Foreign All Stars?

The final fan voting tally will be announced July 3rd, or tomorrow in Japan.

The last provisional tally (as of June 26th) had:

Central League

Starter - Kenshin Kawakami - Chunichi
Long Reliever - Kyuji Fujikawa - Hanshin
Closer - Marc Kroon - Yokohama
Catcher - Atsuya Furuta - Yakult
First Baseman - Andy Sheets - Hanshin
Second Baseman - Atsushi Fujimoto - Hanshin
Third Baseman - Hiroki Kokubo - Yomiuri (who won't play, due to injury if selected)
Shortstop - Takashi Toritani - Hanshin
Outfielders - Tomoaki Kanemoto - Hanshin, Kosuke Fukudome - Chunichi, Norihiro Akahoshi - Hanshin

Pacific League

Starter - Daisuke Matsuzaka - Seibu
Long Reliever - Tsuyoshi Kikuchihara- Orix
Closer - Takahiro Mahara - Softbank
Catcher - Tomoya Satozaki - Chiba Lotte
First Baseman - Michihiro Ogasawara - Nippon Ham
Second Baseman - Mitsuru Honma - Softbank
Third Baseman - Toshiaki Imae - Chiba Lotte
Shortstop - Muneori Kawasaki - Softbank
Outfielders - Tsuyoshi Shinjo - Nippon Ham, Yoshitomo Tani - Orix, Naoyuki Omura - Nippon Ham
Designated Hitter - Kazuhiro Kiyohara - Orix

Source: Sanyo All Star Game Results [in English]

Hanshin didn't totally take over the voting this year, though there are still a couple guys who don't quite deserve to be there. I would've rather seen Nioka at short.

As for the Pacific League, I'm very surprised to see Kikuchihara and Honma there. I guess it's fine. Kikuchihara had an amazing season last year, and second base in the Pacific League has been pretty slim pickings since Iguchi left. Nishioka definitely deserves the nod over Kawasaki. Kiyohara doesn't deserve to be there, but I guess the fans don't know if this is his final year or not.

Finally, there has to be some better options than Tani out there. What about Wada? Benny's not doing bad. Inaba is doing better than him. I'd even take Teppei over Tani. This isn't the .350 batting Tani of a few years ago.

I'm rather stunned that Ogasawara has gotten more votes at first than Matsunaka so far. I don't see Ogasawara challenging for the Triple Crown. Aside from that, there seems to be a sentimentality involved in these votes (Shinjo and Kiyohara in particular).

I'm not shocked with Shinjo as this is his last year.

What I'm more shocked is that Kiyohara is getting more votes than Matsunaka, as Matsunaka is listed as a DH. Though the margin between Kiyohara and Matsunaka is very slim. Kiyohara (574,475) and Matsunaka (543,669).

So far catchers in the Central League has been overall weak and Abe has been injured most of the year, and that is why Furuta has made it. Plus he entered the season as a player-manager. Tanishige, Yano, Furuta, and Ishihara/Kura have struggled. It's a very close race again between Furuta and Yano.

We'll find out soon as the results are supposed to be announced on the 4th, which is today.

Looking at the stats last night, I gotta say that I think Nakajima and Kataoka of the Lions were snubbed. They're having great years. I hope they get picked as reserves.

Must be bias.

Wow, Furuta, Kiyohara, Tani, Shinjo. None of them deserving. I guess it's a popularity vote. How many foreign guys can be on the team?

Um, it's amazing how someone posts a question "How many foreign guys can be on the team?" and so many people take it as a fact that there is a limit. I've never heard of a "gaijin quota" for the all-star games. What's wrong with y'all?

I see today is the last day for voting. Where can you vote online in English?

I think it is totally rediculous to put a limit on foreigners making the All-Star team. I hope I am right when I say I think the Japanese fans want to see the best players in the game, regardless of race. Can you imagine MLB saying only 4 non-US citizens could make the MLB All-Star team? That would be a joke, not to mention it would be quickly identified as racist.

Well stated, in the USA where I am from this would be considered racist.

- ... in the USA where I am from this would be considered racist.

Foreign player quotas aren't necessarily racist - they would only be racist if a specific racial group or groups were excluded. The NPB restictions are aimed at all foreigners, and seek to insure that the rosters are mostly made up of local players. Quotas exist in other pro sports all around the world, and even in the good ole U.S. of A. - Major League Soccer for example.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with quotas (I'll leave that for another day). I'm just pointing out that there are other quite valid reasons why a foreign quota might be imposed. Racism isn't always the reason, and it's wrong to jump to the conclusion that it is.

In my opinion, it is racist. The decision is made based on race. They only have a quota on non-Japanese players.

I would be curious to know what quotas the other sports around the world have. What is the All-Star quota in MLS? I can understand that there are quotas for the sports leagues as far as rosters for the regular season, but not for an All-Star Game. I'm not sure how you could argue that a foreign quota on selection of All-Star games is not fundamentally racist.

In any case, I think it sometimes allows underserving Japanese players to play while deserving foreigners watch on TV, simply because they are not Japanese.

