This real money site caters to all players, with reviews on mobile games you can play, including slots, blackjack, and roulette.

Our Bi-Monthly NBA Post, Right on Schedule

Screen shot 2010-06-04 at 7.03.05 AM.png

As you may have seen last night, the Lakers and Celtics were wearing a new jersey patch last night. A few thoughts:

• Unless you got a very, very close look, you probably don’t realize that the patch continues the NBA’s fixation with including a depiction of a basketball in all of its logo designs.

• I really like how they incorporated the NBA logo into the patch. Much better than having the league logo and the O’Brien Trophy patch as two separate elements like in years past.

• That said, however, I kinda miss the trophy patch, which worked nicely as a symbol — no typography, just an icon. I think the best solution would’ve been to replace the league logo with the trophy patch, or two incorporate those two elements into a single mark. (I’m told that the trophy icon at center court was also missing last night, but I hadn’t actually recalled that it had been there in the first place.)

• Does the whole notion of this insignia, which is part of the new patch, work for anyone else? It’s never worked for me. I don’t get the shooting star (seems like that should be reserved for the All-Star Game, no?), the ornate script seems better suited to a golf tournament, and trying to brand “The Finals” has always struck me as willful, bordering on wishful. Okay, so you don’t have an iconic term like “World Series,” or “Super Bowl,” or even “Stanley Cup Finals.” But trying to own a term like “The Finals” is so transparently desperate. Just called it the NBA Finals, which is nothing to be ashamed of, and leave it at that, the end.

images.jpg

In case you hadn’t noticed…: There are currently zero display ads in the left-hand rail (aside from the Naming Wrong T-shirt ad, which doesn’t count since that’s basically a house ad). Which means this is a prime time for one or two of you potential advertisers out there to get some prime virtual real estate with very little visual competition. If you’re interested in placing an ad, get in touch.

Giveaway Reminder: I’m currently raffling off three PC-to-TV converters. For details, look here.

Uni Watch News Ticker: Yesterday afternoon I went to a hotel suite in Manhattan, where NFL Films was shooting some interviews for a show on football uniforms. They interviewed me for the better part of an hour, although I suspect most of that will end up on the cutting room floor. I’m told the show will air later this month. Further details as they become available. … Here are the new Notre Dame football jerseys. … Pretty groovy-looking old football board game here. … Jeremy Brahm reports that the Yomiuri Giants are taking old game-worn uniforms and recycling them into limited-edition teddy bears. … All the talk about Milt Pappas’s near-perfect game back in 1970 led SI.com to run this photo of Pappas yesterday. Naturally, I’m more interested in the little uni number on his stirrup than in whether he got jobbed by Bruce Froemming (who, it can’t be said often enough, was always a real class act). … Clay Hervey sent along a link to a pretty cool site offering photographic timelines of the Southwest Conference’s football helmet designs. The only catch is that it’s a Tripod-hosted site, which means there’s a decent chance that linking to it will make it crash. But here — let’s take a shot. … You know who has strict uniform standards? Hooters, that’s who. … Impressively comprehensive rundown of the footwear worn by the UNC hoops team last season here. … Superb interactive page on the history of World Cup soccer balls here. … Phil is taking a well-earned day off tomorrow, so I’ll be making a rare Saturday appearance. See you then.

 

126 comments to Our Bi-Monthly NBA Post, Right on Schedule

  • scott | June 4, 2010 at 8:16 am |

    Froemming, Ryan Church and Ronan Tynan – three class acts. :)

  • Bob | June 4, 2010 at 8:28 am |

    “The Finals” is better than the “NBA World Championship Series” as it was called into the mid-1980s, IIRC. But it seems like the NBA is trying to make the point that using “The Finals” makes you automatically think of the NBA and the NBA Finals. I’m with you, just use “NBA Finals” and be done with it.

  • Bob | June 4, 2010 at 8:32 am |

    The Pappas near-perfect game was in 1972. ESPN showed highlights yesterday with the Cubs in the blue-collared pullovers and the Padres in all yellow. The photo to which you linked has to be from his time with the Reds or Braves (looks like the Braves, judging by the color of the hat), both of whom wore pinstripes in the 1960s, but had names on the backs. Cubs didn’t go to names on the backs until 1993 or so.

  • Andy | June 4, 2010 at 8:47 am |

    Speaking of the history of the soccer ball, adidas® has for sale on their website a set of each of the world cup match balls used since 1970. It is $850 for the ten balls. They also have a mini-set.

  • Kevin G. | June 4, 2010 at 9:01 am |

    [quote comment=”392945″]The Pappas near-perfect game was in 1972. ESPN showed highlights yesterday with the Cubs in the blue-collared pullovers and the Padres in all yellow. The photo to which you linked has to be from his time with the Reds or Braves (looks like the Braves, judging by the color of the hat), both of whom wore pinstripes in the 1960s, but had names on the backs. Cubs didn’t go to names on the backs until 1993 or so.[/quote]
    Also you can tell that it is not Wrigley Field. SI must have just grabbed whatever picture they could find of Pappas.

  • John Zajac | June 4, 2010 at 9:08 am |

    Paul, is this your dream patch? From the “The Finals” (it works for me, I think of the NBA Finals right away) in 2002 since all teams were wearing a ribbon for 9/11. Look at Shaq here to see it in action.

  • John Zajac | June 4, 2010 at 9:11 am |

    Hmm… tags came out a little funky. Here are the links if they don’t work from that last post.

    2002 Finals Patch: http://farm5.static....

    Patch in action on Shaq: http://farm5.static....

  • Elena | June 4, 2010 at 9:33 am |

    Hmmm, cute idea to make teddy bears from old jerseys. I have a lot of old team-logo t-shirts I never wear anymore….

  • BIG Ego | June 4, 2010 at 9:36 am |

    The reason the NBA uses a foolish name for their championship is b/c it doesnt have a fancy name like the other 3 major sports do, and then they give out some stupid mutant looking ball trophy.

  • JamesP. | June 4, 2010 at 9:48 am |

    Happy Stirrup Friday! http://i313.photobuc...

    I love that idea of using old jerseys to make teddy bears. My daughter would love to have one. Sounds like an interesting DIY project…

  • DJ | June 4, 2010 at 9:50 am |

    and then they give out some stupid mutant looking ball trophy.

    The cyllindrical shape the ball is balancing on is supposed to be a basketball net. You rarely see the engraving on it that makes it more clear.

  • Mickel Yantz | June 4, 2010 at 9:52 am |

    Updated Las Vegas Locos Logo. I know you have all been waiting for this. http://www.ufl-footb...

  • Chance Michaels | June 4, 2010 at 10:04 am |

    [quote comment=”392953″]and then they give out some stupid mutant looking ball trophy.

    The cyllindrical shape the ball is balancing on is supposed to be a basketball net. You rarely see the engraving on it that makes it more clear.[/quote]

    I know what it’s supposed to be, but I still think it’s an ugly trophy. From the perfectly square base to the squished, off-kilter quarter-basket, too many elements conflict. Plus it only looks good from the one angle – it’s really stupid looking from the back.

    And even when viewed at its best angle, it’s too literal to work – the basketball which will never fit in the too-small net. Looks more like somebody’s tossing the ball into the office garbage can.

    Plus, as you mention, the engraving disappears at a distance of about ten inches.

    It’s just a really terrible design.

  • MarkMax | June 4, 2010 at 10:12 am |

    I believe the term “The Finals” is trademarked by the NBA as well, and they wouldn’t allow the NHL to use the term. That’s why on the patches and the ice it just reads Stanley Cup Final, not finals. Not a big NBA fan to begin with, but that just seems a bit excessive.

  • JimWa | June 4, 2010 at 10:14 am |

    I can’t help but notice those NBA patches aesthetically work much better with the Lakers unis than they do with the Celtics. Not just the color, but the script style, as well. When I saw the lead picture, I first wondered if Boston would have a green-hued version.

    (and don’t bother with a Celtic … Irish … Rainbow … pot of gold … connection)

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 10:16 am |

    Something to ponder on a Friday regarding THE PERFECT GAME THAT WASN’T…

    Many, many people bitch about players putting individual accomplishment ahead of team performance, right?

    And yesterday just as many people (or more) came off their couches screaming that Bud Selig should overrule Jim Joyce’s call and award the perfect game…and that Instant Replay should be applied, well, damn it, to just about everything in baseball except balls and strikes.

    Yet, a few hours after “The Call” in Detroit, out in Seattle the Mariners got a win because of an equally horrible call on what should have been the third out in the bottom of the 10th.

