YAY or NAY #1: Roofs in Baseball

USATODAY.com“…to lose a game in a pennant situation like that because of the roof indicates why there's a crying need for a new ballpark in this area, regardless of where they put it.”- Joe Maddon

I honestly can’t blame Joe Maddon for being livid. A can of corn pop-up that even the worst fielders from Backyard Baseball could catch lost him a game. Nothing would tick me off more than having something other than the players decide the outcome of a game.

And this is why in my opinion baseball should be played outdoors. Now I understand that domes are made to make sure that rainouts don’t occur. But realistically, how many rainouts do most teams have in a given year? About 5-10 at most. Is it really worth risking the outcomes of games in order to prevent 5-10 rescheduled games?

Obviously I realize that situations like what happened to the Rays don’t happen often, but when it does, especially in the middle of an intense pennant race in the best division, it can cost a team a playoff spot. However, the elimination of roofs could (and most likely would) lead to a huge increase in rain outs in places like Tampa Bay and Minnesota. This in turn could anger fans as they would have to get rain-checks for their rained out games. Would it be foolish to get rid of roofs to stop an occurrence that doesn’t happen often?

So what do you guys think?

Yay, roofs should be eliminated because they can potentially impact a game’s outcome or Nay, roofs are necessary to make sure that there aren’t excessive rainouts.