About 60 million "of the more than 300 million" MLB All-Star votes counted so far have been invalidated, which is consistent with the league's usual cancellation rate of about 20% every year, according to Blair Kerkhoff of the K.C. STAR. This is the first year in which balloting is "being conducted entirely online at MLB.com using email addresses," and eight Royals players were slated for the starting lineup as of last week's count. MLB President of Business & Media Bob Bowman said, "No vote is being counted that was invalidated" (K.C. STAR, 6/20). MLB Network’s Ken Rosenthal noted that "sounds like a crazy big number, but it actually is in line with what has happened in past years." There are "two more updates before the vote is finally announced," and some other teams are supposedly "now responding, but they’re going to have to respond pretty fervently to catch up to what Kansas City has done." MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred "has been pretty open about this saying, ‘If this doesn’t work, I’ll re-visit it at the end of the year. We could look at another system.’" Rosenthal: "If eight Royals are elected, I would bet that he looks at another system” (“MLB Tonight,” MLB Network, 6/21). Manfred said he believes the current All-Star voting system is "an important form of fan engagement" and that there are "protections" built in to ensure the best players appear in the game. Manfred: "Fans have a way of correcting (irregularities) by the end of the voting" (SACRAMENTO BEE, 6/20). Indians manager Terry Francona said of the system, "What we have to realize is that the way the system is now, this is not the baseball world saying who is the best at every position. The All-Star Game was made for the fans, and that means they get part of the vote. Since those are the rules, I commend the Royals fans. I think if you talked to the Royals, even they would admit they probably don’t deserve to have eight All-Stars. But this is the system" (BOSTON GLOBE, 6/21).
CALLS FOR CHANGE: In Denver, Patrick Saunders wrote MLB in the future should "let the players vote for the starters from their own league" and let managers "select the pitchers, as they do now." The league could then "let the fans vote for a few final positions to fill out the all-star rosters" (DENVER POST, 6/21). In Toronto, Raju Mudhar wrote fans could call this year's voting "democracy in action," but most people are "calling it a farce." The reaction -- outside of K.C. -- "has been mostly negative," and even Manfred, "while urging critics to wait for the final vote, said he might be open to changes to the system next year" (TORONTO STAR, 6/21). In Boston, Christopher Gasper wrote the "real fraud here" is "coming from MLB." The league "can’t incessantly sell us on the idea that the All-Star Game is more than a meaningless midsummer exhibition, trumpeting its status as the sacred determinant of home-field advantage in the World Series, and allow the starting lineup selection process to resemble a high school prom queen popularity contest." If the game "matters, then MLB has a responsibility to make sure the best and most deserving players are in the starting lineup." Fan voting "should not be the sole criterion of All-Star starters in any sport," as it is "too unreliable" (BOSTON GLOBE, 6/21). In Baltimore, Peter Schmuck wrote either MLB has to "tighten the voting protocol and take a marketing hit or it must unlink the All-Star Game from the World Series." Schmuck: "I would choose the latter and I'm not alone" (Baltimore SUN, 6/21). In Pittsburgh, Ron Cook writes, "The process stinks." The voting issue is "one more reason the game shouldn’t be played." The league "won’t eliminate" the All-Star Game because there is "too much television and promotional money at stake." But the players would rather "have four days off in July than travel to and play in a meaningless exhibition game." Managers and players under the current system "pick the All-Star pitchers and reserves," but they "should pick the starters, as well" (PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE, 6/19).
