A Baseball First?
The Red Sox and the Yanks ended in a tie, which caused this (10th paragraph at link) to kick in:
If Boston and New York are tied and Cleveland can’t match them, the Yankees would win the East and the Red Sox the wild card because New York will have won the season series against Boston.
Something’s not right about that:
I believe that this is the first time pennant or playoff positioning has ever been decided without playing a game. Deciding anything in a way that does not involve playing an actual game does not seem like a good way to go.
Now here’s a question I can’t find an answer to: If Boston had finished with a worse record than Cleveland but still tied with the Yanks, would the Red Sox have automatically NOT made the playoffs (without a deciding championship game to break the tie)? If THAT is true, it would have been a disgrace, and I’m relieved it didn’t happen.
E-mail me or comment below if you have any light to shed. (Don’t forget that comments are moderated, in part to prevent a profanity-filled brouhaha between Sox and Yank fans.)
_______________________
UPDATE: David Lefort at Boston.com explains:
hy did the Yankees clinch the AL East today even though both New York and Boston can finish with the same record if the Red Sox win tomorrow? Here’s the explanation:
If Boston wins tomorrow (which would eliminate the Indians), the Sox will tie the Yankees with a 95-67 record. In that case, head-to-head records are used because the Yankees (East champion) and Red Sox (wild card team) would have already clinched playoff spots.
Why is the head-to-head record (the Yankees lead 10-8) used instead of a playoff game?
A one-game playoff game is only staged when there is a postseason berth at stake, not for postseason seeding purposes.
Got it?
To answer your question - NO
They actually explained this on Sportscenter on Friday when there was a potential of a three-way tie between New York, Boston and Cleveland.
If all three teams were tied, then Boston and New York would have had to play a playoff game to determine who “won” the AL East. Then the loser would have had to play Cleveland to determine the “wild card” team. In other words, there would have been two “one-game” playoffs.
If Cleveland end up with a better record than both New York and Boston with NY and Boston tied, then there would have been a one-game playoff between NY and Boston to determine the winner of the AL East.
The reason there is no playoff game now is because both the Yankees and Red Sox would make the playoffs regardless of who won the “one-game” playoff since Cleveland finished behind both New York and Boston.
It might not be fair, but that is how they explained it on Friday.
Comment by Dave Wissing — October 2, 2005 @ 10:18 pm
#1 Hedgehog–That’s a relief. I guess the logic is that the disadvantage of having to play an extra game just to determine the wild card (vs. other teams that get to rest their ace pitchers, etc.) outweigh any “finality” anal-retentive guys like me would like to have about who the REAL division champ is.
Back to the central question: Is this the first time a championship has been decided in baseball where a game wasn’t played to decide who the champion is? I think the answer is yes.
Comment by TBlumer — October 3, 2005 @ 12:08 am