    Now, if we really believe that team issues come first, shouldn’t the raging have erupted over something like the futzed up call in Seattle that affected the outcome of a game? Nope, it flared up because one individual didn’t get his Perfecto.

    In terms of getting calls correct, a perfect game is a bigger issue than a game ending earlier than it should have, that’s the underlying message out there right now.

    It’s safe to say that, based on what we’ve seen and heard, we’ve learned that too many fans and too many in the media also are disproportionately focused on individual performance. In other words, what nobody seems to notice is that there is some chokingly obnoxious hypocrisy pontificating all over the place these days.

    As to the overall discussion: Guess what, these are real games played by real people and officiated by real people.

    But evidently the view from the couch is that everything should be like a video game…apply as much electronics as possible…because that’s the only way I’m able to relate to it.

    Rollerball is what ultimately will make then happy, I guess.

    —Ricko

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 10:20 am |

    [quote comment=”392955″][quote comment=”392953″]and then they give out some stupid mutant looking ball trophy.

    The cyllindrical shape the ball is balancing on is supposed to be a basketball net. You rarely see the engraving on it that makes it more clear.[/quote]

    I know what it’s supposed to be, but I still think it’s an ugly trophy. From the perfectly square base to the squished, off-kilter quarter-basket, too many elements conflict. Plus it only looks good from the one angle – it’s really stupid looking from the back.

    And even when viewed at its best angle, it’s too literal to work – the basketball which will never fit in the too-small net. Looks more like somebody’s tossing the ball into the office garbage can.

    Plus, as you mention, the engraving disappears at a distance of about ten inches.

    It’s just a really terrible design.[/quote]

    Amen to that… really the absolute worst of the major sports’ championship trophies.

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 10:36 am |

    [quote comment=”392958″]Something to ponder on a Friday regarding THE PERFECT GAME THAT WASN’T…

    Many, many people bitch about players putting individual accomplishment ahead of team performance, right?

    And yesterday just as many people (or more) came off their couches screaming that Bud Selig should overrule Jim Joyce’s call and award the perfect game…and that Instant Replay should be applied, well, damn it, to just about everything in baseball except balls and strikes.

    Yet, a few hours after “The Call” in Detroit, out in Seattle the Mariners got a win because of an equally horrible call on what should have been the third out in the bottom of the 10th.

    Now, if we really believe that team issues come first, shouldn’t the raging have erupted over something like the futzed up call in Seattle that affected the outcome of a game? Nope, it flared up because one individual didn’t get his Perfecto.

    In terms of getting calls correct, a perfect game is a bigger issue than a game ending earlier than it should have, that’s the underlying message out there right now.

    It’s safe to say that, based on what we’ve seen and heard, we’ve learned that too many fans and too many in the media also are disproportionately focused on individual performance. In other words, what nobody seems to notice is that there is some chokingly obnoxious hypocrisy pontificating all over the place these days.

    As to the overall discussion: Guess what, these are real games played by real people and officiated by real people.

    But evidently the view from the couch is that everything should be like a video game…apply as much electronics as possible…because that’s the only way I’m able to relate to it.

    Rollerball is what ultimately will make then happy, I guess.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Excellent points. The players are allowed to make mistakes, but not the officials and umpires? It’s one reason I don’t embrace instant reply (the time delays are the other).

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 10:37 am |

    [quote comment=”392944″]”The Finals” is better than the “NBA World Championship Series” as it was called into the mid-1980s, IIRC. But it seems like the NBA is trying to make the point that using “The Finals” makes you automatically think of the NBA and the NBA Finals. I’m with you, just use “NBA Finals” and be done with it.[/quote]

    If memory serves, “NBA Finals” was first used in 1986. Prior to that, it was just called the “championship series” (a term borrowed, I thik, from baseball).

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 10:37 am |

    [quote comment=”392958″]Something to ponder on a Friday regarding THE PERFECT GAME THAT WASN’T…

    Many, many people bitch about players putting individual accomplishment ahead of team performance, right?

    And yesterday just as many people (or more) came off their couches screaming that Bud Selig should overrule Jim Joyce’s call and award the perfect game…and that Instant Replay should be applied, well, damn it, to just about everything in baseball except balls and strikes.

    Yet, a few hours after “The Call” in Detroit, out in Seattle the Mariners got a win because of an equally horrible call on what should have been the third out in the bottom of the 10th.

    Now, if we really believe that team issues come first, shouldn’t the raging have erupted over something like the futzed up call in Seattle that affected the outcome of a game? Nope, it flared up because one individual didn’t get his Perfecto.

    In terms of getting calls correct, a perfect game is a bigger issue than a game ending earlier than it should have, that’s the underlying message out there right now.

    It’s safe to say that, based on what we’ve seen and heard, we’ve learned that too many fans and too many in the media also are disproportionately focused on individual performance. In other words, what nobody seems to notice is that there is some chokingly obnoxious hypocrisy pontificating all over the place these days.

    As to the overall discussion: Guess what, these are real games played by real people and officiated by real people.

    But evidently the view from the couch is that everything should be like a video game…apply as much electronics as possible…because that’s the only way I’m able to relate to it.

    Rollerball is what ultimately will make then happy, I guess.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But ONLY Rollerball (1975), not Rollerball (2002).

    Good point, Ricko. But isn’t the perfect game truly a team accomplishment? Sure the pitcher always always always gets the credit, but where is Galarraga without the spectacular catch from Austin Jackson? Without hitters getting runs across the plate, he’s Harvey Haddix all over again. I think what gets lost is the fact that the Tigers as a team won a perfect game and were denied their place in the record books. It’s a damn shame, but it is what it is.

    The human element, flaws and all, are what make us… well… human. I’m reversing my opinion from yesterday (yup, I’m human) and agreeing with Selig that the call shouldn’t be reversed. Maybe instant replay isn’t right for baseball. Baseball is unique in so many ways, why should it be like every other sport when it comes to officiating?

  • James Hayden | June 4, 2010 at 10:47 am |

    [quote comment=”392958″]Something to ponder on a Friday regarding THE PERFECT GAME THAT WASN’T…

    Many, many people bitch about players putting individual accomplishment ahead of team performance, right?

    And yesterday just as many people (or more) came off their couches screaming that Bud Selig should overrule Jim Joyce’s call and award the perfect game…and that Instant Replay should be applied, well, damn it, to just about everything in baseball except balls and strikes.

    Yet, a few hours after “The Call” in Detroit, out in Seattle the Mariners got a win because of an equally horrible call on what should have been the third out in the bottom of the 10th.

    Now, if we really believe that team issues come first, shouldn’t the raging have erupted over something like the futzed up call in Seattle that affected the outcome of a game? Nope, it flared up because one individual didn’t get his Perfecto.

    In terms of getting calls correct, a perfect game is a bigger issue than a game ending earlier than it should have, that’s the underlying message out there right now.

    It’s safe to say that, based on what we’ve seen and heard, we’ve learned that too many fans and too many in the media also are disproportionately focused on individual performance. In other words, what nobody seems to notice is that there is some chokingly obnoxious hypocrisy pontificating all over the place these days.

    As to the overall discussion: Guess what, these are real games played by real people and officiated by real people.

    But evidently the view from the couch is that everything should be like a video game…apply as much electronics as possible…because that’s the only way I’m able to relate to it.

    Rollerball is what ultimately will make then happy, I guess.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    JONATHAN E!
    JONATHAN E!
    JONATHAN E!

  • James Hayden | June 4, 2010 at 10:51 am |

    [quote comment=”392962″][quote comment=”392958″]Something to ponder on a Friday regarding THE PERFECT GAME THAT WASN’T…

    Many, many people bitch about players putting individual accomplishment ahead of team performance, right?

    And yesterday just as many people (or more) came off their couches screaming that Bud Selig should overrule Jim Joyce’s call and award the perfect game…and that Instant Replay should be applied, well, damn it, to just about everything in baseball except balls and strikes.

    Yet, a few hours after “The Call” in Detroit, out in Seattle the Mariners got a win because of an equally horrible call on what should have been the third out in the bottom of the 10th.

    Now, if we really believe that team issues come first, shouldn’t the raging have erupted over something like the futzed up call in Seattle that affected the outcome of a game? Nope, it flared up because one individual didn’t get his Perfecto.

    In terms of getting calls correct, a perfect game is a bigger issue than a game ending earlier than it should have, that’s the underlying message out there right now.

    It’s safe to say that, based on what we’ve seen and heard, we’ve learned that too many fans and too many in the media also are disproportionately focused on individual performance. In other words, what nobody seems to notice is that there is some chokingly obnoxious hypocrisy pontificating all over the place these days.

