Quote:
Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
I just think they should be consistent. Either you have a better record than a team, when tied, based on h2h records or you don't. Why look at it differently based on whether both teams have a shot at making the playoffs?
Isn't that exactly what would have happened if Cleveland, Boston and New York ended up with the same record?
TM
|
This is some crazy shit, but here is a link to some hepful rules on the subject.
http://www.all-baseball.com/ref/tie.html
From the site, here is the relevant info:
Major League Baseball Playoff Tiebreaker Info
1. When there is a tie for a Division Championship and the breaking of the tie will result in the losing team nonetheless being the Wild Card team, the Division Champion shall be:
a. the team with the better record in head-to-head competition. . .
2. When there is a tie for a Division Championship and the breaking of that tie will result in the losing team(s) not being the Wild Card team, the tie for the Division Championship shall be broken as follows:
a. Tie between two teams. The League President shall conduct a coin flip to determine the site of a playoff game between the two teams, the game to be played the day after the conclusion of the championship season. The winner of the game shall be declared the Division Champion.
Had all three teams tied with the same record, situation one would apply. The reason no game would be played in the event all three of these teams had tied is because the loser of the "Divisional Championship" would then had been one game behind Cleveland in the standings for the Wild Card. So, they settle the "Division Championship" which is meaningless (except for home field advantage) by the tie-breaker, and they allow Cleveland and Boston (had Cleveland won yesterday) to play one game for the Wild Card.
I think situation 2 would apply only in the case where New York or Boston had the same record atop their division, but the Wild Card team (from another division obviously) had a
better record.
