Does he still wear that stupid bow tie, by the way?

Tucker Carlson on Michael Vick:

“I’m a Christian. I’ve made mistakes myself. I believe fervently in second chances,” Carlson said. “But Michael Vick killed dogs, and he did in a heartless and cruel way. And I think, personally, he should’ve been executed for that. He wasn’t, but the idea that the president of the United States would be getting behind someone who murdered dogs? Kind of beyond the pale.”

You know, I don’t like Vick either. I hate what he did, and if he were to end up on the Bills’ roster, I would end my fandom almost immediately. But execution? Come on, now. And to advocate execution in the same breath of claiming to be a Christian? Tucker, I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Vick did a horrible, disgusting thing. But he also paid the price that our legal system decided to exact from him. Saying he should have been executed? That’s just silly. But then, Tucker Carlson is a pretty silly person.

Share This Post

Bring on the Bucs!!!

Yeah, right…but as I write this, it’s about ten minutes since the San Francisco Giants won the World Series. I didn’t pay a great deal of attention, but I always try to be watching when the final out of a World Series takes place, and tonight was no exception. A few thoughts:

:: The game ended around 10:35 pm, Eastern Time. Wow. For baseball, that’s ridiculously early, innit? I’ve seen World Series games decided after midnight in recent years.

:: And since it ended early, Giants pitcher Tim Lincecum won’t be out quite as late on a school night! (Seriously, the guy looks like he’s 14.)

:: FOX Sports does a great job with its World Series and baseball coverage. They really do. One thing I always love about them is the way they have a camera on just about everybody on the team that’s going for the win in the 9th, so when the final out happens, they’ve got footage of every single player’s reaction as they see the last out and start jumping for joy, screaming, and charging for the pile-up on the pitcher’s mound. That’s always very cool.

:: They also had the obligatory footage of a crowd’s reaction in San Francisco as the final out happened. It was the usual stuff — a crowd of mostly young-ish people suddenly jumping up and down and screaming and hugging as their hometown boys won the title. The camera then panned across the crowd, and suddenly there’s a little old lady, maybe all of five feet tall and around 80 years old, jumping and screaming and looking for someone to High-Five with the best of ’em. What a great moment!

Congrats to the Giants!

Share This Post

The Piratical Epoch continues….

Roger talks about baseball. I used to love baseball — maybe even more than I loved football. I loved the game’s slower pace, the way a game unfolded rather than took place. I loved how long the thrilling moments of tension would last, and the way that in the hands of skilled spostscasters, those moments would almost seem cinematic in a way that the tense moments in football often are not. In a football game, when your team is trying to drive for a winning score in the final moments, it’s still Come to the line, set, snap the ball. But when watching a baseball game, in a tight spot in the 9th inning — well, let’s say your team is holding a one-run lead with one out in the 9th. Your team’s closer is on the mound, and he’s a pretty good closer as closers go, but he’s got one run already on base and the next two batters up are the best hitters the other team’s got. The way this might unfold on teevee? Instead of football’s “Watch the guys come to the line and snap the ball, always from the same angle”, in baseball you’ll often get a series of shots:

Closeup on the pitcher as he leans forward to see the signs.

Long shot so we can see the catcher.

Quick cut to the guy at first, getting a good jump.

Back to the pitcher, who takes his stance.

Cut to the batter, who taps the plate with the bat and readies for his swing.

Back to the pitcher, who glances over his shoulder at the guy at first.

Back to the long shot. The catcher readies for the pitch.

The pitcher stands there, ready. Glances at first again. Seems about to wind up.

He winds up, and finally, when the tension’s greatest and the crowd is screaming wildly, here’s the pitch.

The batter swings.

Makes contact.

The ball goes…somewhere. Where? Well, that determines the next moment.

That’s what it’s like when baseball is really good. When it’s bad, though — well, this parody (from Buffalo’s own WGR Sports Radio) isn’t as far off as you might think. (“Greg Buck” is a character they use in fake “authentic” broadcasts which are often utterly hilarious.) Baseball’s problems are well-established — the games take way too long, the big post-season games start so late that they often end well after midnight, the game’s lack of real revenue-sharing hampers small-market teams to a point, and of course, the steroid issue which makes a lot of it just seem fake, anyway.

