It’s naïve to think that we – and that truly includes all of us, from the fans to the ball boys, to the players to management – don’t have some kind of responsibility to grow the game. And obviously some can do more than others. And that’s okay. As hardcore fans, sometimes our part is to put up with inconveniences. We have to tolerate the hideous City Connect jerseys because, who knows, it might turn some tourist into a fan.

And we have to tolerate the schedule being tinkered with so our team can play in a sub-standard field to bring the game overseas. We have all of these great players from Latin America and the Far East. It would be fun if Europe turned into a hot spot of future MLB players.

Personally, having to endure a Yankee announcer interview Chase Utley tested my tolerance to its limit. But national broadcasts always leave a lot to be desired. Was it really any worse than a generic FOX or ESPN broadcast? Tim Kurkjian is annoying on U.S. telecasts, too.

What did you think of the London Series? The poll question that follows is about what was most annoying but while my opinion is that London was a necessary evil, perhaps your opinion is different. Did you take any positives from the trip?

What was the worst part about the London Series?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

5 comments on “Poll: What was the most annoying thing about the London Series?

  • ChrisF

    The fact is baseball growth seems like an imperative where the home fan base continues to age. It is fun to see the game going overseas in these various ventures. I pretty much have accepted that there will be tradeoffs to make this happen and like you said, its a thing to accept.

    To me the player and season disruption is a real downer, just for two games. If they dont want to play favorites then play 4. As for national broadcasting, well we very much know for real fans its wildly bad.

    The London series drew more than 100,000 fans to London Stadium, and the Mets did their darndest to show the worst and best of the game. But London Stadium is very much a cookie cutter built for the 2012 Olympics. Even for football, the stadium leaves a lot to be desired compared to most other Premier League grounds. It reminds us that purpose build stadiums are essential and just how bad the 60-70s stadiums really were (for the most part).

  • T.J.

    As you stated, I get the desire to grow the game. I agree with Lindor in that there was too much down time. Play 4, bookended with off days. By far the most annoying was the announcers. They couldn’t find anyone besides the Yankee play by play guy…really? For an international event like this, MLB should allow a local cable broadcast for each participating team. A 10am start time was pretty poor as well.

    The Mets can’t fill their ballpark even for Straw’s retirement, so seeing the Mets play to a big crowd that wasn’t totally against them was nice.

  • José Hunter

    I didn’t dislike the choices above sufficiently

    My vote goes to 7 AM PDT start on Sunday morning

  • NYM6986

    Growing the sport makes sense from a practical standpoint but there is no way a team will end up in London. It’s too far away. Yes, flying there for a game is the same as flying to the west coast except there are no other teams to play over in Europe. If they want to grow the game they first need to deal with teams with crappy attendance like the Rays who last year aversged nearly 18K a game, the A’s who averaged a little more than 10K a game, and the Marlins who averaged 14K a game. This year the Rays are down to 16K, the A’s 7K and the Marlins 12K. We could add the Royals and Chisox to poor drawing teams. Solidify your existing franchises or move them to new cities before bringing new teams in.
    Playing in England is a nice distraction, but I think it messes with their timing and see no plus as far as the Mets are concerned.

    • Brian Joura

      You don’t need to put a team in Europe to create more fans there. The NFL has no plans to put a team there and yet they play several games in Europe every year.

      MLB has always pitted cities against one another, typically to get a new stadium. And the Rays and Royals have new stadiums planned and the White Sox are on that path, too. The A’s owner botched the stadium negotiations in Oakland, so they’re getting ready to move. But he’s botching the new location, too. Which leaves the Marlins. Ownership has been so inept that it’s hard to blame the fans for not showing up more.

      Meanwhile, expansion is coming. A 32=team league just makes more sense than a 30-team one, to say nothing of the expansion fees the existing owners would reap. There’s splitting revenue with two more teams but that’s something that can be worked out. We saw in college sports where the ACC added three teams with the newbies receiving just partial revenue shares at first and not receiving a full share until their 10th year in the league.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 100 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here