The entire major baseball league is expected to worry about the future in the new world of the institutionalized game of Commissioner Rob Manfred.
The suspensions linked to the game published this season with two launchers from Cleveland Guardians represent what should be considered as part of an existential crisis for MLB. And yet, the league acts as if the incidents were isolated and have limited consequences. On the contrary: it is not something that can be fixed with periodic surveys and individual suspensions, even if they are for life.
MLB placed the Emmanuel Clase’s rescue ace on non -Didisciplinary leave on Monday during his investigation into the possible violations of the League game policy. The suspension of Clase occurred three weeks after the league did the same way as the right -hander Luis L. Ortiz, one of Clase’s teammates. MLB would have limited Ortiz after connecting two throws which he threw out of the striking area to a large quantity of playing activity on the question of whether these throws would be called balls or would cause a successful striker. MLB hires outside companies to monitor games and report irregularities with betting.
The two players are faced with a life ban if they are guilty.
Major leagues’ ball players know the rules on Baseball. They are not supposed to do it, and if they get caught, they lose their jobs. This has not changed since the 1920s, when MLB codified the language against the staff of the league betting on baseball following the Black Sox scandal. The relevant rules are displayed in each clubhouse, and each season, the league speaks with each team of the reasons why the bets on the matches are false and what would be the consequences. No player can claim that they were sick on day 21 was taught.
Here is what has changed: MLB’s relationship with the game, because individual states have legalized it. The Paris activity has become so widely accepted socially that the MLB itself is associated with legal playing companies in financial agreements which generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues for the League. For decades, fans (or players) had to take problems finding an illegal bookmaker that would act on MLB games. Although the illegal game still exists, bettors do not need to look further than MLB programs to find information on how to start bets.
No matter how much MLB money generates from the legal game – or could – it is not enough for that.
The omnipresence of legal bets on baseball has created an environment where it is clear that more players feel comfortable enough to be sucked. A year ago in June, Manfred issued suspensions to four players for violating the rule 21. A fifth player, Tucupita Marcano, was banished for life for betting on Pittsburgh Pirates Games on their rals.
No one has accused these players, Nor Ortiz and Clase, of taking money to lose matches from the World Series express as the players of Chicago White Sox would do it in 1919. But that does not make the accusations against modern players less serious. There is no ethical difference between a player who takes a bridge pot to lose a match in the World Series and a boost to throw some shots of the striking area in a regular season match. Even with the latter, there is no reason to accept that part of the performance of a game player is honest or authentic. At the very least, a player throwing grounds outside the striking area with the game as a motivator has literally made more difficult for his own team to win.
Another consequence that MLB is so comfortable with the game is the way he affected players and their relationship with fans. Several stories have been told about the increase in verbal violence players – and even their families – suffered from players who made a bad bet or two. Literal death threats have been made in some cases. All abuses are amplified by social media, which are associated with a legal game to create a toxic environment which is clearly not in the best interests of the players.
Excellent system you have here, the commissioner.
It seems to escape Manfred that the reason why the work of the baseball commissioner is because the owners wanted to save the ruin league during the Black Sox scandal. Manfred alone cannot be held responsible for states that make the legal game – although until its regime arrives, the MLB seemed to spend a lot of resources by pressure against it.
It seems obvious that Manfred did not think of the game throughout. Speaking of this, earlier this year, Manfred withdrew Pete Rose from the permanently ineligible list of the League, even if Rose admitted that he bet on the baseball matches in which he played and managed. Manfred also withdrew Joe Jackson and the other White Sox players who died from 1919 from the prohibited list. His rationalization was that, since Rose and the others died, they were no longer a danger to the League.
It is questionable on several levels, since Manfred’s action looks very much like a posthumous forgiveness – even if it does not intend that way.
Manfred has been dealing with a visit to MLB clubs in recent times where he is trying to persuade the players they should be pleasant to the hypothetics that the owners of the ceilings want to implement. It is in the best interests of the players, you see, and would prevent the lockout that the owners predict after the 2026 season. Good times seem to be ahead in MLB.
Worse still that a potential lost season, the whole future of the MLB is at stake because of the game. It will be difficult – or even impossible – to put the genius of the game in the bottle. It will also be expensive, with legal games with a new source of income that takes place like others have dried up.
It would be difficult to give up this.
A bit like dependence on the game.
Good insight, I appreciate the balanced approach. The problem is real and must be addressed with open dialogue and a clear plan; this type of critique helps push the league to do better. I think there is room for improvement and we can unite around better policies.
Stop with the melodrama. The claim of existential threat is not supported by the current data, and blaming Rob Manfred alone is lazy. Yes there are issues, but the league has shown capacity to adapt when pushed, like rule experiments and broadcast deals. If fans want change, they should propose concrete reforms instead of grand accusations.
Love this discussion, it hits a nerve and its real. The MLB game crisis is an existential threat, and Rob Manfred does not take it seriously. Leaders must bring fans, players, and owners to the table with a clear plan, not more vague promises. We need transparency, accountability, and real timelines for fixes, or we lose trust for good.
Comical take here: Manfred as villain, fans as damsels in distress, the game as a dystopian drama. If they want me to panic, they must offer snacks, good camera angles and a reasonable game pace. Until then, I will watch my team anyway and pretend the existential threat is just a weather forecast.
Im not sure this crisis deserve all doom talk. The post blows things out of proportion and relies on fear to gain hits.
Fantastic the crisis is existential while we still have enough time to watch three innings of a rain delay; perfect logic, maybe its a meteor shower of hot takes. Anyway I hope we get a transparent plan sooner rather than later.
I challenge this black and white view. Yes there is frustration, but the grief cannot justify tearing down the current leadership without offering viable alternative. If critics want real reforms they must present actionable options, costs, and implementation steps; otherwise its just venting. Rob Manfred deserves scrutiny, but not blind demonization.
Irony alert: crisis existential while stadiums fill and the postseason still moves; sure panic sells. Maybe the real threat is over reacting to every strike call or schedule delay.
This is sooooooo scientific. Rob Manfred does not take it seriously because he is busy counting cash and playing golf. Seriously though, the post uses fear mongering to push a simple agenda. Maybe if they propose a real plan people would listen rather than rant.
Not convinced, seems like fear mongering to me. The article exaggerates the stakes to attack Manfred; the league is not doom; they are experimenting with changes and progress is slow but real. I would like to see actual data before we call this existential.
Factual point: we need more context about how broadcast rights and attendance correlate with brand trust. The phrase existential threat is rhetorical, not metric; if numbers show long term declines we should escalate response. The league should publish performance dashboards and explain how decisions impact players and fans; that would help.
Final thought: if this really is existential, someone should tell the baseball to stop stealing bases and start stealing our attention with better pace and better humor. Rob Manfred is not my grand wizard of baseball; he is just a guy with a tough job; lighten up and fix the games, please.
Here is some data the article could reference: attendance trends, streaming deals, minor league pipeline, and scheduling experiments. The concept of existential threat is loaded; we need to measure impact over multiple seasons not just headlines. If the league wants trust, it must publish metrics, explain decisions, and invite public feedback.