    As to the overall discussion: Guess what, these are real games played by real people and officiated by real people.

    But evidently the view from the couch is that everything should be like a video game…apply as much electronics as possible…because that’s the only way I’m able to relate to it.

    Rollerball is what ultimately will make then happy, I guess.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But ONLY Rollerball (1975), not Rollerball (2002).

    Good point, Ricko. But isn’t the perfect game truly a team accomplishment? Sure the pitcher always always always gets the credit, but where is Galarraga without the spectacular catch from Austin Jackson? Without hitters getting runs across the plate, he’s Harvey Haddix all over again. I think what gets lost is the fact that the Tigers as a team won a perfect game and were denied their place in the record books. It’s a damn shame, but it is what it is.

    The human element, flaws and all, are what make us… well… human. I’m reversing my opinion from yesterday (yup, I’m human) and agreeing with Selig that the call shouldn’t be reversed. Maybe instant replay isn’t right for baseball. Baseball is unique in so many ways, why should it be like every other sport when it comes to officiating?[/quote]

    Re: Rollerball – ever read the original short story?

    http://www.layres.co...

  • Andy | June 4, 2010 at 11:00 am |

    [quote comment=”392955″][quote comment=”392953″]and then they give out some stupid mutant looking ball trophy.

    The cyllindrical shape the ball is balancing on is supposed to be a basketball net. You rarely see the engraving on it that makes it more clear.[/quote]

    I know what it’s supposed to be, but I still think it’s an ugly trophy. From the perfectly square base to the squished, off-kilter quarter-basket, too many elements conflict. Plus it only looks good from the one angle – it’s really stupid looking from the back.

    And even when viewed at its best angle, it’s too literal to work – the basketball which will never fit in the too-small net. Looks more like somebody’s tossing the ball into the office garbage can.

    Plus, as you mention, the engraving disappears at a distance of about ten inches.

    It’s just a really terrible design.[/quote]

    Actually, I don’t think it’s supposed to be literal at all. If it was supposed to be, I think that’s exactly what it would be: a realistic, literal representation of a ball on the rim. The fact that the net is stylized, too small, etc. makes it more of an abstract, or sculptural piece, which makes it bound by no physical limitations. I don’t like it that much, and really, it’s not my favorite trophy, but just because it doesn’t ‘work’ spatially doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a terrible design. I don’t think it was ever intended to be spatially accurate. It’s an artists abstract vision of what it is, which, as we know, is really often times less about design and more about personal expression.

  • concealed78 | June 4, 2010 at 11:00 am |

    You know, with each passing year, it’s getting harder and harder to defend no Instant Replay when the umpires are making completely ridiculous & obvious mistakes. Bud Selig is also a big part of the problem, he’s an enabler, defiant against all logic and facts, and has done terrible things to the sport, and he has just no balls to stand up to anybody. He wouldn’t even fathom to admit mistake on anybody’s part.

    I’d say add more umpires on the field with more training, allow delayed calls with conferences – a much better chance of getting the call right. As as traditionalist, I am beyond pissed. They’re making it lunacy. And what’s going to happen to Joyce? A fine? Suspension? Hell no. He’ll be in the public eye for a few days, and everything will be forgotten, and nothing will be fixed or done for the better. You know, I don’t even know why I even care, the Tigers are a hated divisional rival. Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 11:01 am |

    [quote comment=”392962″][quote comment=”392958″]Something to ponder on a Friday regarding THE PERFECT GAME THAT WASN’T…

    Many, many people bitch about players putting individual accomplishment ahead of team performance, right?

    And yesterday just as many people (or more) came off their couches screaming that Bud Selig should overrule Jim Joyce’s call and award the perfect game…and that Instant Replay should be applied, well, damn it, to just about everything in baseball except balls and strikes.

    Yet, a few hours after “The Call” in Detroit, out in Seattle the Mariners got a win because of an equally horrible call on what should have been the third out in the bottom of the 10th.

    Now, if we really believe that team issues come first, shouldn’t the raging have erupted over something like the futzed up call in Seattle that affected the outcome of a game? Nope, it flared up because one individual didn’t get his Perfecto.

    In terms of getting calls correct, a perfect game is a bigger issue than a game ending earlier than it should have, that’s the underlying message out there right now.

    It’s safe to say that, based on what we’ve seen and heard, we’ve learned that too many fans and too many in the media also are disproportionately focused on individual performance. In other words, what nobody seems to notice is that there is some chokingly obnoxious hypocrisy pontificating all over the place these days.

    As to the overall discussion: Guess what, these are real games played by real people and officiated by real people.

    But evidently the view from the couch is that everything should be like a video game…apply as much electronics as possible…because that’s the only way I’m able to relate to it.

    Rollerball is what ultimately will make then happy, I guess.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But ONLY Rollerball (1975), not Rollerball (2002).

    Good point, Ricko. But isn’t the perfect game truly a team accomplishment? Sure the pitcher always always always gets the credit, but where is Galarraga without the spectacular catch from Austin Jackson? Without hitters getting runs across the plate, he’s Harvey Haddix all over again. I think what gets lost is the fact that the Tigers as a team won a perfect game and were denied their place in the record books. It’s a damn shame, but it is what it is.

    The human element, flaws and all, are what make us… well… human. I’m reversing my opinion from yesterday (yup, I’m human) and agreeing with Selig that the call shouldn’t be reversed. Maybe instant replay isn’t right for baseball. Baseball is unique in so many ways, why should it be like every other sport when it comes to officiating?[/quote]

    But getting pinned with a loss you might not have taken is far more egregious than not getting a Perfecto. Every single time. If one truly thinks “team first,” that is.

    And while a Perfecto may be a team accomplishment, it generally isn’t viewed that way, from a historical perspective, anyway.

    Quick, who played third base for the Yankees in Don Larsen’s W-S perfect game? Did he have any putouts? Any assists?

    Or…which team has the MOST Perfectos in history?

    Just, y’know, sayin’. ;)

    Best observation of all, though, was whoever it was here who reminded us that the non-Perfecto will be remembered far, far longer than the actual Perfecto a few days before.

    Had Harvey Haddix won that game in nine innings, his spot in history would be relative invisibility other than, “Oh, yeah, Haddix…isn’t he one of the guys who pitched a perfect game?”

    Think Tin Cup’s 12.

    —Ricko

  • Andy | June 4, 2010 at 11:02 am |

    I also think it might fall over without that base, which is an issue with the design. I’d like the trophy much better without the huge base, and part of me thinks it could somehow be weighted in the bottom of the net so that the base wasn’t necessary.

  • Aaron | June 4, 2010 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”392955″][quote comment=”392953″]and then they give out some stupid mutant looking ball trophy.

    The cyllindrical shape the ball is balancing on is supposed to be a basketball net. You rarely see the engraving on it that makes it more clear.[/quote]

    I know what it’s supposed to be, but I still think it’s an ugly trophy. From the perfectly square base to the squished, off-kilter quarter-basket, too many elements conflict. Plus it only looks good from the one angle – it’s really stupid looking from the back.

    And even when viewed at its best angle, it’s too literal to work – the basketball which will never fit in the too-small net. Looks more like somebody’s tossing the ball into the office garbage can.

    Plus, as you mention, the engraving disappears at a distance of about ten inches.

    It’s just a really terrible design.[/quote]

    Is there some secret Luke Walton Poses With The NBA Trophy database that I am missing out on?

  • John Zajac | June 4, 2010 at 11:06 am |

    I don’t get the hatred for the O’Brien Trophy. I love it compared to what they gave away before 1977…

    http://farm5.static....

    And as for the trophy patches, I’m pretty sure that the reason they started putting the trophy alone on the jersey was because of the 9/11 patch. They always had the large script “The Finals” patch which had the trophy with it:

    http://farm2.static....

    Though there was one time in ’97 where they had the trophy that looked like a little alien or something… I think it was the first time they went trophy only.

    http://farm5.static....

  • Bernard | June 4, 2010 at 11:08 am |

    [quote comment=”392958″]Something to ponder on a Friday regarding THE PERFECT GAME THAT WASN’T…

    Many, many people bitch about players putting individual accomplishment ahead of team performance, right?

    And yesterday just as many people (or more) came off their couches screaming that Bud Selig should overrule Jim Joyce’s call and award the perfect game…and that Instant Replay should be applied, well, damn it, to just about everything in baseball except balls and strikes.

    Yet, a few hours after “The Call” in Detroit, out in Seattle the Mariners got a win because of an equally horrible call on what should have been the third out in the bottom of the 10th.

    Now, if we really believe that team issues come first, shouldn’t the raging have erupted over something like the futzed up call in Seattle that affected the outcome of a game? Nope, it flared up because one individual didn’t get his Perfecto.

