Thoughts on rigging the All-Star voting to force change

A few weeks ago, a Met blogger put forward a case for Met fans to vote Collin Cowgill for the 2013 All-Star Game because his name will be on the ballot for the duration of the voting period. This despite Cowgill being demoted to Triple A on May 3rd, after 19 games and a .157 batting average.

The reasoning is simple, to once again prove to The Powers That Be that fan voting for the All-Star Game, especially in the age of internet voting, is a flawed process that needs to go. Especially in light of Pablo Sandoval‘s victory in the fan voting to start last season’s All-Star Game as the National League’s third-baseman ahead of David Wright.

While the process is flawed, and the idea of internet ballot stuffing, as well as the marketing wizards at MLB having players whom ordinarily would have no business even MAKING the squad, let alone be voted as starters be “hyped” for fans to vote for them via social media (now the pushes come with Twitter hashtags #AnnoyingAsHell) and in-between innings pushes at the ballpark is a good start to a case for change, this is an example of two wrongs not making a right (no pun intended).

True, seeing Collin Cowgill’s name among the NL Outfield vote leaders could be one way of causing change. However, in the past the All-Star Game has seen Mike Schmidt retire on May 29th while in midst of a decline started the previous year, still garner enough votes to be selected as the All-Star Game starter. As well as many situations to mention where a player has been on the shelf for months, time enough for someone to overtake them (as opposed to having a commanding lead with a handful of weeks to spare and being put on the DL), and yet somehow they’ve managed to be selected by the fans (and the aforementioned blogger has suggested voting Jose Reyes for AL Shortstop, whether this is meant for screwing the system, voting for an ex-Met, ensuring Jeter is not elected the starter or a combo of all three is not known). But there are several reasons this is a flawed way of messing with the process.

First, it is unknown how many people in the general mass audience know about this, but in recent years MLB HAS been trying to resolve popularity contest issues by having the players vote as well. With the winners, or player runner-up getting selected if both votes are the same. It still can be seen as a popularity contest, but at least it is giving the peers a chance to vote as well. It also greatly reduces the chance for a manager to stack the bench and pitching staff (players vote for a good portion of starters and relievers) of his “guys.”

Second, with the amount of various injuries that crop up, and whatnot, the chances of a player that truly deserves to be at the All-Star Game these days of not being selected in one form or another. Nor should it really be that big of a deal with whom starts, which is the reason for this campaign in the first place. Would it have been a nice feather in Wright’s cap last year to be the starter? Sure, but it would be far more greater to see David Wright start his first postseason game since Game 7 of the 2006 NLCS!

And finally, at the end of the day, its still fan interaction. No matter how obnoxious the voting campaigns online and in the stadium for Lucas Duda or Daniel Murphy might be, it still is part of baseball’s effort to get fans involved. So, especially if younger fans are more and more involved in social media, then isn’t something for them worth the odd “wrong choice” here and there. And generally, as in the Sandoval-Wright case, sometimes it is a case of writing a wrong that happened in an earlier case.

Not to mention, it is one thing to rail against a flawed system and cause chaos for the sake of causing chaos, but rather than going for anarchy, why not suggest ways for it to be fixed, besides being done away with entirely.