It would be easy to me to say that those reasons are the main factors in my not really paying much attention to baseball anymore, but the truth is…that photo up there. That’s Sid Bream, beating a throw from Barry Bonds in Game Seven of the 1992 National League Series. Bream’s run was the winning run, which put the Atlanta Braves in the World Series for the second year in a row. (They’d lose the Series to Toronto, in what was the first of Toronto’s back-to-back Series wins. Neat baseball factoid: Joe Carter made the final out of the 1992 World Series, and then the next year, scored the final walk-off run of the 1993 Series. Two consecutive series ended on Joe Carter doing something.)

That NLCS was one of the most nauseating experiences I’ve ever had as a sports fan. The Pirates had fallen behind in the NLCS, 3 games to 1, and their loss seemed a foregone conclusion. But then they won Game 5, and after that, they won Game 6 in a big way, with their big bats finally exploding for a bunch of runs. In Game 7, they took a 2-0 lead into the bottom of the 9th. All they had to do was record three outs…but instead, the Braves scored three runs, with the final two coming on a single from a backup catcher named Francisco Cabrera whom no one had ever heard of before (and no one’s heard from since). Cabrera’s hit is burned on my brain: the pitch from Stan Belinda, and Cabrera’s swing in which he just kind of flailed the bat out there, seeming to have zero idea of where the pitch actually was — until he’d smacked it over shortstop Jay Bell’s head into left field.

And Barry Bonds couldn’t throw out Sid Bream, who is legendary for being one of the slowest guys on the basepaths in baseball history.

My love of baseball didn’t end that night, obviously. I’d watch it for some years afterward, loyally and faithfully. But what did end that night was the last season in which my team didn’t suck. The Pirates have posted a losing record every year since that one. Eighteen of ’em. Nobody has ever done that, in any sport. They’ve had at least five distinct “rebuilding efforts” since then, and another is supposedly underway right now. But hope for Pirates fans does not spring eternal, as we’ve seen kids born the last time the Pirates were a winning team first turn old enough to drive…and then old enough to vote. Just three more, and they’re old enough to drink.

When you favorite team sucks for that long, it’s no surprise that your enthusiasm for the sport in general flags a bit.

Just seeing what’s happened in baseball in general since 1992 is amazing. Players have played entire long careers in that span, and never encountered a good Pirates team. The game’s hallowed records have fallen (owing to drugs, of course). The Boston Red Sox won the World Series twice, finally ending their curse; the Chicago White Sox won the Series once, ending their own long drought. Major League Baseball expanded twice, adding four teams (Colorado, Florida, Tampa, and Arizona); each of those teams has been to the World Series since entering MLB, and two have won it (Florida twice and Arizona once). When last the Pirates were good, the Yankees were fourteen years removed from their last Series win; since then, they’ve won five and appeared in two more. When the Pirates were good, the Angels, Astros and Rangers were all known for not being good very often. Since then, the Angels have won a Series, the Astros have been to their first, and the Rangers are about to go to their first.

Wow. A lot of water under the baseball bridge. And the Pirates still stink.

Share This Post

On second thought, let’s not go to the Olympics. ‘Tis a silly place.

A petition for pie-throwing at the Olympics. Sure, why not? I’m not sure how it would work, though. Would there be a scoring system? “Oooooh, a half-point deduction because that last hit left too much of the right cheek clean.” Would there be an official Olympic recipe for the edible missile? (Heck, would the missile even be edible? Shaving cream, ewwwww.)

Anyway, I’m totally on board! I also think the London Olympics should include competitive haggis eating, warm-beer drinking, and…hey, wait a minute. We’re the ones who invented pie throwing in the first place! Why do the Brits get to claim it as an important cultural thing? It’s like how the tomato is seen as a classic Italian vegetable, and yet, not one person on the Italian peninsula ever saw a tomato until they were brought back to Europe from over here!

Share This Post

Wham! A homah! Wham! Anuddah homah!

Jim Caple selects the top ten fictional home runs of all time. Here’s one of them:

3. Charlie Brown finally homers (“Peanuts,” March 30, 1993). After 43 years of futility, Charlie Brown finally tastes success when he hits the first home run of his career. Responds sister Sally when he tells her: “YOU?!?!?” By the way, this marks the official beginning of baseball’s steroid era. I mean, c’mon. Look at the size of his head.

Heh! Although I’m surprised that none of the homers on Caple’s list come from this classic bit of baseball history:

(The sound sync is a bit off on the video, or at least it was for me. Still, one of the all-time great cartoon shorts.)

