[新聞] 明星賽爭議 中信領隊為球迷抱不平
中華職棒明星賽票選結果12日公布,專業人士投票比重大,引發熱烈討論;中信兄弟領隊
劉志威呼籲,聯盟應該站在球迷的角度思考,否則未來怎麼說服球迷參加聯盟活動。
這次爭議最明顯的例子是中信兄弟洋投伍鐸(Bryan Woodall)獲得球迷48萬票,但是納
入專業人士票選之後,不敵8萬票的桃猿洋投史博威(Zeke Spruill),由史博威贏得明
星賽先發。
劉志威表示,各隊都是靠球迷經營,如果聯盟主辦的活動抹煞了球迷的投入,傷害球迷的
信任,遊戲規則就要檢討。這次聯盟雖有事先告知,但結果造成風波,未來建議可以先討
論。
劉志威建議,聯盟應思考球迷想看什麼樣貌的明星賽,設計出合適且創新的遊戲規則;如
果必需納入「專業人士」票選,他建議可以專業人士票選一隊,純粹球迷票選一隊,相互
對抗。
劉志威表示,球迷花時間、金錢參與票選活動,不外乎想支持自己喜歡的選手,在規則不
夠清楚明白的狀況下,讓數十萬球迷每一票變得渺小,數百名專業人士的一票又異常巨大
,「以後有什麼立足點,說服球迷參加聯盟活動?」
職棒聯盟今天也在官網提出說明,指出最終的計算方式是由專業人士投票的「排名」佔
40%加上球迷投票「排名」佔60%,得出的加權積分最接近1者勝出。聯盟說明,實際參與
投票的專業人員包括教練、球員、媒體記者。
http://www.cna.com.tw/news/aspt/201706130479-1.aspx
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 118.168.205.136
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Baseball/M.1497363475.A.1BC.html
推
06/13 22:18, , 1F
06/13 22:18, 1F
→
06/13 22:19, , 2F
06/13 22:19, 2F
→
06/13 22:19, , 3F
06/13 22:19, 3F
推
06/13 22:20, , 4F
06/13 22:20, 4F
推
06/13 22:21, , 5F
06/13 22:21, 5F
推
06/13 22:22, , 6F
06/13 22:22, 6F
→
06/13 22:22, , 7F
06/13 22:22, 7F
推
06/13 22:23, , 8F
06/13 22:23, 8F
→
06/13 22:23, , 9F
06/13 22:23, 9F
推
06/13 22:23, , 10F
06/13 22:23, 10F
推
06/13 22:23, , 11F
06/13 22:23, 11F
推
06/13 22:23, , 12F
06/13 22:23, 12F
→
06/13 22:24, , 13F
06/13 22:24, 13F
推
06/13 22:24, , 14F
06/13 22:24, 14F
推
06/13 22:24, , 15F
06/13 22:24, 15F
推
06/13 22:24, , 16F
06/13 22:24, 16F
推
06/13 22:27, , 17F
06/13 22:27, 17F
→
06/13 22:28, , 18F
06/13 22:28, 18F
推
06/13 22:29, , 19F
06/13 22:29, 19F
→
06/13 22:29, , 20F
06/13 22:29, 20F
→
06/13 22:30, , 21F
06/13 22:30, 21F
推
06/13 22:31, , 22F
06/13 22:31, 22F
推
06/13 22:32, , 23F
06/13 22:32, 23F
推
06/13 22:33, , 24F
06/13 22:33, 24F
推
06/13 22:33, , 25F
06/13 22:33, 25F
推
06/13 22:33, , 26F
06/13 22:33, 26F
→
06/13 22:33, , 27F
06/13 22:33, 27F
推
06/13 22:33, , 28F
06/13 22:33, 28F
推
06/13 22:33, , 29F
06/13 22:33, 29F
推
06/13 22:34, , 30F
06/13 22:34, 30F
→
06/13 22:34, , 31F
06/13 22:34, 31F
推
06/13 22:34, , 32F
06/13 22:34, 32F
推
06/13 22:34, , 33F
06/13 22:34, 33F
→
06/13 22:36, , 34F
06/13 22:36, 34F
→
06/13 22:36, , 35F
06/13 22:36, 35F
→
06/13 22:36, , 36F
06/13 22:36, 36F
→
06/13 22:38, , 37F
06/13 22:38, 37F
→
06/13 22:38, , 38F
06/13 22:38, 38F
→
06/13 22:38, , 39F
06/13 22:38, 39F
推
06/13 22:39, , 40F
06/13 22:39, 40F
推
06/13 22:42, , 41F
06/13 22:42, 41F
噓
06/13 22:53, , 42F
06/13 22:53, 42F
→
06/13 22:54, , 43F
06/13 22:54, 43F
→
06/13 22:54, , 44F
06/13 22:54, 44F
推
06/13 22:56, , 45F
06/13 22:56, 45F
→
06/13 22:57, , 46F
06/13 22:57, 46F
推
06/13 22:59, , 47F
06/13 22:59, 47F
推
06/13 23:15, , 48F
06/13 23:15, 48F
推
06/13 23:16, , 49F
06/13 23:16, 49F
→
06/13 23:17, , 50F
06/13 23:17, 50F
噓
06/13 23:21, , 51F
06/13 23:21, 51F
→
06/13 23:22, , 52F
06/13 23:22, 52F
推
06/13 23:30, , 53F
06/13 23:30, 53F
推
06/13 23:31, , 54F
06/13 23:31, 54F
→
06/13 23:31, , 55F
06/13 23:31, 55F
推
06/13 23:36, , 56F
06/13 23:36, 56F
推
06/14 00:28, , 57F
06/14 00:28, 57F
→
06/14 00:28, , 58F
06/14 00:28, 58F
推
06/14 00:29, , 59F
06/14 00:29, 59F
→
06/14 00:29, , 60F
06/14 00:29, 60F
→
06/14 00:29, , 61F
06/14 00:29, 61F
推
06/14 00:43, , 62F
06/14 00:43, 62F
推
06/14 00:55, , 63F
06/14 00:55, 63F
→
06/14 01:00, , 64F
06/14 01:00, 64F
→
06/14 09:42, , 65F
06/14 09:42, 65F
推
06/14 13:15, , 66F
06/14 13:15, 66F
噓
06/15 11:41, , 67F
06/15 11:41, 67F
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文:
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 3 篇):