This may be the last straw. My mouse's x-axis no longer functions, for some reason, so it looks like I will be purchasing a new mouse. This is just the next in a series of purchases I've made in the past year in an effort to revive my sagging computer: 128MB of RAM, new DVD/CDRW, and new Hard Drive being the previous ones, as well as installing XP. As such, and with computer prices being very low, it is about time I purchase a new one. Until I do, I'm attempting to install Linux on my old hard drive and make this computer dual-boot (although there is no slot for my other hard drive) just for the experience and of course for the games. Might as well completely break this computer before purchasing a new one.

Purchasing may be a problem, however, since I'm also in the market for a car. As it is now I must enlist the help of my girlfriend whenever I need to get groceries, and if none of my friends are around then I'm pretty much trapped in my apartment, which has lately had a bit of a roach problem. The problem is, I'm not exactly pulling in 50 G's per year or anyt- BODY:

[warning, long-overdue post about Major League Baseball]

After last night's All-Star game debacle it is about time for me to start railing on the powers that be in the baseball world. I agree with Dave that they were correct in ending the game after 11 innings, but this should not have been a hastily-made decision between frames. Why was there no policy for this situation already in place? If there were a maximum game length of 11 innings set long ago, which makes sense in this age of "play everybody even the players that don't deserve to be there", the fans would have no reason to be shocked and outraged.

This brings up another issue. The only reason that the managers play every single guy is to "appease the fans", but the starters are the ones that the fans actually voted in. If millions and millions of fans vote to see Ichiro play center field, I'm sure they would rather see him play 7 or 8 innings than see him get his one token at bat only to be replaced by Randy Winn in the 3rd inning. Tampa Bay fans may be unhappy that Randy didn't get to play, but they couldn't have wanted to see him too much since he was not even close to one of the leading outfield vote-getters. Bringing one player from every team is fine, but if the fans in a player's own city didn't even vote for him then there really is no mandate from the fans that he should play in the game.

Fixing this problem would also fix the problem of who to pick for the MVP. It's tough to name one player as the difference-maker when every pitcher throws only one inning and every hitter gets at most 2 at-bats, especially when the game ends up 9-2 or some other lopsided score.

But the All-Star game is the least of baseball's problems right now. There are of course the ubiquitous labor "negotations" which are about as productive as the Israel-Palestine conflict for the same basic reason: neither side wants to give any ground. The owners are a group of lying, scheming businessmen who say one thing ("salaries are too high") and do something completely different ("enter stupid bidding wars so that Mike Hampton gets paid $25 million to play poorly in only 20% of his team's games), and somewhere along the line the Player's Union became an all-powerful entity that controls its own pay (salary cap, free agency, and arbitration) and can skirt federal laws (steroids).

The steroid issue is an especially ridiculous one. If you apply for a job at Wal-Mart, you are expected to undergo a drug test. Part of your employment contract states that you will remain drug free and management has the right to send you for a random test at any time. If you are a baseball player, however, you are also expected to not take illegal substances, but if you are caught as a minor leaguer they slap you on the wrist and as a major leaguer your employers are not even allowed to test you. I don't even see how this is an issue, it is currently against the law to take steroids. Players are worried about false-positives and leaked results, so instead they get a massive witch-hunt. Brady Anderson goes from a light-hitting leadoff hitter to a 50-homerun guy in the span of less than a year, must be steroids. Ditto for Luis Gonzalez, must be steroids. And the worst part is that even the players who aren't using steroids can't get tested because that would be "going against the union". Therefore Gonzalez, who doesn't look much like the prototypical steroid user must endure ridicule and rumor all to cover up the Jose Cansecos and (most likely) Albert Belles of the world. Sure there are ways to fool the tests, but does that mean we should just allow players to do whatever they want? Why do I have follow federal laws but Barry Bonds doesn't? Apparently the Computer Science Researcher's Union isn't powerful enough.

Unions were established to protect workers from unsafe work environments and ensure that they received wages to at least match their cost of living. Strikes were held to get rid of things like 16-hour work days, child labor, and exploitation of foreign workers. Baseball players are not being exploited, overworked, or underpaid, so why is their union so powerful?

And the owners are no better. Every statement they make is part of an agenda. "We're losing money," they whine, then pay Alex Rodriguez $253 million. Part of the problem is that the Player's Union won't allow a salary cap (there are so many starving football players on the street who can't afford to pay their gas bills apparently), but the owners are equally guilty. They build new stadiums, then try to make taxpayers foot the bill (when was the last time Wal-Mart threatened not to open a store in your town unless you built them the building for free?). They pay athletes exhorbitant salaries, then raise ticket prices to cover them (when was the last time the price of bread went up at Schnucks because there was a really good bagger working that day?).

Both sides know that a strike would be detrimental to the game, yet neither side is willing to make any concessions. It doesn't help that representing the interests of baseball is not someone elected by owners and players alike but an owner who filled the vaccuum in the commissioners office temporarily then hung around so long that the other owners let him stay. He couldn't remain an owner, of course, so he gave up his controlling interest to his daughter. Think there's an agenda in there somewhere? Nah, couldn't be. It doesn't help that Commissioner Selig is to public relations what eToys was to internet commerce. "Fans, I want you to enjoy baseball, so therefore I will threaten to obliterate your home team, veto trades that make me look bad and might make one of my contraction candidates a better team, but allow all salary-dumping trades to the Yankees because they prove my competitive imbalance point. Oh yeah, and we need to speed up games so let's make arbitrary changes to the rules of baseball about number of warmup pitches and time between batters but for heaven's sake keep those 3 minute commercial breaks between innings!" The commissioner should be someone impartial to both sides and elected by both sides who looks after only the interests of baseball, not a scheming, lying, uber-owner.

In short, here are my sweeping solutions to baseball's problems:
-Fire Bud Selig, and replace him with someone voted for by players, owners, and umpires in a general election.
-Implement a salary cap.
-Require mandatory random steroid testing as well as testing for other drugs.
-Restrict the signing-bonuses of draft picks so that small-market teams can afford to sign their picks.
-Bring back cheap first-come-first-served bleacher seats for fans.
-Keep the DH rule the way it is.

And most importantly, especially to Red Sox fans...
-Contract the Yankees