Share This Post

The point left a contrail above his head

Matthew Yglesias has been one of my favorite bloggers for years, but in commenting today on Lebron James, he misses the point about as badly as a point can be missed.

I’m all for rooting against the new look Heat, but it is worth saying that a lot of the anti-LeBron commentary of the past couple of days bespeaks a major anti-labor bias in our popular culture. The guy had an offer from one employer and a competing offer from another employer—he took the offer he preferred. Is that really so terrible? Does he really have a moral obligation to work for Dan Gilbert’s for-profit firm indefinitely? Would you like to be told that if you get offered a better job, it’s unethical for you to accept it? I wouldn’t.

Look. This stuff doesn’t happen in a vacuum, and we’re not talking about, say, a District Manager for Fed-Ex going to work as a District Manager for UPS. There’s a lot more at work here than an employee simply deciding to take a new job.

Mega-star sports figures who command salaries in the stratospheres of their sports simply aren’t comparable, as employees, to people like Matt Yglesias, who work in a cubicle farm writing blog posts all day. These kinds of sports figures become identifiable parts of their communities in ways that the vast, vast, vast majority of employees in this country never even come close to being. That being the case, moral questions regarding James’s departure can, and do, and ought to, come into play.

Besides, no one is saying that James had a moral obligation to stay in Cleveland. In this day and age, no one would really suggest that, and when a great and beloved athlete manages to stay with one team for an entire career, it’s viewed as (a) an anomaly, and (b) something of an equal effort on the part of the player and the ownership. Most times a player in that case will voluntarily forego a larger offer or two over the course of their career, if they think the situation they’re already in is a pretty good one. The claim can be made that the morally preferable course would have been for James to stay in Cleveland, but nobody thinks he was obliged to do so.

The criticism, as far as I can see it, focuses on a number of issues surrounding James’s decision to leave. There was the callous manner in which he did it, stringing Cleveland along so they couldn’t get a jump-start on a post-Lebron era until after the Draft and once free agency was already in full swing; there was the way he pretty much treated the fans of that city as if they were disposable; there was the way he pretty much structured the entire episode so as to stroke his own ego.

It all reminded me of a scene in the movie Nixon. Late in the film, when Watergate is starting to bring the administration down, Nixon holds a press conference to make some sort of announcement. To that point, when he’s announced stuff, the entire room has always erupted into applause, but at this event, he makes his announcement, steps back to receive the applause…and only his aides are applauding. Everyone else is just sitting there. That’s what the Lebron James fiasco has looked like. He constructed this entire thing utterly convinced that everyone sees him as a hero, and now he seems a bit shocked that almost nobody actually does. (Give the Miami fans some time, when his teams start accumulating 55-win seasons and second-round playoff exits.)

Players can, and do, leave their original teams all the time. But when they do, it’s generally for one of the following reasons:

1. They are significantly underpaid in their original market, and they are unlikely to come anywhere near their market value there.

2. They want desperately to win, and their current market seems unlikely to do so any time in the foreseeable future.

3. Team management decides to allow the player to leave, under the belief that they may be better equipped to win without the player or by replacing him at the position he plays.

4. The chemistry of their current team is unpleasant to the point that they want to play someplace else.

There are others, but those are the big ones that I generally see bandied about when players leave one team for another. And as far as I can tell, none of these really apply to Lebron James in Cleveland. They were prepared to pay him as massively as anyone else was; they’ve been a very good team in recent years; and…well, I can’t really speak to the third point. But I haven’t read anything about the Cav’s locker room being a hotbed of miscontent.

James’s willingness to leave Cleveland was clearly not motivated by money, and if James thinks he’s going to a more winning-conducive environment in Miami, everything I’ve read indicates that he’s likely mistaken. As for the last, well…maybe I’m wrong, but basketball has always struck me as the most prima donna-ridden of sports, and the Miami locker room will now have three prima donnas within it. If they don’t win, look for things to deteriorate quickly, and heck, it might happen anyway if they do win. Lots of winning teams end up falling apart not because they get bad again, but because their chemistry can’t be maintained.

Ultimately, what it comes down to is that no one thinks that Lebron James had a moral obligation to stay in Cleveland. Most folks, though, think that he had a moral obligation to not be a dick. And by any reasonable standards of dickishness, Lebron James was a dick of epic proportions.