The KBO(Korean Baseball Organization) and CPBL(Chinese Proffessional Baseball League) are the same way. They both have a quota on foreigners on who can be selected to the All-Star game.

Remember, foreigners in Japan, Taiwan, and Korea are going to watch native born players, and that is more or so why the quota is there. Not saying I agree with the quota.

NPB isn't Major League Baseball, and doesn't want to be open to internationalization of the sport by foreigners, or there wouldn't be a foreign quota limit. NPB fans want to see Japanese players first in NPB.

Why many times, it does allow undeserving Japanese players play, this isn't also the major reason either. Many players are fan favorites, such as Furuta, Shinjo, and Kiyohara. The same thing happens in the Majors with the MLB All Star Game. Many players are voted in because they are fan favorites.

I'm sorry, but it's not based on race - it's not even based on nationality actually. Foreigners are not subject to the quota if they've played a certain number of years in Japan (Tuffy Rhodes for one). And a foreign player who plays at high school level and rises up through the ranks that way would also not be subject to the quota.

I agree with you that there's no reason to have an All Star quota, and that it does allow undeserving Japanese players to play. You're quite right there.

But to call it racist is another matter. I suspect it's simply a case of the NPB not giving the matter much thought when setting the All Star rules. All they've probably done is extended the quota to the All Star games without considering whether it's justified or not. Stupid? Yes. Racist? Not necessarily. That's all I'm saying.

Allowing or not allowing players to join an All-Star game based on race is racist. Allowing only a certain number of foreign players per team is also racist, whether or not it is also prevelant in Korea, Mexico, China, USA, or wherever.

I understand the basic reasoning behind it in Japanese baseball as Mr. Kranepool pointed out. (I agreed.)

To me, it is still racism. I'm not saying there is some kind of plot against foreigners. Doesn't need to be blatant or sinister, but it is what it is, regardless of intent.

Did Tuffy Rhodes even play in Japan after he was exempt from the "gaijin" regular season quota? If he did, I don't think he made the All-Star team.

Have there been many players to come up through the high school level and rises up to the ranks to achieve All-Star status that has had no Japanese ancestry?

In the end, I am just saying that the rule is terrible and the best players are not all at the game.

The United Nations uses a definition of racial discrimination laid out in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and adopted in 1966:

...any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.. [Wikipedia Reference]

That's right, it's not based on race or nationality. If someone is raised in Japan, attends high scool or university and rises up through the ranks, they're not considered Gai-Jin. Anyone who does not do this will be considered gaijin. Period.

Oh yeah, except if one of your parents happens to be a certain race or nationality; i.e. Michael Nakamura - Nippon Ham (nothing against him of course).

Not racist? Please.

I would be curious to know what quotas the other sports around the world have.

Until 3-4 years ago, one of the most successful and prominent leagues in the world, had restrictions on the number of non-EU players. I'm talking about the Premier League, a league that is arguably the most popular sports league anywhere in the world.

Yes, I know the restriction is not there anymore, but it did exist for decades.

NPB has been increasing the foreigner limit slowly over the past decade. It cannot be expected that the rigid system in Japan will change immediately and that foreigners will face no restrictions.

Nevertheless, the Premier League had the restrictions in place so that a majority of the players were "locals." The same is true for the NPB. To label it as rascism is nonsense. I've given you your "evidence." Let it rest. (Sorry, I havn't provided a link, didn't have time, but I'm sure you can use Google to see what I'm talking about.)

There are two races, uchi and soto in this case, but to dismiss the gaijin restrictions as racism is simplistic.

If there is a limit on gaijin per team, there has to be a limit of gaijin All-Stars, right? Right? Otherwise, it would be the end of the world as we know it for NPB.

It can be rationalized away as:

-NPB is an inferior league, so we have to protect our inferior players and industry from foreign competition

-Gaijin will spoil the purity of the Japanese game if we are overwhelmed by them.

-The fans won't pay to see gaijin players.

-General fear of foreigners

-NPB is run by dinosaurs

-Racism

This is the way it is. Can someone offer another plausible explanation?

Well there is a limit per team anyway of 4 active foreign players so it's logical that it should be extended to the all star games. As for foreign talent its great to bring them in and learn from them but if you want to develop local talent and your own style and have your young people playing in the sport you need some kind of limit. Most sports have some kind of limit on the number of foreign players at any one time and this is not a particularly onerous limit.

It was interesting to see Erik quote the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

As with any international treaty, there are exceptions, and indeed if you study the treaty as a whole (rather than just take a snippet from Wikipedia), you'll realize that differential treatment is justified under the convention when applied "pursuant to a legitimate aim," and that the differential treatment is proportional to the achievement of that aim.

In this case it can be argued quite reasonably that the aim of NPB is to assist the development of Japanese baseball, and that a foreign quota helps to achieve that aim. As Christopher mentioned, a limit of four active players (the roster can include more) is not particularly onerous and thus proportionate. Besides, we're talking about elite sportsmen here, not the run of the mill gaijin who are denied employment on the basis of their nationality.