    In terms of getting calls correct, a perfect game is a bigger issue than a game ending earlier than it should have, that’s the underlying message out there right now.

    It’s safe to say that, based on what we’ve seen and heard, we’ve learned that too many fans and too many in the media also are disproportionately focused on individual performance. In other words, what nobody seems to notice is that there is some chokingly obnoxious hypocrisy pontificating all over the place these days.

    As to the overall discussion: Guess what, these are real games played by real people and officiated by real people.

    But evidently the view from the couch is that everything should be like a video game…apply as much electronics as possible…because that’s the only way I’m able to relate to it.

    Rollerball is what ultimately will make then happy, I guess.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Totally. This is why things like “home run king”, “triple crown”, “stolen base leader” and “Cy Young Award Winning” are utter bullshit. Why are we even tracking batting average or ERA? In the grand scheme of things, who cares what any one person does? Box scores (and record books) should include nothing but R, H and E. And if any of those are incorrect because of human error, well, as my grandma used to say, “Tough titty.”

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 11:08 am |

    “Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko

  • Kyle | June 4, 2010 at 11:12 am |

    Here is a picture of the NBA trophy on the floor when Cleveland was in the finals.

    http://www.flickr.co...

  • greg allred | June 4, 2010 at 11:15 am |

    Paul…congrats on the NFL Films interview, they are a treat. I was fortunate to be a part of an NFL Films special in 2001. I was amazed that my segments didn’t end up “on the cutting room floor”… it was loads of fun and to this day I still get calls and emails about it, and my NFL Films hat/shirts still draw positive comments.

  • M.Princip | June 4, 2010 at 11:21 am |

    [quote comment=”392973″]”Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s not the same Ricko, cuz I seriously doubt anyone had a sweeter smile than Galarraga in that Twins/Mariners game. :o/

    I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.

  • Bernard | June 4, 2010 at 11:30 am |

    If anything, the imperfect game and what happened in the Twins/Mariners game are BOTH prime examples of why use of instant replay SHOULD be expanded. If we’re worried about the actual integrity of the game, be it in terms of individual glory OR wins and losses, we should be advocating for ways to get it right. Otherwise, it’s less about integrity and more about maintaining status quo.

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 11:41 am |

    [quote comment=”392968″]Best observation of all, though, was whoever it was here who reminded us that the non-Perfecto will be remembered far, far longer than the actual Perfecto a few days before.

    Had Harvey Haddix won that game in nine innings, his spot in history would be relative invisibility other than, “Oh, yeah, Haddix…isn’t he one of the guys who pitched a perfect game?”

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Sadly, I’ve got a feeling it’d be more like “Who’s Harvey Haddix?” Even if Galarraga goes on to have a mediocre (or worse) career, he’ll always be remembered as the guy who got shafted on his perfect game. Hopefully, he’ll always be remembered for his composure after the fact as well.

  • kj | June 4, 2010 at 11:41 am |

    [quote comment=”392976″]I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.[/quote]
    I’m of the opinion that he did the right thing by not overturning the call.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 11:42 am |

    [quote comment=”392976″][quote comment=”392973″]”Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s not the same Ricko, cuz I seriously doubt anyone had a sweeter smile than Galarraga in that Twins/Mariners game. :o/

    I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.[/quote]

    Ump decides safe or out in that situation. Says so right there in the rule book.

    It’s a one-hitter, now and forever.

    If Galarraga isn’t bitching, no one else should be. He’s the one with the right perspective.

    Can’t, as they say, unring a bell.

    (Besides, and this is a really forced hypothetical, I admit, and while not probable is theoretically possible. If Selig rules the guy out on that play, then the next hitter, who made an out, never batted. His out is erased. But what if, at the end the season, not having that at-bat were to win the guy a batting title by the slimmest of margins?)

    —Ricko

  • JTH | June 4, 2010 at 11:48 am |

    [quote comment=”392980″][quote comment=”392976″][quote comment=”392973″]”Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s not the same Ricko, cuz I seriously doubt anyone had a sweeter smile than Galarraga in that Twins/Mariners game. :o/

    I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.[/quote]

    Ump decides safe or out in that situation. Says so right there in the rule book.

    It’s a one-hitter, now and forever.

    If Galarraga isn’t bitching, no one else should be. He’s the one with the right perspective.

    Can’t, as they say, unring a bell.

    (Besides, and this is a really forced hypothetical, I admit, and while not probable is theoretically possible. If Selig rules the guy out on that play, then the next hitter, who made an out, never batted. His out is erased. But what if, at the end the season, not having that at-bat were to win the guy a batting title by the slimmest of margins?)

    —Ricko[/quote]
    I say the call should be changed to E-1 rather than a hit. Cabrera’s throw was good. Galarraga got to first base in time. The ump ruled the runner safe. So in the Joyce’s judgment, he missed the bag or he must not have caught it cleanly. That’s an error. It’s not a perfect game, but it’s still a no-hitter.

  • Chance Michaels | June 4, 2010 at 11:51 am |

    [quote comment=”392966″][quote comment=”392955″][quote comment=”392953″]and then they give out some stupid mutant looking ball trophy.

    The cyllindrical shape the ball is balancing on is supposed to be a basketball net. You rarely see the engraving on it that makes it more clear.[/quote]

    I know what it’s supposed to be, but I still think it’s an ugly trophy. From the perfectly square base to the squished, off-kilter quarter-basket, too many elements conflict. Plus it only looks good from the one angle – it’s really stupid looking from the back.

    And even when viewed at its best angle, it’s too literal to work – the basketball which will never fit in the too-small net. Looks more like somebody’s tossing the ball into the office garbage can.

    Plus, as you mention, the engraving disappears at a distance of about ten inches.

    It’s just a really terrible design.[/quote]

    Actually, I don’t think it’s supposed to be literal at all. If it was supposed to be, I think that’s exactly what it would be: a realistic, literal representation of a ball on the rim. The fact that the net is stylized, too small, etc. makes it more of an abstract, or sculptural piece, which makes it bound by no physical limitations. I don’t like it that much, and really, it’s not my favorite trophy, but just because it doesn’t ‘work’ spatially doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a terrible design. I don’t think it was ever intended to be spatially accurate. It’s an artists abstract vision of what it is, which, as we know, is really often times less about design and more about personal expression.[/quote]
    My beef is that it’s neither fish nor fowl.

    It’s neither literal nor stylized, incorporating elements of both in a murky mash-up.

    They chose to represent something concrete, the moment before a ball goes through the basket. I think that’s a brilliant idea. My problem is entirely with the execution. They’ve sort of stylized it, with the angled basket, but then added another literal element to the mix, with the floor-plank base.

    Worst of all is that intended effect only works from one angle. From the back it’s an unintelligible mess – that’s why I call it a terrible design.

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 11:58 am |

    [quote comment=”392977″]If anything, the imperfect game and what happened in the Twins/Mariners game are BOTH prime examples of why use of instant replay SHOULD be expanded. If we’re worried about the actual integrity of the game, be it in terms of individual glory OR wins and losses, we should be advocating for ways to get it right. Otherwise, it’s less about integrity and more about maintaining status quo.[/quote]

    I brought up a few posts back that I’d changed my position on this since yesterday when I was all for MLB going to replay. Baseball has operated this way for over 150 years and done pretty good for itself, why does it need change? I think of it as less maintaining status quo than allowing human error to be part of the game. Sure a lot of fans will be unhappy if their team is on the stinky end of the stick, but hey, that’s life. If life were perfect, I’d have a swimming pool full of piping hot fettucini alfredo, a perpetually full and ice cold glass bottle of Pepsi and knees that still worked the way I want them to. Instant replay is a “do-over” for umpires. Bill Buckner didn’t have that option, nor should he have… why let umpires off the hook?

  • Chance Michaels | June 4, 2010 at 11:58 am |

    [quote comment=”392981″]
    I say the call should be changed to E-1 rather than a hit. Cabrera’s throw was good. Galarraga got to first base in time. The ump ruled the runner safe. So in the Joyce’s judgment, he missed the bag or he must not have caught it cleanly. That’s an error. It’s not a perfect game, but it’s still a no-hitter.[/quote]
    No, I think you’re compounding the problem there. It isn’t some zero-sum game where every hit must necessitate an error on somebody else’s part. Not every infield hit is an automatic out.

    Just as an aside, after watching the video again I don’t see Jason Donald getting the credit he deserves – he ran out that grounder all the way, doing his damndest to get to first before the ball.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 11:59 am |

    [quote comment=”392982″][quote comment=”392966″][quote comment=”392955″][quote comment=”392953″]and then they give out some stupid mutant looking ball trophy.