Share This Post

A news headline I’d like to see

TONYA HARDING WHACKS LEBRON JAMES ON THE KNEE

JAMES OUT FOR SEASON, CAREER IN JEOPARDY

CLEVELAND GIVES HARDING KEY TO CITY

You know, I’ve seen a lot of athletes do asshole things. I’ve seen Barry Bonds and Rafael Palmeiro stonewall that they didn’t do steroids. I’ve seen Mark McGwire go to Congress and say, “I’m not here to talk about the past.” I’ve seen Pete Rose refuse to admit he gambled. I’ve seen Brett Favre’s insanely annoying “Will I play or won’t I?” nonsense every year for the last, oh, eighteen years or so. And it goes the other way, too, into ownership and management. I’ve seen the Buffalo Sabres completely bungle their efforts to hold onto their star players. I’ve seen the Bills release Thurman Thomas and Andre Reed without calling them first. I’ve seen Dan Snyder throw money at every player with a pulse, I’ve seen Jerry Jones decide that he just can’t live with the coach who had just won him two Super Bowls, I’ve seen Art Modell move the Browns without warning, I’ve seen the Irsay family do the same thing with the Colts. And I’ve read about collusion, union busting, racism, hard drinking, drug abuse, sexual harassment, and even murder.

But damned if Lebron James didn’t manage to put a unique spin on what he did. He may not be the biggest asshole in sports history, but in the words of sports talk radio hosts who do “Is [Name] the [biggest/best/greatest/worst/etc.] in sports history” topics, Lebron has “got to be in the conversation”.

I just can’t believe this all unfolded the way it did. I can’t believe that Lebron James was almost literally holding court for prospective NBA owners. I can’t believe he decided to announce his decision on a prime-time teevee special. I can’t believe ESPN went along with it. And I can’t believe that Lebron James didn’t even have the decency to tell the Cleveland Cavaliers what his decision was before he announced it to everyone else.

I’ve heard some people defending James on various unconvincing bases. I’ve heard the “It’s a free country!” defense, as if the fact that it’s not illegal to be an asshole somehow renders it OK to be an asshole. Then there are folks scoffing at the idea that Cleveland fans should be upset at all; “He doesn’t owe Cleveland anything!” goes the refrain here.

But in my view, he owes Cleveland a great deal. He’s lived in that region his entire life, and he got to play for his hometown fans. He helped make that team into one of the best in the NBA, even if they didn’t win a championship. I find the defenses of James very odd, because they come from people who will almost certainly sing Kobe Bryant’s praises, when he eventually retires, for having played his entire career with one team.

James’s behavior through this entire annoying ordeal has displayed some of the most breathtaking narcissism I’ve ever seen by a public figure. It really was astonishing to behold. I find his reasons, his excuses, nonsensical — “It’s about winning”, he says, even though his Cleveland teams have been among the best in the NBA. It’s not as if he’s just made his dramatic escape from the LA Clippers. And while I am no expert on the NBA, people who are seem to be less than convinced that a juggernaut of multiple titles has just been forged in Miami, because so much of the Heat’s space under the NBA salary cap will be devoted to just three players that the team is unlikely to be able to really fill out their roster with the kinds of non-superstar, but still excellent, talent that championship clubs in all sports need.

Lebron James did owe Cleveland something. He owed them respect and honesty. He gave them neither. I hope he never wins a title at all — which is a result that has a lot more chance of happening than some might believe — and if he comes down on the court at an awkward angle and his ACL just happens to rip asunder in the first five minutes of his first regular season in front of his new beloved fans, well, I won’t feel a lot of sympathy for him.

A few links: Jason Whitlock of FOX Sports; Ethan Sherwood Strauss of Salon.com; Mr. Trend at Alterdestiny.

Share This Post

Yeah, we can close the ballparks now.

UPDATED below.

Well, it’s official: as of today, June 3, 2010, I am finished with baseball. For good. Now, I haven’t been much of a baseball fan for a number of years, owing to a number of circumstances: my team (the Pirates) has sucked for so long that a baby born during the Pirates’ last winning season is probably out of high school now; few games are televised off cable anymore; the steroid era has made the game a hell of a lot less interesting; the game seems to take longer and longer and longer to play each year, with the World Series games often ending well after midnight.

But even so, there’s always been a part of me willing to claim to be a baseball fan “in waiting”, a fan in hibernation, perhaps, waiting for a time when the game would capture my interest again. I came to love baseball deeply in the late 80s and early 90s, when I took delight not just in the game’s slower general pace but in the way the game’s dramatic moments seem to last forever. It’s not like football, when there’s the snap and then the play’s going to run. No, in baseball, you have crucial situations where one guy is staring down another guy…and then, only then, the pitch….