The convention was never intended to apply to elite sports in this manner, and it's ridiculous to suggest it does. Keep your powder dry for more deserving cases of racial discrimination. This issue hardly deserves all the attention it's getting.

Don't you think NPB, having just won the WBC, is highly developed and does not need this kind of assistance any longer?

A quota by its nature denies elite sportsman of employment due to their nationality. The "legitimate aim" arguement should not be applied to discrimination based on national origin. Any bigot could self-righteously claim their legitimate aim very easily. Racism is never legitimate.

I agree there are far more deserving cases of racial discrimination and it is fruitless to discuss it here.

- Don't you think NPB, having just won the WBC, is highly developed and does not need this kind of assistance any longer?

No - but that's not the point. I'm not saying I support (or don't support) the quota. I'm simply saying the quota is not necessarily racist.

- The "legitimate aim" arguement should not be applied to discrimination based on national origin. Any bigot could self-righteously claim their legitimate aim very easily. Racism is never legitimate.

I agree - racism is never legitimate. But what's racism? The convention quoted by Erik includes a very broad definition of racism, but it does allow for exceptions. It is true that the "legitimate aim" provisions are sometimes abused by bigots and others, and the UN has said this many times. But hey, welcome to the world of international law.

But consider: domestic laws are passed every day all over the world that could be regarded as racist under that very broad definition quoted by Erik. Immigration laws, anti-terrorism laws, the right to own property, the right to vote, even certain affirmative action measures. These all have legitimate aims, and that's what the treaty recognizes.

- In this case it can be argued quite reasonably that the aim of NPB is to assist the development of Japanese baseball, and that a foreign quota helps to achieve that aim.

My point was that NPB doesn't need assistance to develop Japanese Baseball, as it is already quite developed and won the WBC. Using your reasonable argument, one could reasonably conclude that a quota is no longer necessary.

As for the UN definition, that organization is so politically two-faced and milktoast that it is not surprising that its pronouncements have more holes than swiss cheese.

- ... one could reasonably conclude that a quota is no longer necessary.

Indeed. That's a reasonable assumption. But I was limiting myself to the question of whether or not the quota was racist.

- As for the UN definition, that organization is so politically two-faced and milktoast that it is not surprising that its pronouncements have more holes than swiss cheese.

Ah yes, but you've got to realize that the UN consists of sovereign states, and the UN doesn't have any real power itself. But you're so right. That "definition" of racism is so broad to be virtually meaningless as a definition. It works as a general statement of principle, though. And that's how it should be regarded. It's up to individual states, not the UN, to pass laws using the convention as a guide. The UN simply doesn't have the power (and nor should it) to tell a sovereign state (let alone a baseball league) what to do and how to do it.

Anyway, whether one agrees with the quota or not, I believe it's going too far to label it racist. That's all I'm saying. If you believe the NPB quota is racist, then you must also regard the MLS quota as racist, too.

I don't think the quota is racist, but rather, it is exclusionary. It is what it is. One cannot absolutely (nor should in most cases) apply one cultural perspective or norm to another. I think it is best to leave it to NPB fans to tell management their feelings toward such quotas, if it is indeed an issue. If there is a strong feeling against quotas by NPB fans, the league will have to change the rule.

This discussion has continued for so long and it is surprising that nobody has mentioned the primary reason that the quota is in place. (I am referring to the 1-gun roster, not the All-star quota).

The Japanese players, just like many other employees around the world, are part of a union. I can't remember the official name of the union, but it is something along the lines of: Japanese Baseball Players Association.

It is these players who object to the expansion of the foreigner limit on the top roster of each team. The more gaijin entering Japanese baseball, the less time these players get to play, resulting in a smaller paycheck for these guys. It is also interesting to note that gaijin players are not part of the players association.

Thus, even if NPB approved to increase the quota or foreign players, it would most likely have to gain approval of the Players Association.

So, once again, it is not about racism. It is just to provide the Japanese players a better chance of earning their livlihood. A certain number of players are usually drafted each year to offset the number of players released or retired at the end of each season. However, allowing an unlimited number of gaijin into NPB would result in Japanese players (who are part of the union) to eventually be released if they do not play as well as the gaijin.

OK, so it is about protectionism?

Why aren't the gaijin allowed to be members of the union? If they aren't union members, does that make them scabs?

The point that just having won the WBC, NPB can dispense with their quota is interesting. However, it is taking it too far to say that it denies elite sports people employment. At any time a Japanese team can have four non-Japanese on a baseball field (out of nine players). This is hardly onerous and unreasonable.

The assumption of racism though is misplaced. To be racist you would need to exclude just black people or Venezualans say. NPB does not exclude any race in its restrictions or place any restrictions on foreign players apart from the quota (which is common in other sports). As a result it has developed its own unique way of playing baseball.

It should be remembered that playing baseball for a team is not an automatic right. Likewise working overseas is not an automatic right. In NPB a foreign player has a good chance, but as so many have shown, they do not have the ability to succeed. NPB made a legitimate choice to protect its domestic talent and continue to develop its own style.