    The cyllindrical shape the ball is balancing on is supposed to be a basketball net. You rarely see the engraving on it that makes it more clear.[/quote]

    I know what it’s supposed to be, but I still think it’s an ugly trophy. From the perfectly square base to the squished, off-kilter quarter-basket, too many elements conflict. Plus it only looks good from the one angle – it’s really stupid looking from the back.

    And even when viewed at its best angle, it’s too literal to work – the basketball which will never fit in the too-small net. Looks more like somebody’s tossing the ball into the office garbage can.

    Plus, as you mention, the engraving disappears at a distance of about ten inches.

    It’s just a really terrible design.[/quote]

    Actually, I don’t think it’s supposed to be literal at all. If it was supposed to be, I think that’s exactly what it would be: a realistic, literal representation of a ball on the rim. The fact that the net is stylized, too small, etc. makes it more of an abstract, or sculptural piece, which makes it bound by no physical limitations. I don’t like it that much, and really, it’s not my favorite trophy, but just because it doesn’t ‘work’ spatially doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a terrible design. I don’t think it was ever intended to be spatially accurate. It’s an artists abstract vision of what it is, which, as we know, is really often times less about design and more about personal expression.[/quote]
    My beef is that it’s neither fish nor fowl.

    It’s neither literal nor stylized, incorporating elements of both in a murky mash-up.

    They chose to represent something concrete, the moment before a ball goes through the basket. I think that’s a brilliant idea. My problem is entirely with the execution. They’ve sort of stylized it, with the angled basket, but then added another literal element to the mix, with the floor-plank base.

    Worst of all is that intended effect only works from one angle. From the back it’s an unintelligible mess – that’s why I call it a terrible design.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”392981″][quote comment=”392980″][quote comment=”392976″][quote comment=”392973″]”Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s not the same Ricko, cuz I seriously doubt anyone had a sweeter smile than Galarraga in that Twins/Mariners game. :o/

    I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.[/quote]

    Ump decides safe or out in that situation. Says so right there in the rule book.

    It’s a one-hitter, now and forever.

    If Galarraga isn’t bitching, no one else should be. He’s the one with the right perspective.

    Can’t, as they say, unring a bell.

    (Besides, and this is a really forced hypothetical, I admit, and while not probable is theoretically possible. If Selig rules the guy out on that play, then the next hitter, who made an out, never batted. His out is erased. But what if, at the end the season, not having that at-bat were to win the guy a batting title by the slimmest of margins?)

    —Ricko[/quote]
    I say the call should be changed to E-1 rather than a hit. Cabrera’s throw was good. Galarraga got to first base in time. The ump ruled the runner safe. So in the Joyce’s judgment, he missed the bag or he must not have caught it cleanly. That’s an error. It’s not a perfect game, but it’s still a no-hitter.[/quote]

    So now the official scorer’s the bad guy? :)

    Only truly sane thing to do is let it stand.

    Otherwise, they’ll start reviewing a blown call on a player’s last at bat of the season if a batting title’s at stake.

    No one is serious enough to suggest decisions should be reviewed ex post facto involving something as important as winning or losing. How can we elevate individual glory to a status higher than that?

    —Ricko

  • JimWa | June 4, 2010 at 12:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”392981″][quote comment=”392980″][quote comment=”392976″][quote comment=”392973″]”Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s not the same Ricko, cuz I seriously doubt anyone had a sweeter smile than Galarraga in that Twins/Mariners game. :o/

    I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.[/quote]

    Ump decides safe or out in that situation. Says so right there in the rule book.

    It’s a one-hitter, now and forever.

    If Galarraga isn’t bitching, no one else should be. He’s the one with the right perspective.

    Can’t, as they say, unring a bell.

    (Besides, and this is a really forced hypothetical, I admit, and while not probable is theoretically possible. If Selig rules the guy out on that play, then the next hitter, who made an out, never batted. His out is erased. But what if, at the end the season, not having that at-bat were to win the guy a batting title by the slimmest of margins?)

    —Ricko[/quote]
    I say the call should be changed to E-1 rather than a hit. Cabrera’s throw was good. Galarraga got to first base in time. The ump ruled the runner safe. So in the Joyce’s judgment, he missed the bag or he must not have caught it cleanly. That’s an error. It’s not a perfect game, but it’s still a no-hitter.[/quote]

    E-66

  • M.Princip | June 4, 2010 at 12:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”392980″][quote comment=”392976″][quote comment=”392973″]”Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s not the same Ricko, cuz I seriously doubt anyone had a sweeter smile than Galarraga in that Twins/Mariners game. :o/

    I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.[/quote]

    Ump decides safe or out in that situation. Says so right there in the rule book.

    It’s a one-hitter, now and forever.

    If Galarraga isn’t bitching, no one else should be. He’s the one with the right perspective.

    Can’t, as they say, unring a bell.

    (Besides, and this is a really forced hypothetical, I admit, and while not probable is theoretically possible. If Selig rules the guy out on that play, then the next hitter, who made an out, never batted. His out is erased. But what if, at the end the season, not having that at-bat were to win the guy a batting title by the slimmest of margins?)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Yea, just a tad stretch on that hypothetical. heh heh

    I’m not a baseball guy, so as neophytic sounding as this maybe, after watching Keith Olbermann and his interview with Ken Burns last night, I firmly believe this call(imperfect game)should be overturned.

  • JimWa | June 4, 2010 at 12:09 pm |

    Otherwise, they’ll start reviewing a blown call on a player’s last at bat of the season if a batting title’s at stake.

    But Mama, but Mama … (sorry about the Stinky Face reference for those of you without little kids at home) what if they overturn the ruling, and he wins the batting title, but only because that one 0-fer is off the record book? How would the batting title LOSER feel? Huh, Mama?

  • jim greenfield | June 4, 2010 at 12:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”392967″]You know, with each passing year, it’s getting harder and harder to defend no Instant Replay when the umpires are making completely ridiculous & obvious mistakes. Bud Selig is also a big part of the problem, he’s an enabler, defiant against all logic and facts, and has done terrible things to the sport, and he has just no balls to stand up to anybody. He wouldn’t even fathom to admit mistake on anybody’s part.

    I’d say add more umpires on the field with more training, allow delayed calls with conferences – a much better chance of getting the call right. As as traditionalist, I am beyond pissed. They’re making it lunacy. And what’s going to happen to Joyce? A fine? Suspension? Hell no. He’ll be in the public eye for a few days, and everything will be forgotten, and nothing will be fixed or done for the better. You know, I don’t even know why I even care, the Tigers are a hated divisional rival. Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.[/quote]

    Good point. The ump the other night immeadiatly relized his mistake IIRC. Bit under the rules he couldn’t revese his call. “Safe, I mean out” what’s so bad about that?

  • LI Phil | June 4, 2010 at 12:16 pm |

    i’ve mentioned this before

    this book is a must read for anyone debating the blown call wednesday last

    there should be no action taken to reverse the call

    i know that’s against popular will on here and i feel for galarraga AND joyce — those two will be forever linked and probably no one feels worse (or should) than joyce

    nevertheless, this is one of things that KEEPS baseball the greatest sport in the world, and human error is as much a part of the beauty (and yes, drawbacks) of the sport as anything

    let the call stand…complain about it and debate it forever, if you must…even consider ways to make sure it can’t happen again

    but it’s a one-hit shutout, and that’s that

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 12:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”392989″]Good point. The ump the other night immeadiatly relized his mistake IIRC. Bit under the rules he couldn’t revese his call. “Safe, I mean out” what’s so bad about that?[/quote]

    The downside of that is it may undermine the integrity of the umpire. What if he gets it right the first time? Right or wrong, people need someone to make a decision. If he says “Safe!” then “Oh wait… OUT!” then “Oh wait, I didn’t think of that… SAFE AGAIN!” where is the line drawn on how many times an ump can reverse himself?

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 12:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”392990″]let the call stand…complain about it and debate it forever, if you must…even consider ways to make sure it can’t happen again[/quote]

    And that’s one of the reasons sports are so great.

  • Teebz | June 4, 2010 at 12:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”392956″]I believe the term “The Finals” is trademarked by the NBA as well, and they wouldn’t allow the NHL to use the term. That’s why on the patches and the ice it just reads Stanley Cup Final, not finals. Not a big NBA fan to begin with, but that just seems a bit excessive.[/quote]

    I believe the term “Finals” would indicate there is more than one Final. The NBA can keep their trademark since they clearly hold more than one Final per year to determine a champion.

