This is, ah, kind of embarrassing. I know it's early in the game, but 5-0 against a bunch of AAA Canadians?

Al Leiter comes in and can't get anyone out? I don't believe it! He's got to be one of the top 200 pitchers in America I would think. There's no way those crappy Canadians can hit him!

Probably not a great idea to allow Vernon Wells to start in a game against his curent team....doesn't appear that he is trying too hard to run anything down in the outfield...

The US is close to getting mercied by Canada. Wonderful.

Are you supposed to take joy in the Canadians pummelling us? And I'm no anti-American liberal either, I'm in the Marine Corps!

Question: Run differential matters, right?
I mean assuming Canada holds on, and then loses to Mexico, who, along with the US, beats South Africa, then 3 teams would be 2-1. And then the tiebreaker is run differential, I think, so this could be a deadly defeat if the US doesn't score a few runs...(Although don't you all think Ortiz is destined to win the thing for DR in the 8th or 9th of the finals?)

I remember when we (Canada) won the relay race, with Donovan Bailey as anchor, all we heard was "The US lost the race". Maybe, Canada won the race? Instead of things going wrong for USA, how about things are going right for Canada? Did the Russians lose in 1980, or did USA win? Let's give credit where credit is due!

....annnnnd it's a game again

The tie breaker is head-to-head, followed by earned runs, which is just silly.

This is starting to annoy me, because the braodcasters in the PAN/CUB game kept mentioning it, and it was mentioned in the updates below, Panama is still NOT eliminated. If Panama beats Holland, Holland beats Cuba but loses to Puerto Rico (and Panama), and Puerto Rico beats Cuba, Puerto Rico advances (3-0) with Cuba/Holland/Panama at 1-2. That means earned runs allowed would decide who goes on of the remaining three. A few comments above me pointed out, you could win 2 games and not advance in one particular scenario, while you could lose 2 games and still advance in another.

I should clarify in the post above that what is annoying me is that the broadcasters kept insisting Panama would be eliminated with a loss, which is not the case.

The tiebreakers is earned runs, but there's a mercy rule? Stupid.

Being non american, nor canadian, I'm happy for the following score (so far): Red Sox 8 (Stern, 4RBI incl. amazing ITP HR; Varitek, Grand Slam) - Yankess 0.

We ran on Francoeur's arm? If you do come back to beat us, we deserve to lose for such a boneheaded move. That and leaving Begg in so long.

Adam Stern is awesome.

I was born an American, but I'm an O's fan by choice... how 'bout that Adam Loewen for Canada?

In Philadelphia, that's a home run.

(from WBC wb site) Tiebreakers are: first, head-to-head, then "fewest runs allowed divided by the number of innings (including partial innings)", and then fewest earned runs. Makes a little more sense...
P.S.: Stern, amaaa-oooh! (still, great Adam performance)
P.S.S.: So far, so good for this WBC

Now I realize why the Red Sox have tried so hard to keep Stern through the Rule 5 Draft. This kid has got tremendous potential, great speed, and spectacular defense. He might have just won the fifth outfielder role today. (Well, that plus they need to keep him to complete his Rule 5 requirements.)

Pretty sweet eh? That's what I'm talking aboot.

So for the tiebreaker -

If Mexico beats South Africa, but loses to Canada, then the U.S. is in with a win.

If Mexico wins both games, the U.S. is in with a win over S.A. because the U.S. beat Mexico in the first game.

So Mexico need the U.S. to lose to S.A. to continue? Is that right?

Wow, this is pretty surprising!

If Mexico beats Canada and both Mexico and th US beat SA then all three teams will be 2-1 and the tie breaker will be earned runs because head to head the each beat one of the others. The US has given up 8 ER and Canada has given up 14. So as long as the US beats SA and allows less than six runs they will beat Canada in the tie breaker even though they lost the game today.

That seems unfair. I hopefuly Canada will beat Mexico and avoid this situation

"It might be the biggest victory for the Canadians since the French and Indian wars!"

Since Canada was French at the time, Canada lost that war...

