Baseball off the Olympic Games?

[gyb13]

In August, a special commission recommended the exclusion of three sports, including baseball, to the International Olympic Commttee. The exclusion would take place as of the 2008 games, to be held in Beijing.

Today, Bob DuPuy and Don Fehr met with Aldo Notari (president of the International Baseball Federation), Marty Mankamyer (USA Olympic Committee), and Mike Gaski (USA Baseball Director) to discuss measures they can take to prevent the IOC from excluding baseball.

On October 3rd, several world baseball directors will meet in Switzerland with Jacques Rogge, the IOC President.

The proposal will be analyzed on November 25-26 in Mexico City by the IOC's executive committee.

[Max Power]

OK, they play baseball in the U.S., Canada, Cuba, Japan, Taipei, Australia, Korea, Venezuela, Panamá, Brazil, the Netherlands, Italia, España, France, the Czech Republic, China and the U.K.

Really - see: http://www.baseball.ch/

What's a matter, it's not global enough for the IOC?

[JamesI]

Why would they want to remove Baseball? That doesn't make sense.

[Duque]

Why remove an actual sport, but allow figureskating and horse jumping and other silliness to continue?

One hates to sound political, but could any of this possibly be because of the America-centric (the continents, not the countries) nature of baseball? You don't see a lot of European, African, or Asian (outside of Japan and the Koreas) teams competing.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Max Power
OK, they play baseball in the U.S., Canada, Cuba, Japan, Taipei, Australia, Korea, Venezuela, Panamá, Brazil, the Netherlands, Italia, España, France, the Czech Republic, China and the U.K.

Really - see: http://www.baseball.ch/

What's a matter, it's not global enough for the IOC?

And Belgium, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Austria, Switserland, the Dominican Republic, etc

[MDC]

I don't think that Baseball should ideally be at the Olympics, but when one considers the "events" that are still in the programme then it is ludicrous to seek to eliminate Baseball.

As Max says, there is baseball played in Europe(and it is growing in popularity and participation numbers)so now is hardly the time to take away the opportunity to allow this process to lead to an event where these developing countries have a chance to participate at a decent level and to encourage more folk to watch and take part. It could be a painful measure for Baseball funding in the UK, where the Olympic status of the sport guarantees a decent level of central government funding.

Well... there's 2 big reasons to cut baseball out of the Olympics.

First of all, there's no real history of Olympic baseball. Baseball didn't even become a medal event until 1992 in Barcelona.

Also, and this is the big one, unlike Hockey, Soccer, and Basketball, the three other major team sports played in the Olympics, the upper level of talent hasn't gone to the games.

Really... if the Olympics don't recognize the superior talent in a sport, there's no reason for the event.

Think about it, the Dream Team plays in basketball, the Hockey tournament was one of the most exciting ever, the soccer comes close to World Cup level. Even Tennis has the Williams sisters and Sampras from the US, and Hingis, Rios, and some of the other big talent.

Baseball has none of that. They sent the offensive sinkhole of a 1B from the Twins, and tried to pass that off as serious talent. Watching amateurs has it's place - the recognition of the very best athletes in the world, however, needs to go to the very best athletes in the world, not the best amateurs or 2nd tier major leaguers. Pat Borders???

The only reason I can see for the exclusion of softball is that it's so closely tied to baseball.

[Skip]

My impression was that the Olympics didn't exclude MLB, it was that MLB and/or the players didn't want to disrupt the season by allowing the players to go.

that's true, Skip - but if the very best players don't go... what's the point?

[Skip]

I absolutely agree there. I just thought from your first post, that you were putting the onus on the Olympics ("If the Olympics doesn't recognize ..."), but realize that can be read more than one way.

Personally, I think it's a terrible shame, because a REAL baseball world cup would be as exciting as any event ever, and the Olympics would be a great outlet for it.

I may be wrong here, but aside from the American Minor Leagues, I don't think any professional leagues give players the choice to play in the games (The Korean and Japanese Leagues come to mind).

And you're right... looking back, a better choice of words would have been "If the results of the Olympics do not recognize...."

[MDC]

Originally posted by CpUltravox
Well... there's 2 big reasons to cut baseball out of the Olympics.

First of all, there's no real history of Olympic baseball. Baseball didn't even become a medal event until 1992 in Barcelona.

Also, and this is the big one, unlike Hockey, Soccer, and Basketball, the three other major team sports played in the Olympics, the upper level of talent hasn't gone to the games.

Really... if the Olympics don't recognize the superior talent in a sport, there's no reason for the event.

Think about it, the Dream Team plays in basketball, the Hockey tournament was one of the most exciting ever, the soccer comes close to World Cup level. Even Tennis has the Williams sisters and Sampras from the US, and Hingis, Rios, and some of the other big talent.

Baseball has none of that. They sent the offensive sinkhole of a 1B from the Twins, and tried to pass that off as serious talent. Watching amateurs has it's place - the recognition of the very best athletes in the world, however, needs to go to the very best athletes in the world, not the best amateurs or 2nd tier major leaguers. Pat Borders???

The only reason I can see for the exclusion of softball is that it's so closely tied to baseball.

While it is true that the status of baseball in the Olympics is a relatively recent one, that in itself does not mean that it should be excluded. The fact that the top players from the MLB don't appear should hold little pull one way or the other; the existence of Baseball as an Olympic event should not stand or fall on whether (predominantly)North Americans are disappointed at the lack of their favourite players. The Olympic ideals may have gone to hell in a dustcart but surely there is room for a sport which will help other nations to further the game of Baseball???

Incidentally, the level of soccer at the Olympics is nowhere near that of the World Cup, as it is mostly young players who participate. Few, if any, of the established players in football(soccer)make an appearance at the Olympics.

Apologies if this sounds a little bitter, but the continuation of Baseball as an Olympic event is vital to developing Baseball nations.

[Skip]

I also would like to see baseball continue in the Olympics, though as it is now it's not a "must see" event to me, like the T&F and swimming events are.

Originally posted by MDC
The fact that the top players from the MLB don't appear should hold little pull one way or the other; the existence of Baseball as an Olympic event should not stand or fall on whether (predominantly)North Americans are disappointed at the lack of their favourite players.

It absolutely should hold that pull. If the very best sprinters chose not compete in the 100 yard dash, I would advocate the elimination of that event as well. What's the point of having the event, if no one can break 10 seconds?

[MDC]

If you will forgive me for saying this, the idea that Baseball should be booted because A-Rod and Bonds don't show up to the Olympics is a very American-centric point of view. Before the Barcelona games the NBA superstars didn't show up in huge numbers. Should we have booted Basketball before that?

Baseball development in some countries outwith the Americas will grind to a halt if the sport is tossed from the Olympics. Any sporting organisation that willingly sanctions such a thing, while leaving synchronised swimming in the event needs to be overhauled from top to bottom. The baseball I have seen at the past Olympics has been largely entertaining. In truth, it has often been more entertaining than some other sports where the top stars have competed but have failed to live up to standards. Which, to me at least, is interesting.

It all gets back to encouraging continued development of the game outwith the major territories. If that isn't as important as another Bonds home run or another US gold then there is little I can say.