    What’s that? They don’t have more than one Final? How dumb.

  • Teebz | June 4, 2010 at 12:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”392967″]You know, with each passing year, it’s getting harder and harder to defend no Instant Replay when the umpires are making completely ridiculous & obvious mistakes. Bud Selig is also a big part of the problem, he’s an enabler, defiant against all logic and facts, and has done terrible things to the sport, and he has just no balls to stand up to anybody. He wouldn’t even fathom to admit mistake on anybody’s part.

    I’d say add more umpires on the field with more training, allow delayed calls with conferences – a much better chance of getting the call right. As as traditionalist, I am beyond pissed. They’re making it lunacy. And what’s going to happen to Joyce? A fine? Suspension? Hell no. He’ll be in the public eye for a few days, and everything will be forgotten, and nothing will be fixed or done for the better. You know, I don’t even know why I even care, the Tigers are a hated divisional rival. Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.[/quote]

    Since humans decide the outcomes of games in every single sporting event, how is it harder to defend instant replay?

    If we were meant to be perfect, sports would be boring.

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 12:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”392993″][quote comment=”392956″]I believe the term “The Finals” is trademarked by the NBA as well, and they wouldn’t allow the NHL to use the term. That’s why on the patches and the ice it just reads Stanley Cup Final, not finals. Not a big NBA fan to begin with, but that just seems a bit excessive.[/quote]

    I believe the term “Finals” would indicate there is more than one Final. The NBA can keep their trademark since they clearly hold more than one Final per year to determine a champion.

    What’s that? They don’t have more than one Final? How dumb.[/quote]

    Then technically, wouldn’t only the final game of “The NBA Final” be the only one you could call that? :-) There needs to be at least 4 games, so they need to call it “Finals.”

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 12:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”392994″][quote comment=”392967″]You know, with each passing year, it’s getting harder and harder to defend no Instant Replay when the umpires are making completely ridiculous & obvious mistakes. Bud Selig is also a big part of the problem, he’s an enabler, defiant against all logic and facts, and has done terrible things to the sport, and he has just no balls to stand up to anybody. He wouldn’t even fathom to admit mistake on anybody’s part.

    I’d say add more umpires on the field with more training, allow delayed calls with conferences – a much better chance of getting the call right. As as traditionalist, I am beyond pissed. They’re making it lunacy. And what’s going to happen to Joyce? A fine? Suspension? Hell no. He’ll be in the public eye for a few days, and everything will be forgotten, and nothing will be fixed or done for the better. You know, I don’t even know why I even care, the Tigers are a hated divisional rival. Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.[/quote]

    Since humans decide the outcomes of games in every single sporting event, how is it harder to defend instant replay?

    If we were meant to be perfect, sports would be boring.[/quote]

    See, now, Teebz, that’s why video games are SO much better.
    You get do-overs, extra lives. You don’t have to live with something that doesn’t go your way cuz you muffed it on your one and only chance. I mean, living with reality really sucks.

    Plus, you can store all your games on the same shelves with your “participation trophies” you got for putting in no more effort than showing up…most of the time, anyway.

    Then you can sit on your couch, look around and know what a “winner” you are. And you never have to feel bad or sad. Or come in second. Or worse, last.

    —Ricko

  • JTH | June 4, 2010 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”392985″]
    So now the official scorer’s the bad guy? :)
    [/quote]I’ll assume from your li’l smiley-face emoticon that you aren’t serious.

    All I’m saying is you could argue that it’s not a hit because the throw was solid and on time and Donald was beaten to the bag. The call is not reversed. Perfect game is still gone. In theory, Joyce’s competence/integrity is not called into question.

    By the way, any word about a “tough shit” letter for Galarraga?

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 12:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”392997″]By the way, any word about a “tough shit” letter for Galarraga?[/quote]

    LMFAO!

  • RS Rogers | June 4, 2010 at 12:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”392967″]You know, with each passing year, it’s getting harder and harder to defend no Instant Replay when the umpires are making completely ridiculous & obvious mistakes. Bud Selig is also a big part of the problem, he’s an enabler, defiant against all logic and facts, and has done terrible things to the sport, and he has just no balls to stand up to anybody. He wouldn’t even fathom to admit mistake on anybody’s part.

    I’d say add more umpires on the field with more training, allow delayed calls with conferences – a much better chance of getting the call right. As as traditionalist, I am beyond pissed. They’re making it lunacy. And what’s going to happen to Joyce? A fine? Suspension? Hell no. He’ll be in the public eye for a few days, and everything will be forgotten, and nothing will be fixed or done for the better. You know, I don’t even know why I even care, the Tigers are a hated divisional rival. Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.[/quote]

    Actually, Bud Selig has already significantly improved the quality and consistency of umpiring. There’s more ongoing training and active, day-to-day supervision, oversight, and continuing instruction than ever before. Balls-and-strikes calling has hugely improved in the last 10 years and there’s a lot less deference to star players on close plays. Think of all the “outs” Chuck Knoblauch recorded for the Yankees without being within 10 feet of a runner or a base, or in one playoff game without even having the ball. That crap just doesn’t happen anymore.

    The thing is, the infield umpires blow two or three close calls in every game. Usually, the blown call goes against the runner; contrary to the rules, in practice the fielders get the benefit of the doubt. Think of all the double plays that pivot on a middle infielder who never touches second or the steals called out because the fielder got his glove to where the runner could have been without actually touching him. Happens all the time.

    If you’ve ever seen a perfect game (I’ve seen two) or a no-hitter (more than I can remember) before, you know that perfection depends in part on getting all the breaks from umpires who call ties for the fielder or who develop an aversion to calling ball four on any pitch not in the dirt.

    This particular blown call just isn’t that big a deal. It’s less egregious than the series of blown calls that cost the Twins two games against the Yankees in the playoffs last year and made the ALDS a best-one-of-three proposition for the Yanks. The right team won the game in Detroit; the ump’s call did not change the outcome of the game. And it’s just one game in a 162-game season, not a do-or-die playoff contest. A shame for the pitcher and the umpire both, but fans and the public alike will remember Galaraga and Joyce for their sportsmanship and integrity far longer than they’d remember some kid who threw a perfecto the week after Roy Halladay.

  • Giancarlo | June 4, 2010 at 12:54 pm |

    Rollerball (1975) has already come true, vis-à-vis the almost complete corporatization of professional sports.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 1:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”392997″][quote comment=”392985″]
    So now the official scorer’s the bad guy? :)
    [/quote]I’ll assume from your li’l smiley-face emoticon that you aren’t serious.

    All I’m saying is you could argue that it’s not a hit because the throw was solid and on time and Donald was beaten to the bag. The call is not reversed. Perfect game is still gone. In theory, Joyce’s competence/integrity is not called into question.

    By the way, any word about a “tough shit” letter for Galarraga?[/quote]

    Know what, if you watch that replay from behind Joyce, at regular speed (instead of it being slowed down and freeze-framed the way it always is and further indicting Joyce)…it DOES look like the ball moves in Galarraga’s glove, as if he juggled it a bit. Starts as a bit of a snow cone and then drops toward the pocket as he closes the glove. *

    Of course they never show us THAT. And Joyce was man enough NOT to say, “I thought he juggled it.”

    On that basis, the Scorer could, upon further review have decided it was E-1.

    * That’s something first basemen learn early on, Even if it’s a snowcone, hold it there and show it to the Ump. If you release it a bit and let it drop into the pocket you run the risk of a “Safe” call because you didn’t have it secured. After you see the “Out” signal, THEN let the ball drop.

    —Ricko

  • Anthony G | June 4, 2010 at 1:02 pm |

    Did anyone notice that Rondo was wearing white shoes when all his teammates were wearing black shoes?

  • Mark in Shiga | June 4, 2010 at 1:03 pm |

    I can’t see why anyone would like those plush toys made from Yomiuri Giants uniforms. Jerseys and pants are much more valuable in their original form — why are they benig torn up? what a travesty.

  • concealed78 | June 4, 2010 at 1:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”392994″][quote comment=”392967″]You know, with each passing year, it’s getting harder and harder to defend no Instant Replay when the umpires are making completely ridiculous & obvious mistakes. Bud Selig is also a big part of the problem, he’s an enabler, defiant against all logic and facts, and has done terrible things to the sport, and he has just no balls to stand up to anybody. He wouldn’t even fathom to admit mistake on anybody’s part.

