MLB All-Star Game: Home Field Advantage and Voting System Debate

Fred DillonContributor IJune 3, 2008

The mid-summer classic is a time for a match-up between the best in the American League, and the best in the National League.

The past few years the All-Star game has counted toward home field advantage in the World Series. This is great and all, but what about the way players are selected?

Fans vote for the All-Star game players. This system favors the teams with the largest fan bases, and those teams are more likely to see a good deal of their players performing at Yankee Stadium in July, i.e. Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox.

I try to vote for the best players, but as a fan, I tend to lean toward my hometown Reds. Major League Baseball also makes it a point to have at least one player from each team in baseball to attend the All-Star event.

This has not sparked much controversy. This may be in a large part due to the amount of sweeps we have seen in the World Series as of late.

Am I the only one that can agree that this system is flawed?

I think Major League Baseball should have two options; take the home field advantage away from the All-Star game, or put the best players according to stats and maybe even managers' votes.

Do you really believe that someone playing on the Royals or the Rockies really cares about the World Series right now?

The fact is players that are not in contention could really care less about who or what team gets the four games at home in the fall classic.

Don't get me wrong, I love competitive baseball, but the bottom line is to have your best players playing if it is going to mean something to somebody.

If it were up to me, the advantage of the extra home game would be lifted, and the All-Star game would once again be a casual event for the best players in the league voted on by the managers and Major League baseball. If it does not count, I have no problem with the "at least one player from each team" rule.