No more of that, though. Baseball has, in my mind, killed itself.

In Detroit last night, a Tigers pitcher named Armando Galarraga took a perfect game into the top of the ninth. Perfect games are extremely rare; even though there have been two in the last month, in all of baseball history there have only been twenty of them. A perfect game is a game in which a pitcher never allows a single batter to reach base in any way: 27 guys come to the plate, 27 guys go down. No hits, no walks, nobody reaching base on an error or a passed ball, nobody reaching because they got hit by the pitch. Nobody goes to base. That’s a perfect game.

Galarraga takes his perfect game to the ninth, and gets the first two outs. One more out, and the game’s over and Galarraga is a part of baseball history. The hitter swings, putting the ball on the ground; the ball is fielded and thrown to the waiting first baseman, clearly in time for the out. Third out. Game over. Perfect game.

Except that the first base umpire called the runner safe.

In the history of bad sports officiating calls, this one will almost certainly rank in the top five, if not take the top spot outright. It was painfully obvious to everyone that the runner was out. Painfully so. The replay showed it. Everybody in the stadium knew it. The perfect game was ruined. After the game the umpire didn’t do any of the usual things officials do in these situations, talking about how it’s all “judgment calls” and how sometimes we get ’em wrong but we try real hard and it’s a shame and all but there it is. No, the umpire admitted that he’d blown it and proceeded to look so sad about it all that he almost seemed ready to sharpen a bat to a fine point that he might throw himself upon it.

The solution, of course, was as painfully obvious as the fact that the runner was out at first. All that needed done was for the Commissioner of Baseball, Bud Selig, to simply come out this morning and say: “The runner was out, and the game will be recorded in the books as having ended thusly. Therefore, Galarraga will be recognized officially as having thrown a perfect game.” Obvious. The right thing to do. No other course of action would suffice. This was an absolute slam-dunk of a decision.

And Selig didn’t make it. He said some mealy-mouthed bullshit about judgment calls and how sometimes we get ’em wrong but we try real hard and it’s a shame. And he’ll get some people together to look real hard at the rules. It’s every Person In Power’s favorite way of looking like they’re doing something about a problem when they really intend to do nothing about it at all: Appoint a commission! Form an investigative body! Discuss the rules!

But don’t fix what actually got broken in this case.

If the blown call had been the first or second out, Selig would have a strong case for not changing the call: We have no way of knowing what would have happened had the call gone correctly; maybe the next guy gets a hit. But in this case, it was the third out. We know exactly what would have happened had the call been made correctly: Galarraga’s teammates would have mobbed him on the mound in celebration of the completion of a perfect game.

I heard some people on the radio talking about how this put Selig in a very difficult position, and I was thinking, “No, it doesn’t. Never has the right thing to do been more clear!” Apparently it wasn’t, though. I heard someone else talk about the “integrity of the game”, which would be somehow violated if Selig overturned the on-field result.

“Integrity of the game”. That’s rich. Baseball, of all the major sports, is the one with the least amount of integrity, after its long history. The Black Sox. Owners treating players like indentured servants. Collusion to keep blacks out of the game. Collusion against free agent players. Drug abuse. Steroid abuse. Doing nothing to enhance the game’s popularity even as its popularity decreases a little more every single year. Time was when the World Series was a big deal; the teevee networks not airing it would schedule re-runs so as to not get crappy ratings for new episodes airing during the Series, and the Series used to start on a Saturday night, so if it went to six or seven games it would span two weekends, for even better ratings. Now, ratings are so far down that networks put whatever they want up against the Series and the Series itself starts on Wednesday, so that only one weekend is upset by it.

“Integrity of the game”. Nonsense. Baseball has zero integrity left to defend. Bud Selig was actually presented a gift-wrapped opportunity for baseball to be seen doing the right thing, for once. It would have been a unique situation, and baseball would look great in doing so. Instead…he’ll appoint a blue-ribbon commission to study the feasibility of possibly increasing the role of instant replay use in the officiating of baseball. Big whoop.

Armando Galarraga threw a perfect game last night, but instead of being on that list, Bud Selig apparently thinks that being on the “Close but no cigar” list is just fine. Galarraga deserves better than to be remembered in the same way that Harvey Haddix is remembered.