    I’d say add more umpires on the field with more training, allow delayed calls with conferences – a much better chance of getting the call right. As as traditionalist, I am beyond pissed. They’re making it lunacy. And what’s going to happen to Joyce? A fine? Suspension? Hell no. He’ll be in the public eye for a few days, and everything will be forgotten, and nothing will be fixed or done for the better. You know, I don’t even know why I even care, the Tigers are a hated divisional rival. Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.[/quote]

    Since humans decide the outcomes of games in every single sporting event, how is it harder to defend instant replay?

    If we were meant to be perfect, sports would be boring.[/quote]

    It’s getting harder to defend the charm of human error, and it’s starting to get to the point that Instant Replay is necessary and my old traditionalist ways of thinking is becoming outdated and ridiculous. What’s more important? Getting the call right most of the time, or getting it right 99.9% of the time from an officiating perspective? But isn’t the whole point of sports to divide winners from losers, in the grand scheme of things aside from it being a job, for fun, exercise, sportsmanship, etc? I don’t see how any sport can be “perfect”.

    But guddamit, I wouldn’t want to lose a perfect game to some stupid umpire because he was too proud to ask for some help or a review. They can have all the good sportsmanship and hand shakes and feel-good headlines they want, it still stinks.

  • Paul Lukas | June 4, 2010 at 1:37 pm |

    I didn’t weigh in yesterday on what “should” be done by Bud, the official scorer, or anyone else, mainly because it never occurred to me that anyone would seriously consider overturning the outcome.

    Umps miss calls all the time. The fact that this one happened on the last out of what would have been a perfecto is irrelevant. We don’t overturn botched calls in the 5th inning of 4-2 game, and nobody should overturn this one either.

    Unfortunate? Yup. Life is like that sometimes.

    For those of you who think the call should be overturned, here’s a question: It used to be fairly common for umpires to expand the strike zone once there were two strikes on a batter. In other words, a pitch that would have been called outside with a 2-1 count would suddenly become a strike with a 2-2 count. (This still happens occasionally, but I think umps have gotten much better about this over the past decade or so, whether due to stricter standards from the league office, or due to Questec, or whatever.) Most of us, I’m pretty sure, decried this — a ball is a ball and a strike is a strike, we said, regardless of the count. Right?

    And a blown call is a blown call. Regardless of the situation.

    Incidentally, the whole “If it doesn’t bother Galarraga, why should it bother anyone else?” argument doesn’t wash. Yes, it’s really nice that he’s handled everything so nicely. It’s also nice that Joyce has been such a class act. But even if Galarraga was moaning to the media about how he got jobbed, and even if Joyce was saying, “I don’t care what the video looks like, I *know* he was safe and the rest of you can all go fuck yourselves,” the right move would STILL be to let the call stand, because that’s just baseball.

    Now, as to whether we should now have expanded instant replay, that’s a legitimate debate to have, and I’m not sure where I stand on that — I’m a bit torn. Either way, though, it’s too late to do anything about the game in Detroit. It was too late from the very moment Joyce made his call.

  • Miles | June 4, 2010 at 1:42 pm |

    As I asked last night while eating dinner with some colleagues… “What if the call that was made was erroneous in that Donald (who hustled his ass down the line BTW) was clearly safe but had been called out?” Would people still be complaining about the call?

  • Paul Lukas | June 4, 2010 at 1:47 pm |

    And why is anyone making a fuss over Donald hustling down the line?

    1) That’s his job.

    2) No team wants to be the victim of a perfect game or no-hitter, so of course he was doing his darndest to leg out the hit.

    3) Even without the perfecto situation, he had to be smelling base hit as the ball came off the bat — I certainly was. Cabrera ranged really far off the bag to make get that ball. Took perfect execution to make that play, and I’d think any hitter at any point in any game would’ve been sprinting on that one and thinking he had a good chance of being safe.

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 1:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”393008″]
    …I’d think any hitter at any point in any game would’ve been sprinting on that one and thinking he had a good chance of being safe.[/quote]

    Unless his name is Manny Ramirez.

  • Chris from Carver | June 4, 2010 at 2:09 pm |

    Here’s something to consider, what if instant replay was available for every person at their job? How many people would want it then?

  • M.Princip | June 4, 2010 at 2:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”393007″]As I asked last night while eating dinner with some colleagues… “What if the call that was made was erroneous in that Donald (who hustled his ass down the line BTW) was clearly safe but had been called out?” Would people still be complaining about the call?[/quote]

    Yes.

  • JTH | June 4, 2010 at 2:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”393010″]Here’s something to consider, what if instant replay was available for every person at their job? How many people would want it then?[/quote]
    if it’s something that would help me make correct a mistake right on the spot, I’d be all for it.

    I made a mistake on something Tuesday night and I spent pretty much all of Wednesday and part of yesterday cleaning up the mess that ensued. If there was some kind of magic re-do button available to me at the time, I’d have used it.

  • JTH | June 4, 2010 at 2:17 pm |

    And speaking of magic redo buttons…
    [quote comment=”393010″]Here’s something to consider, what if instant replay was available for every person at their job? How many people would want it then?[/quote]
    if it’s something that would help me make correct a mistake right on the spot, I’d be all for it.

    I made a mistake on something Tuesday night and I spent pretty much all of Wednesday and part of yesterday cleaning up the mess that ensued. If there was some kind of magic re-do button available to me at the time, I’d have used it.

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 2:20 pm |

    Aside from the length of the shorts, anyone else think the Lakers’ uniforms looked a tad better in the old days?

    http://sportsillustr...

    http://sportsillustr...

  • Chris from Carver | June 4, 2010 at 2:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”393013″]And speaking of magic redo buttons…
    [quote comment=”393010″]Here’s something to consider, what if instant replay was available for every person at their job? How many people would want it then?[/quote]
    if it’s something that would help me make correct a mistake right on the spot, I’d be all for it.

    I made a mistake on something Tuesday night and I spent pretty much all of Wednesday and part of yesterday cleaning up the mess that ensued. If there was some kind of magic re-do button available to me at the time, I’d have used it.[/quote]
    But would you want people scrutinizing every action of yours and saying that you should of done this, when in your opinion you did the best you could?

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 2:21 pm |

    AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT…

    How things change.

    Last night the Twins announcers were discussing that at one time—and at the SAME time—the Seattle Mariners had Randy Johnson, Ken Griffey Jr., Alex Rodriguez and Edgar Martinez.

    And I thought, Oh, man, there was a time when guys like that would have worn the uniform of only one team their entire careers.

    The days of “I remember that lineup so well” (because it usually changed very little) sure are behind us now. The Big Red Machine was maybe the last such lineup that went year after year after with basically the same starting defense?

    —Ricko

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 2:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”393016″]AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT…

    How things change.

    Last night the Twins announcers were discussing that at one time—and at the SAME time—the Seattle Mariners had Randy Johnson, Ken Griffey Jr., Alex Rodriguez and Edgar Martinez.

    And I thought, Oh, man, there was a time when guys like that would have worn the uniform of only one team their entire careers.

    The days of “I remember that lineup so well” (because it usually changed very little) sure are behind us now. The Big Red Machine was maybe the last such lineup that went year after year after with basically the same starting defense?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Yes, those were the days. I can quote the ’75 Reds lineup and ’77-78 Red Sox by heart. If you pressed, I could tell you all the starters for the ’86 Mets, but no their batting order.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 2:27 pm |

    Perfectly willing to be corrected here, but the Big Red Machine was, what….?
    Perez, Morgan, Concepcion, Rose around the infield.
    Outfield was Foster, Geronimo, Griffey Sr.
    Catcher, of course, Bench.

    Outfield changed a bit, tough, I think.

    Last of long-time-together lineups would be same era, I’d think.
    A’s, Orioles, Royals, Cardinals, Red Sox, maybe? Nominees, anyone?

    —Ricko

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 2:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”393014″]Aside from the length of the shorts, anyone else think the Lakers’ uniforms looked a tad better in the old days?

    http://sportsillustr...

    http://sportsillustr...

    And can I get an answer to this question? (To paraphrase Jeff Goldbloom from “Jurassic Park” — “You are going to have actual uniform discussion here, aren’t you?”)

  • JTH | June 4, 2010 at 2:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”393015″][quote comment=”393013″]And speaking of magic redo buttons…
    [quote comment=”393010″]Here’s something to consider, what if instant replay was available for every person at their job? How many people would want it then?[/quote]
    if it’s something that would help me make correct a mistake right on the spot, I’d be all for it.

    I made a mistake on something Tuesday night and I spent pretty much all of Wednesday and part of yesterday cleaning up the mess that ensued. If there was some kind of magic re-do button available to me at the time, I’d have used it.[/quote]
    But would you want people scrutinizing every action of yours and saying that you should of done this, when in your opinion you did the best you could?[/quote]
    To an extent, that exactly what did happen.

