of his 1969 season, beginning with the expansion Seattle Pilots and ending with the Houston Astros. Such projects are so common nowadays that the concept would be met with ambivalence. Not so In 1970. This was an era when the general public’s perception of baseball players was the “milk and cookies” version that the baseball establishment wanted them to believe; where MLB clubhouses were branded with signs stating: “What you say here, what you do here, let it stay here, when you leave here”. Bouton wasn’t breaking an unspoken rule, he was directly flouting the law of the clubhouse.

As such, he became public enemy number one within the baseball establishment, while gaining heroic status among baseball fans. Indeed, the reaction from within the professional ranks served to enhance Bouton’s reputation as a renegade and was pure publicity gold. Ball Four quickly gained legendary status and that position is undiminished even today. While the ‘shock’ of reading about the players’ off-field activities might be lessened for someone picking up the book in 2008, its main quality will always stand the test of time. Ball Four provides an endless stream of hilarious stories that will have you howling with laughter.

It’s precisely this point that makes the book so engrossing. A day-by-day account of a long MLB season could quite easily slip into repetitive drudgery. ‘Went to the ballpark, pitched to four batters, the team lost. Next day, didn’t pitch, we won in extra innings etc’. Ball Four never gets bogged down in such tedium thanks to Bouton’s storytelling ability and the many characters and events that he encounters. You also gain the understanding that such little moments, a funny tale or bit of gossip shared in the bullpen, are essential in alleviating the sameness of a season for the players themselves.

Although it is an immensely funny book in its own right, the controversy it caused when first published has become part of the whole Ball Four experience. One of the benefits of this ‘Twentieth Anniversary edition’ is that you get to read ‘Ball Five’ and ‘Ball Six’, Bouton’s epilogues from 1980 and 1990 which partly explain the reaction to the book and the way he has been treated as a result.

It’s amazing to read how Bowie Kuhn, the MLB Commissioner when Ball Four was published, literally tried to make Bouton sign a document stating that book was “a bunch of lies”. It’s frankly sad to read the way Bouton was ostracised by many within the game, barred from attending Oldtimers’ day at Yankee stadium and either verbally abused or pointedly ignored. Players on the San Diego Padres’s roster even burned a copy of the book and left the charred remains for Bouton to discover in the clubhouse.

Did it deserve such a response? Well, simply revealing details from the inner sanctum of MLB was enough to draw the ire of many, but Bouton certainly didn’t avoid talking about topics that painted those mentioned in a less than perfect light.

MLB didn’t need the managerial techniques of Pilots’ manager, Joe Schultz, to be summed up by his rallying cry of “pound that Budweiser” – Schultz certainly didn’t need it because he probably had people shouting it at him every day until he died in 1996. MLB certainly didn’t want Bouton to expose the rampant use of ‘greenies’ or to reveal the cheating ways of baseball gods such as Whitey Ford, who would surreptitiously gouge and muddy the ball.

The owners would have been aghast to read claims that they were less than honest when it came to dealing with players in the days of the reserve clause. And many a ballplayer would have been subjected to an inquisition from their partner(s!) thanks to Bouton’s many descriptions of their favourite pastime: chasing women (whether sleeping with air stewardesses or so-called ‘Baseball Annies’, or simply “beaver shooting” – a gloriously distasteful phrase liable to incite sniggers from any male teenager).

But of course, all the above are exactly what made reading Ball Four in 1970 such a hoot, as they still do today.

You need to own a copy of Ball Four for three main reasons. Firstly, it is an invaluable insight into what life was like for Major Leaguers at the time. Secondly, thanks to the extraordinary storm it caused, it is an important book for any new baseball fan to read. And finally, it is incredibly funny. This is not a book you will read once and put back up on the shelf to gather dust before finding its way to a charity shop years later. Several times over the course of an MLB season, something will happen that brings an incident from Ball Four to mind and soon you will be devouring the pages once again.

Nothing short of an essential purchase for any baseball fan.

Have you read “Ball Four”? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments section below. Can you recommend any other similar books? If so, let us know.

More 2012 news

As a follow up to yesterday’s story, Insidethegames.com brought to my attention an article on their website about the IBAF’s active attempts to convince the organizers that baseball should be a demonstration sport at London 2012.  Hyde Park may yet stage an Olympic baseball tournament, albeit one without medals and official Olympic status. 

