Columnist Ron Kantowski: Metric would be hectic

Thursday, July 18, 2002 | 9:47 a.m.

Ron Kantowski's insider notes column appears Tuesday and his Page One column appears Thursday. He can be reached at ron@lasvegassun.com or (702) 259-4088.

When all is said and done, greedy players, owners and agents -- especially the agents -- will be blamed for wrecking sports.

But that's only because North America has yet to join the rest of the world in converting to the metric system.

I was watching a soccer game Wednesday from England when the announcer mentioned a "hopeful strike from 10 meters." I had no point of reference. I guess it is the equivalent of three-point distance in basketball, although to be honest, I'm not sure how far that is, either, only because everybody marks it off differently.

In high school, I had a chemistry teacher who warned his sixth-period class almost daily that the metric system was coming. It should also be noted he had green-yellow hair, like the Joker, and that virtually all of my milestone class reunions have come and gone. Yet they still measure the distance from the pitcher's mound to home plate in feet (60) and inches (6).

It's a good thing we're so slow to adjust. Because if we ever do go metric, you'll not only be able to throw the records out the window, as they say every time Army plays Navy, but the record book as well.

In baseball, for instance, it won't be 375 feet from home plate to the outfield fence in the power alley. It'll be 114.3 meters. Randy Johnson's 98-mph fastball will be known as 157.71 kilometers-per-hour gas. The distance it will travel from the mound to home plate? 2.28 meters, 15.24 centimeters. And Sammy Sosa will probably miss it by 1.6 kilometers, instead of a mile.

The impact would be even more significant in football. You've heard of the 100-yard war? Forget it. The metric equivalent is 91.44 meters. Not even Grantland Rice could make that sound poetic.

On 3rd-and-1 -- er, .91 (meters) -- the Steelers would hand the ball to Jerome Bettis, hoping to achieve another 1st and 10 -- er, 9.1. He might even come up short by centimeters or millimeters, but not inches.

Mile High Stadium in Denver would have to change its name, though 1.6-Kilometer Stadium just doesn't have the same ring.

In basketball, you'd still need a big man in the middle -- only he'd be a 2.1-meter man, not a 7-footer. And I'd love to hear Chick Hearn try to do the math on one of Kobe Bryant's 20-footers, which actually would originate 6.09 meters from the basket.

Almost every sport -- with the possible exception of hockey -- would be affected. Hockey is hard to define using linear measure. Or for that matter, a rulebook.

In boxing, Michael Buffer would announce fighters' weights in kilograms, rather than pounds. Two-Ton Tony Galetta hence would be known as 1.81-Metric Ton Tony. Let's see how Larry Merchant handles that one.

The ultimate test of man and machine? Not the Indianapolis 500 anymore. The Indy 804.65.

Track and field might regain some of its former popularity, as most of the running events already are known by meters. But Bob Beamon's long-standing record in the long jump would go into the books at 8.83 meters, 6.35 centimeters. Call me old-fashioned, but I still think 29-2 1/2 is easier to remember.

And if you don't agree that switching to the metric system would totally screw up sports, consider horse racing.

What the heck is a furlong, anyway?