Bud Selig didn’t preserve the integrity of the game. All he did was chicken out when he had a chance to do good. But the owners love Selig, because he’s pretty much totally in their bag. And baseball will continue to become more and more irrelevant.

So yeah: I’m done with baseball. For good. Even when the Pirates stop sucking.

UPDATE 6-4-10:

A couple of readers comment to say, basically, that Selig changing the call would set precedent for all manner of calls being changed after the fact. To which I say, simply: nonsense.

Mary opines:

As for Selig — I think I agree with him. Sure, this particular time it’s the last out of the game. But what if next time it is, as you say, the first out in the inning, or occurs earlier? If we wash out that blown call for Galaragga, but we can’t do it for the next guy, to whom it happens just slightly earlier, how fair is that? I mean, I know it has happened to some other guys. I’ve seen near-perfect no-hitters where the only guy on base got there by taking a few “balls” that were clearly strikes. Galaragga’s fame is already greater, and will certainly outlive, that of all those other pitchers who were robbed at earlier points in the game. He’s lucky and unlucky at the same time.

How fair is what? If there’s a blown call ruining a perfect game in the 8th inning, someday, then, as I note in my original post, the call should stand, for a very simple reason: There is no way of knowing what would have happened otherwise.

This type of “What might have been” thinking is a big part of sports fandom, and it’s present for every team or athlete who almost wins. Take Don Denkinger’s famous blown call in the 1985 World Series. Leading the Series three games to two, the Cardinals took a 1-0 lead into the 9th inning, but Don Denkinger called a Royals batter safe when he was clearly out. The Royals went on to score twice in the inning, winning 2-1; they won the Series in Game Seven. Is that case analogous?

No, it isn’t. Not even close. Why? Because there was still game play to come after the blown call. The hitter’s safe instead of out, but maybe the Cardinals get a double play and get out of the inning and win the Series. Or maybe the Cardinals manage to put a run or two up in the bottom of the ninth. Or maybe the Cardinals win Game Seven. Denkinger’s gaffe was terrible — probably the most famous blown call in baseball history until the other night — but there’s no logical way in which it can be said to have literally decided the World Series.

Or in football, take the questionable officiating in Super Bowl XL, when the Steelers beat the Seahawks 21-10. Ben Roethlisberger was judged to have scored a rushing touchdown even though most folks believe the replays clearly show he was down before he broke the plane of the goal line with the ball, and Seattle was assessed a couple of odd penalties later on in the game which on replay seemed to not have happened at all. Should those calls be reversed after the game? No, because there’s no convincing argument to be made that those plays determined the outcome. Maybe after the bad TD by Big Ben, Seattle finds a way to score more than just 10 points in the game. Maybe some Seattle played forces a turnover or makes a big play. You just don’t know, and that’s why those calls shouldn’t be changed. They can be bitched about, sure, but 99 percent of the time, when you get screwed by the umpires or the refs, you still have your chance to win afterwards.

The Galarraga perfect game isn’t like either of those, or many of the other sucky instances of bad officiating in sports history (like the Buffalo Sabres and “No goal”). In this case, there is no question about what would have happened had the right call been applied. None. Zero.

If some pitcher has a perfect game going through seven innings, and then the first guy in the 8th gets to base on an identical call, if you freeze the action right there, you don’t know if the pitcher is going to retire the remaining six hitters, or if he’s about to give up some hits, or if he’s about to implode and load the bases and end up losing the game. This is a very strong distinction here. The game wouldn’t have ended had the call been made correctly in the 8th.

As for the fact that Galarraga’s fame is greater now, well, I can’t speak for him, but…so what? When it’s perfectly possible to give him something that he earned by right and should have had, saying “Wow, sucks to be you, but you’re a part of lore now!” is a pretty crappy consolation prize. And we’re not talking about balls and strikes here, which has always been a floating concept anyway in baseball. We’re talking safe versus out.

Tosy and Cosh says:

I’m with Mary – the minute, in any sport, the commissioner can unilaterally change calls we don’t like, after the fact – for any reason – it’s all over and the floodgates start. Before long they’ll be a similar situation and the expectation will be that we change what happened. Umpires make wrong calls all the time – either we review after or we don’t; we don’t get to choose when we want to because it makes a good story.

I’m sorry, but this is, from my POV, as wrong as it is possible to be. Why would there be an opening of floodgates? There aren’t any floodgates to open here.