There’s no telling whether it will succeed, but at least the IBAF are doing all they can to bring baseball to London in four years’ time and hopefully to achieve their ultimate aim of having the sport (and softball) reinstated for the 2016 Games.

Baseball at the 2012 Games?

There’s an intriguing little note on page 29 in the sports section of the Daily Telegraph today (I can’t find the actual story online) which states:

“Baseball could yet feature at the London Olympics. The sport was voted off the schedule for the 2012 Games, but the International Baseball Federation are fighting to have it restored as a medal event for 2016 and, at least, an exhibition event in London”

I’ve no idea why the Telegraph have picked up on this story today. Possibly the recent Final Olympic Qualifying Tournament has put it back on the agenda? The IBAF website contains no new details about it and I’ve yet to come across a recent document that may have brought the idea to the Telegraph’s attention.

The optimist in me would like to think that the newspaper, which was firmly behind the 2012 bid, has heard some insider news suggesting that it may happen. More likely though is that they have simply caught wind of the plans and needed to fill a little gap in the page at short notice.

British baseball fans were offered a glimmer of hope last May when the recently-elected IBAF president, Harvey Schiller, publicly stated that the Federation would be campaigning for baseball to be installed as a ‘demonstration sport’ in 2012. At the time, after the initial burst of excitement, most of us considered the idea to be a non-starter. Firstly, the International Olympic Committee doesn’t seem particularly keen to give baseball any favours. Secondly, demonstration sports ceased to be a part of the Games after the 1992 Barcelona Olympics. And last but not least, the general idea of having demonstration sports in the past was to allow the host nation to introduce the world to one of their own sports. Indeed, baseball got it’s first Olympic exposure thanks to being a demonstration sport at the 1984 Los Angeles Games. Put the three points together and it’s hard to imagine that any sort of Olympic baseball event will be a part of the London Games.

Of course, if I’m proved wrong, I will be absolutely delighted!  Best not to get our hopes up though, I think.

Sunday evening baseball

MLB.tv subscribers have eleven games to choose from today and several involve some of the top starting pitchers.

Pedro Martinez makes his much-anticipated Spring Training debut at 17.10 (GMT) against the Tigers. He will probably pitch around three innings as he is a bit behind where most starters would want to be right now due to several postponed outings. Both sides will be fielding split squad teams, with the Mets also playing the Astros and Detroit facing Tampa Bay. Dontrelle Willis and James Shields are the scheduled starters for the latter game, beginning at 17.10.

While Pedro’s start is an appealing prospect, a great alternative from 17.15 would be the Yankees-Indians game in which Chien-Ming Wang and reigning Cy Young award winner C.C. Sabathia will take the mound.

The action doesn’t slow down later in the evening either. Ben Sheets against Felix Hernandez looks a tasty prospect as the Brewers play the Mariners. Elsewhere, Carlos Zambrano takes the mound for the Cubs in their game against the Angels, and Danny Haren starts for the D-Backs against the White Sox. First pitch for all three of these games is set for 20.05.

Final Olympic Qualifying Tournament in review

The Dodgers and the Padres made Major League history in the early hours of this morning, playing the first of two exhibition games at the home of the 2008 Olympics. Their trip has coincided with the conclusion of the Final Olympic Qualifying Tournament, in which eight teams battled it out to follow MLB’s lead and earn the right to play baseball in China.

For a blog that partly likes to look beyond the confines of MLB (great though it is) to the wider baseball world, my lack of comments on the tournament while it was in progress might have seemed a bit odd.

The truth is, I deliberately ignored the event. Writing about it as the games were being played would have painfully rammed home the fact that Great Britain were not competing in it, despite qualifying for the competition due to their silver medal finish in the 2007 European Championship. You should all know the story by now: Team GB qualified but had to withdraw due to lack of funding. Germany took Britain’s place and travelled to Chinese Taipei to represent Europe alongside Spain.

The IBAF Final Olympic Qualifying Tournament involved eight teams, all playing each other once in a round robin format. The two European sides were joined by Australia, Canada, the hosts Chinese Taipei, Korea, Mexico and South Africa with the top three teams set to advance to to the Beijing Olympics.