[/history nerd]

Why is the first tie breaker runs given up and not run differential? Does anyone know how they came to this sort of thinking? Based on the little I saw of Japan/Korea this could be a good tie breaker for whomever gets out of the U.S./Canada/Mexico group (Helping the U.S. make it to semifinals maybe?). This line of thinking is a reach to say the least....anyone have better thoughts?

Only runs allowed in head-to-head games count in the tie-breaker. So assuming US, Canada and Mexico are all 2-1, runs allowed to South Africa are irrelevant.

Regarding the ER as a tiebreaker, my guess is that it is something that could be potentially manipulated (scorers pressured to give errors in certain situations) in the case that it comes into play with a team that needs it, EXACTLY what could play out with the U.S. not controlling its own destiny now...Well, at least that's the conspiracy theorist in me. I can't think of anything better.

I don't see why this is such a shock to anyone. Baseball is a game where a Triple AAA team can go against a World Series Champ and beat them 10% of the time. The Canadian team was no worse than some lineups that the D-Rays and Royals have floated the past few years and those teams win games. It's only logical that Canada can beat just about anybody on any given day. Let the US play even a five game series against the Canadians and the US takes that series 99% of the time. The closer than talent level games between Canada and South Africa and Cuba and Panama proved this.

I fully expect a few more upsets like this before the end of the Classic. If it happens in the semi's with the wrong teams it could spell the effective end to the WBC. A Italy vs Japan final would make the WBC a complete joke.

If Mexico beats Canada and scores at least 3 runs, then Mexico and USA will advance. USA has allowed 8 runs after 2 games, Mexico 2 Runs after 1 game, Canada 6 after 1 game.
Therefore, If Mexico scores 3 earned runs against Canada, they will have allowed 9 runs and be eliminated.
The question is, how do you decide who is the pool B winner, and who is runner up. After the two teams are decided, does it go by head-head record, in which case USA beat Mexico. Or does it still go by runs allowed. Mexico will be the pool B winner if they beat Canada and don't allow more than 6 runs. What a crazy system.

I think you can have tie games (is it after 14 innings?). In that case the USA could advance with a tie vs RSA if Mex and Can tie as well. Then Can advances with a 2-0-1, Mex and USA are at 1-1-1. USA advances by having beaten Mex. Unlikely, but yet another fun possibility. March Madness II!

The tiebreakers are Byzantine, but they're inevitable when each team only plays three games. I shouldn't say this, but what's to stop Canada and Mexico from "arranging" a 1-0 win for Mexico that sends both teams into the second round? You wouldn't even have to do an explicit deal. Just play the game so that nobody scores for the first eight. Then let Mexico score one run in the ninth.

Uh, we'll cross that bridge if and when we get to it. Meanwhile, Buck Martinez gets the Idiot of the Millenium award for bringing Al Leiter into the game in a critical early-inning situation. Actually, Martinez already won that award by putting Al Leiter on the team in the first place. Mike Bauman shows no mercy on this decision over at mlb.com.

The WBC is turning into more fun that I expected.

Good point, Jason...there's a reason why baseball is a series game. Good for Canada...and yeah, Al Leiter? Yikes. Keep him off the mound, please.

The WBC is definitely a lot of fun to watch. So far the pitcher usage seems pretty good too. Fingers crossed that nobody's arm comes flying out of its socket.

Before everybody thinks I'm a wild-eyed conspiracy nut, let me say that I think both Canada and Mexico will play honestly tonight and go all out for the win.

But let's say the game is scoreless after the first three or four innings, which of course could happen. Don't you think some baseball officials might start squirming? And if the scoreless string goes on for six or seven innings, those officials might really start to wonder.

And if the game ends 1-0 Mexico...well, I don't want to think.

At any rate, I won't miss the game tonight on mlb.com.

A lot of this was just true grit: how often can a lineup of 7 left-handed players survive 3 innings against Dontrelle Willis? Our boys did well, and played a strong game to be fair: Cyr/Mathieson/Green shutting out the U.S. for the final four innings, Lowen shutting them out for the first three. But Willis and Leiter weren't on their games, and if they were, this game would have gone very different.