As I explain above — several times, in fact — there are very clear differences between this spectacularly rare situation and your average, garden-variety umpire flub. This isn’t “He mighta had a perfect game!”; this was “He would have had a perfect game.” It’s a statement of fact that Galarraga would have had a perfect game if the call had been correct. If we set that as our precedent here — an absolute certainty of the correctness of the call and an absolute certainty of what would have happened in the game had the correct call been made — then I don’t see an objection. Situations where this much certainty apply are, actually, very rare in sports. There will almost certainly not be another perfect game robbed from a pitcher in the ninth inning with two outs “before long”. No one is saying we should “choose when we want to” reverse calls because it makes us feel good.

It’s not about what makes “the nicest story”. It’s about doing what’s right, and rewarding what actually happened on the field correctly. I’m not strongly in favor of Galarraga being credited with a perfect game because it’s a nice tale that gives me the warm-and-fuzzies as a sports fan. I’m strongly in favor of it because it’s what happened.

Returning to Mary, she closed out her comment with “It’s just a game.” Well, I suppose so, but whenever anyone says that, it always strikes me as a pretty cheap shot. Yeah, it is “just a game”. But we decide to care about lots of things that aren’t life and death; it’s stuff like baseball that makes our lives more than just finding food, making babies, and going to bed where the big monsters can’t get us. I’m sure that “Hey, it’s just a game!” came as little consolation to Cubs fans when Steve Bartman caught that ball. “Hey, it’s just a game!” wasn’t much fun to hear when I watched Scott Norwood’s kick sail just outside the goal posts. Michael Phelps’s achievements aren’t cheapened any in my book, just because “Hey, it’s just a bunch of guys splashing in the water!”

Share This Post

Actually, we’re Quantum Presbyterians

Via Cal, I see that the organizers of the 2012 Summer Olypmics in London have unveiled their mascots for the Games.

And here they are.

Well, aren’t those interesting?

I think that it’s now official, folks. We are now living in the Age of Simpson, because we’ve now come to a point where the Olympic mascots are Kang and Kodos!

Homer: (lowering his trousers and bending over) I suppose you’ll want to probe me. Well, you might as well get it over with.

Kang: Stop! We have reached the limits of what rectal probing can teach us.

Share This Post

Poor Evgeni

It seems that Russian figure skater Evgeni Plushenko was not entirely happy about his Silver medal at the Vancouver Olympics, mainly because Plushenko landed a quadruple jump while Gold medalist Evan Lycasek (from the United States) did not. Plushenko made all manner of public comments about how he is surprised that one can win a Gold medal without doing a quad, and that without a quad, “men’s figure skating” is reduced to ice dancing.

Well, cry me a river.

Many skating observers, even armchair ones myself who really can’t tell a Salchow jump from a toe-loop jump unless the announcers tell me which is which, have thought for a number of years that skating has become too jump-focused, to the point where competitions ever since, say, Nagano in 1998 have basically boiled down to who lands the most quads without falling. When that was the reigning paradigm in skating, it was little trouble for a guy like Plushenko to win consistently, because — and here’s the dirty truth about him — Plushenko is ultimately a one-trick pony.

Evgeni Plushenko is a skater who essentially turns in boring, personality-free performances into which he inserts spectacular jumps. He’s an amazing jumper, maybe the best pure jumper ever, but everything else he does is just dull. This has tended, in my view, to be the case with Russian men in general; only Alexei Yagudin — Gold in Salt Lake City in ’02 — of the recent Russian male domination didn’t bore me with his programs. Other than him, all of the Russian men who have won since Brian Boitano’s win in 1988 have been boring skaters who won by landing perfect jumps. (The most categorically insane Olympic victory was 1994’s, when Alexei Urmanov sleepskated to Gold over Elvis Stojko’s inifinitely more interesting programs.)

Now, finally, it seems that figure skating has started to push the pendulum back the other way, taking the emphasis back off jumps in general and the quad specifically, thus making the quad less of a silver bullet maneuver than it’s been of late. That bugs Plushenko, obviously, but he’ll just have to get over it. To flip his complaint around: it’s called figure skating, not ice jumping. If he thinks that’s what should determine the winners, then maybe a new event should take place featuring jumping and nothing else. Hell, we could even get rid of the music and the funky outfits and just have the skaters come out and do jumps in front of an audience. Then Plushenko could quad to his heart’s content and dominate in the only way he really knows how.

Share This Post