Canada went into the tournament as one of the favourites and they didn’t disappoint. With a roster stocked full of current or former Minor Leaguers, and three former Major Leaguers in Stubby Clapp, Steve Green and Ryan Radmanovich, the Canadians finished at the top of the table with a 6-1 record. Day four was the turning point. After opening their tournament with victories over Mexico and South Africa, they took a heavy 10-5 loss in game three against Australia. Down 5-4 in the top of the ninth in game four against the host nation, Canada’s tournament was firmly in the balance. They rallied to take the contest into extra innings, came through with a 6-5 victory and then followed it up with a comfortable 11-0 win over Spain. Beating Korea 4-3 guaranteed them a place in the top three and a hard-fought final day victory over Germany secured them top spot.

For Korea, that loss against Canada was the only blemish on what was otherwise a perfect campaign. They opened the tournament by winning their first five games at a combined score of 53-9 and rebounded from their single defeat to beat Chinese Taipei 4-3 in a tense final game. Korea’s offense was relentless, with their two main Giants leading the way: Joo Chan Kim of the Lotte Giants (of Korea) and Seung Yuop Lee of the Yomiuri Giants (of Japan). The pitching staff more than played their part as well, finishing with a combined ERA of just 1.55 over the seven games.

While the local fans would have been disappointed to lose to their Korean rivals, the Chinese Taipei team gave them plenty of reasons to cheer. Any tournament is always enriched when the host nation performs well and Chinese Taipei did just that, causing a minor surprise by finishing with a 5-2 record and taking the final qualifying spot. Heading into the event, most observers probably would have predicted a fourth or fifth placed finish for the local side, with Australia and Mexico being the other two teams likely to finish above them. Yet Chinese Taipei played a very solid and consistent game and, spurred on by their home support, took advantage of Australia and Mexico’s maddeningly unpredictable performances.

After their silver medal in the 2004 Olympics, Australia were naturally one of the favourites to qualify for Beijing, but the Aussies kept taking one step forward and then one step back. An opening victory over Germany was followed by an absolute pounding by Korea (16-2 and ended by the ‘mercy killing’ rule in the middle of the seventh inning). Their response to this heavy defeat was to knock ten runs in against Canada, only to lose 7-4 to Mexico in their fourth game and to then be shut out in a decisive 5-0 defeat at the hands of Chinese Taipei. Mexico’s victory over the Aussies was the start of a four game winning streak for the Latin Americans, but this had been preceded by an 0-3 start to the tournament and a final 4-3 record was only good enough for fourth place.

As for the two European representatives, they entered the event as firm underdogs and simply found the competition to be a level above their own ability. Germany won the ‘minnows mini-league’ by defeating both Spain and South Africa to finish 2-7, while Spain avoided the wooden spoon thanks to a 2-1 victory over the South Africans. It’s difficult to say whether Great Britain would have fared any better had they been able to take their rightful place in the tournament. There appears to have been a distinct division between the top five and bottom three teams and Team GB may have struggled to bridge the gap. Sadly, they were denied the chance to find out.

With the final qualification spots having been won, we now know that Canada, Korea and Chinese Taipei will join China, Japan, the U.S., Cuba and the Netherlands in the Beijing Olympics baseball tournament. This event will of course be the final such event for the foreseeable future after baseball and softball were dropped from the Olympic programme. Once again, the competition will make painful viewing for British baseball fans still lamenting the decision that will deny the sport a chance to shine in London in four years time. Our only hope is that the 2008 event is a resounding success and helps to convince the International Olympics Committee that the sport should be reinstated for 2016.

For more information on the Qualifying tournament, head over to the IBAF website as well as Mister-Baseball.com.

Best wishes to Rick

ESPN has announced that former Major Leaguer and current baseball analyst Rick Sutcliffe has been diagnosed with cancer.  According to the report it is a “treatable and curable form of colon cancer”. 

British baseball fans have had the pleasure of listening to Sutcliffe’s analysis as part of the MLB International broadcast of the World Series for several years now.  Whether alongside Gary Thorne or Dan O’Brien, he is always quick to pass on some insightful knowledge or something that will simply make you laugh.  The pre-game pieces they sometimes put together specifically for Five are always good fun and serve to make British fans feel part of the World Series that little bit more than they would otherwise.

Good luck to Rick in his upcoming battles.  Like all British baseball fans, I look forward to hearing him back on commentary, fit and healthy, for the 2008 World Series.