Quote:
Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Why is this home field advantage any different than any other? Hell, what about the fucking hill and pole in centerfield (dumbest thing I've ever seen) -- how's that for home field advantage?
But I don't think any of that is any different than playing games at, say, Fenway or Minnesota's Dome. That's the beauty of baseball. Different fields, different dimensions. Same game. Boston can put together a team to try to take advantage of the Green Monster. The Yankees can try to load up on lefty pitchers and hitters because of the short porch in left. Grow the grass long if you have team speed, keep it short if you don't. Etc. I don't think many people would think it cheap if Houston had won because they cashed in on the advantages of their home field.
TM
|
You know, I actually anticipated this argument, and I get your point, but I think it's different. The fact that Houston can
change between an open-air configuration and a dome, for whatever actual or perceived advantages that may give them, is a bit different from the Green Monster or the short porch in Yankee Stadium. It would be more akin to
changing the configuration of an outfield wall prior to a series (like moving it out if you knew you had a speedier team and the other team was more home-run hitters).
I realize that isn't a perfect analogy by any stretch of the imagination, but I think it's a little different than your examples, which is why I asked the question in the first place. The only other place I can think of where this issue would come up is Sky Dome or whatever the fuck they're calling it now, and as I recall, nobody made the closing of the roof an issue there because it was much more likely that the weather would be cold/inclement in October.
I don't know -- it just seemed like kind of a pussy thing to make issue of, and I wonder if it would have been made an issue if the Astros weren't behind.
