Baseball -- potential historic World Series
Discussion
Seems like the biggest sport story that no one over here is talking about. Cleveland (last win: 1948) have* made it to the World Series, and the Chicago Cubs (last win: 1908, last World Series appearance: 1945, Curse of the Billy Goat and all that) are getting close. These are, by far, the longest droughts in baseball, and the two of them could be facing each other in the World Series.
This would be like Leicester winning the league over Spurs, or Portugal winning the Euros having got past Wales. It continues 2016's "unlikely winner" story.
(In anticipation of comments involving the word "rounders", or disputing the idea that a north American competition can rightly be called a "world" series: Please consider such events as the "world" snooker championship.)
* or, as Americans would say, "has"
This would be like Leicester winning the league over Spurs, or Portugal winning the Euros having got past Wales. It continues 2016's "unlikely winner" story.
(In anticipation of comments involving the word "rounders", or disputing the idea that a north American competition can rightly be called a "world" series: Please consider such events as the "world" snooker championship.)
* or, as Americans would say, "has"
thinkofaname said:
Seems like the biggest sport story that no one over here is talking about. Cleveland (last win: 1948) have* made it to the World Series, and the Chicago Cubs (last win: 1908, last World Series appearance: 1945, Curse of the Billy Goat and all that) are getting close. These are, by far, the longest droughts in baseball, and the two of them could be facing each other in the World Series.
This would be like Leicester winning the league over Spurs, or Portugal winning the Euros having got past Wales. It continues 2016's "unlikely winner" story.
(In anticipation of comments involving the word "rounders", or disputing the idea that a north American competition can rightly be called a "world" series: Please consider such events as the "world" snooker championship.)
* or, as Americans would say, "has"
Any player from, any country in the world is allowed to play in the World Snooker Championship - the 2016 semis had players from 4 different countries This would be like Leicester winning the league over Spurs, or Portugal winning the Euros having got past Wales. It continues 2016's "unlikely winner" story.
(In anticipation of comments involving the word "rounders", or disputing the idea that a north American competition can rightly be called a "world" series: Please consider such events as the "world" snooker championship.)
* or, as Americans would say, "has"
How many countries have teams that are allowed to play in the World Series?
TEKNOPUG said:
How many countries have teams that are allowed to play in the World Series?
Two. If your point is that the powerhouses of, say, Bulgarian baseball are not allowed to compete, then you are correct. My view would be that the competition still only involves the best teams in the world.TEKNOPUG said:
thinkofaname said:
davepoth said:
Apart from the ones in Cuba.
A country whose existence isn't even mentioned by World Snooker.
TEKNOPUG said:
They're free to enter the competition though, should they so desire? As are participants from every other country in the world.
They're free to enter only if World Snooker allows it. You have to be registered with them in some way. You can't just turn up and say "I'm from Zambia and therefore I have a right to compete in the World Snooker Championship."It's the same with baseball. The governing body could allow teams from other countries. There's no rule against it, and indeed they have already included foreign teams.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff