A woman was knocked unconscious during a fight between A’s and Giants fans outside AT&T Park following the A’s-Giants game yesterday afternoon. The fight took place on King Street, which is just outside the park. The woman was actually attempting to break up a fight between two men, but ended up being punched in the face and hit her head on the sidewalk. Her condition is unknown, but she was unresponsive when she was taken away in an ambulance.
Last fall a man was killed during a fight near AT&T Park following a Dodgers-Giants game. And, of course, Giants fan Bryan Stow was brutally beaten outside of Dodger Stadium following the Opening Day game in 2011.
We’ve heard the back and forth between players and owners on money, on safety, on the size and the shape of the season. But not until now have we heard just how little baseball Major League Baseball and its owners actually want: 48 games.
That’s all they want, at least if they have to, as agreed, pay players their prorated salaries on a per-game basis. That’s the report from ESPN’s Jeff Passan, who writes this morning on the state of the current negotiations.
Passan’s article has a lot more than that. It contains a number of financial calculations about how much teams say they stand to lose per game played under any given scenario. That said, given the near total opacity when it comes to owner finances, we have no real way to evaluate the claims. The players have a bit more access to league financials, but even they are reported to be unsatisfied with what the owners have shared in that regard. So, while interesting, nothing Passan presents there is really convincing. It stakes out the positions of the parties but doesn’t really tell us much about the merits.
Which is to say that a 48-game schedule sounds like either (a) a bluff aimed at getting the players to offer financial concessions; or (b) a declaration from the owners that they’d prefer almost no baseball if it means that they have to lose any money. The whole “we’ll happily take the benefits of a good market but won’t bother if there’s a chance we might lose money” approach I’ve lambasted in this space before.
We’ll see soon which it is.