The Philly Phanatics

Everyone loves a struggle between evenly matched competitors or teams. Rivalries are just more interesting to all fans when both teams are competitive, rather than in those years when one team is a clear favorite. We all live for these types of games and matches. Ali-Frazier comes to mind. Even this year's marathon Wimbledon final between Nadal and Federer. Long drawn out games heighten drama.

This year's MLB All-Star Game was one of these struggles. Both teams were pretty balanced and made for an extremely competitive game. And, while the AL maintained their unbeaten streak of 12 consecutive all-star games, there has to be a limit to this insanity in terms of lenght of the game.

The MLB All-Star game is a long and drawn out affair to start, but factoring in ties after nine innings and the possibility of extra innings, the games reach absured lengths. This year's game lasted 15 innings before the AL pulled out the win. Every pitcher had been used by both teams, including starting pitchers who were between starts and could be worn out from throwing 100+ pitches only a couple days before the game.

The Rays told AL manager Terry Francona to try to limit the use of starter Scott Kazmir. The NL was trying to keep the number of pitches thrown by Brandon Webb and Brad Lidge, among others. Both managers have since admitted that if the game had continued, they each would have put a positional player on the pitchers' mound (AL: J.D. Drew; NL: David Wright).

This brings me to my main point: why does the All-Star game mean so much? I disliked the tie in Milwaukee years ago, as did most fans, but I see no reason to jepardize a pitcher's health to win home field advantage for one of the teams in your league. There is only incentive for a select few players on each side who could potentially be in the running for a playoff spot. In addition, teams must worry about the health of their marquee players in such long games.

The All-Star game should have a meaning because it gets all of the league's best players together in one ballpark. The entire idea of having this game decide home field advantage is ludicrous. Why do we need to create a reason to make this game meaningful? And one personal gripe, I'd love to stop seeing Fox commercials for the All-Star Game that say, "This time it counts..." Frankly, most fans care more for the fact that they get to see a lineup reminiscent of Murderers' Row than the home field advantage factor.

Get rid of this contrived meaning for the All-Star Game. It only serves to be a marketing tool for Fox and a reason to have a reliever go three innings in a game in mid-July and jeopardize his team's second-half chances. Put this one down as a Bud Selig "two-wrong-don't-make-a-right" idea.