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 2:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”393016″]AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT…

    How things change.

    Last night the Twins announcers were discussing that at one time—and at the SAME time—the Seattle Mariners had Randy Johnson, Ken Griffey Jr., Alex Rodriguez and Edgar Martinez.

    And I thought, Oh, man, there was a time when guys like that would have worn the uniform of only one team their entire careers.

    The days of “I remember that lineup so well” (because it usually changed very little) sure are behind us now. The Big Red Machine was maybe the last such lineup that went year after year after with basically the same starting defense?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Wow, a lot of talent. Imagine if they had kept that team together and added Ichiro.

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 2:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”393017″][quote comment=”393016″]AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT…

    How things change.

    Last night the Twins announcers were discussing that at one time—and at the SAME time—the Seattle Mariners had Randy Johnson, Ken Griffey Jr., Alex Rodriguez and Edgar Martinez.

    And I thought, Oh, man, there was a time when guys like that would have worn the uniform of only one team their entire careers.

    The days of “I remember that lineup so well” (because it usually changed very little) sure are behind us now. The Big Red Machine was maybe the last such lineup that went year after year after with basically the same starting defense?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Yes, those were the days. I can quote the ’75 Reds lineup and ’77-78 Red Sox by heart. If you pressed, I could tell you all the starters for the ’86 Mets, but no their batting order.[/quote]

    Make that ’75-’76 Reds and “not” before “their batting order.” Sorry for the fat-fingers.

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 2:34 pm |

    Okay, so as long as we’re off uni discussion for a bit, can anyone answer this: If the Mariners had kept that team intact, would they have been one of the greatest ever? And how would you compare the ’72-’74 A’s to the ’98-’00 Yankees? A’s didn’t win as many games in the regular seasons, but they sure had talent that could hang with anybody.

  • Bernard | June 4, 2010 at 2:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”393015″][quote comment=”393013″]And speaking of magic redo buttons…
    [quote comment=”393010″]Here’s something to consider, what if instant replay was available for every person at their job? How many people would want it then?[/quote]
    if it’s something that would help me make correct a mistake right on the spot, I’d be all for it.

    I made a mistake on something Tuesday night and I spent pretty much all of Wednesday and part of yesterday cleaning up the mess that ensued. If there was some kind of magic re-do button available to me at the time, I’d have used it.[/quote]
    But would you want people scrutinizing every action of yours and saying that you should of done this, when in your opinion you did the best you could?[/quote]

    It depends on my motivation, I guess. Am I more concerned with arriving at the optimal outcome (better for the company/team/game), or saving my own ass?

    If it’s the former, I’ll take the life ump. If it’s the latter, no fuckin way.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 2:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”393019″][quote comment=”393014″]Aside from the length of the shorts, anyone else think the Lakers’ uniforms looked a tad better in the old days?

    http://sportsillustr...

    http://sportsillustr...

    And can I get an answer to this question? (To paraphrase Jeff Goldbloom from “Jurassic Park” — “You are going to have actual uniform discussion here, aren’t you?”)[/quote]

    Kinda what I was going for. At least think about, “Remember how odd it was to suddenly see Harmon Killebrew in a Royals’ uni? Or Willie McCovey in Padres’ all yellow-gold?”

    Best idea I could come up with. :)

    —Ricko

  • bourbon soaked idiot | June 4, 2010 at 2:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”392980″][quote comment=”392976″][quote comment=”392973″]”Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s not the same Ricko, cuz I seriously doubt anyone had a sweeter smile than Galarraga in that Twins/Mariners game. :o/

    I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.[/quote]

    Ump decides safe or out in that situation. Says so right there in the rule book.

    It’s a one-hitter, now and forever.

    If Galarraga isn’t bitching, no one else should be. He’s the one with the right perspective.

    Can’t, as they say, unring a bell.

    (Besides, and this is a really forced hypothetical, I admit, and while not probable is theoretically possible. If Selig rules the guy out on that play, then the next hitter, who made an out, never batted. His out is erased. But what if, at the end the season, not having that at-bat were to win the guy a batting title by the slimmest of margins?)

    —Ricko[/quote]
    The official scorer should rule E1 on that play. The pitcher will still get a no-hitter. The batter doesn’t get credit for a hit he should have received and the next batter still made an out. Yes I know it wasn’t an error, but I am sure there must be dozens of cases where the official scorer gave feilders an error on a play to keep a no hitter alive.

  • JTH | June 4, 2010 at 2:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”393019″][quote comment=”393014″]Aside from the length of the shorts, anyone else think the Lakers’ uniforms looked a tad better in the old days?

    http://sportsillustr...

    http://sportsillustr...

    And can I get an answer to this question? (To paraphrase Jeff Goldbloom from “Jurassic Park” — “You are going to have actual uniform discussion here, aren’t you?”)[/quote]
    I actually prefer their current look. Getting rid of the drop-shadows was a good move on their part.

    On a side note, I can’t type worth a damn today.

  • JimV19 | June 4, 2010 at 2:41 pm |

    I’d wear that Finals patch. It’s simple (less clutter on the jersey than when they had the trophy and the league logo), plus I like the NBA’s fixation with incoporating a basketball in its logos. I wish other sports did the same with their balls.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 2:45 pm |

    When Pete Rose signed with the Expos after being with the Red and Phillies…

    “Pete Rose wearing a hat that’s largely BLUE? WTF, does THAT look weird!”

    Likewise Willie Mays in Mets’ royal. And pinstripes, yet!

    Now days, no big deal. Happens all the time.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 2:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”393026″][quote comment=”392980″][quote comment=”392976″][quote comment=”392973″]”Galarraga just got so cheated it makes the sport look rotten.”

    But the Twins got hosed worse that same night. Mariner runner was called safe at 2b and winning run scored from third. Replay showed same thing everyone watching on TV saw: Guy at second clearly was out to end the inning.

    And that was my earlier point.

    A GAME ending prematurely should piss people off far more a pitcher getting rooked out of individual glory, when the outcome wasn’t altered whatsoever.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s not the same Ricko, cuz I seriously doubt anyone had a sweeter smile than Galarraga in that Twins/Mariners game. :o/

    I’m with Ken Burns on this one. Bud, do the right thing or forever be known as Darth Selig.[/quote]

    Ump decides safe or out in that situation. Says so right there in the rule book.

    It’s a one-hitter, now and forever.

    If Galarraga isn’t bitching, no one else should be. He’s the one with the right perspective.

    Can’t, as they say, unring a bell.

    (Besides, and this is a really forced hypothetical, I admit, and while not probable is theoretically possible. If Selig rules the guy out on that play, then the next hitter, who made an out, never batted. His out is erased. But what if, at the end the season, not having that at-bat were to win the guy a batting title by the slimmest of margins?)

    —Ricko[/quote]
    The official scorer should rule E1 on that play. The pitcher will still get a no-hitter. The batter doesn’t get credit for a hit he should have received and the next batter still made an out. Yes I know it wasn’t an error, but I am sure there must be dozens of cases where the official scorer gave feilders an error on a play to keep a no hitter alive.[/quote]

    But he didn’t.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 2:48 pm |

    “I WANT MY DAMN VIDEO GAME DO-OVER!!!
    REAL LIFE REALLY SUCKS AND I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT!!!”

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 2:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”393029″]When Pete Rose signed with the Expos after being with the Red and Phillies…

    “Pete Rose wearing a hat that’s largely BLUE? WTF, does THAT look weird!”

    Likewise Willie Mays in Mets’ royal. And pinstripes, yet!

    Now days, no big deal. Happens all the time.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    My first memory of Willie was as a Met, so my view is skewed. But I guess it was like Jordan being a Wizard. Then again, there was symmetry to Willie being with the Mets — he was returning to the city where he started and helped bring the team to the World Series.

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 2:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”393031″]”I WANT MY DAMN VIDEO GAME DO-OVER!!!
    REAL LIFE REALLY SUCKS AND I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT!!!”[/quote]

    So true.

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 3:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”393027″][quote comment=”393019″][quote comment=”393014″]Aside from the length of the shorts, anyone else think the Lakers’ uniforms looked a tad better in the old days?

    http://sportsillustr...

    http://sportsillustr...

    And can I get an answer to this question? (To paraphrase Jeff Goldbloom from “Jurassic Park” — “You are going to have actual uniform discussion here, aren’t you?”)[/quote]
    I actually prefer their current look. Getting rid of the drop-shadows was a good move on their part.

    On a side note, I can’t type worth a damn today.[/quote]

    Good point — I hadn’t noticed that. But I like the trim style on the old ones better.

  • Geeman | June 4, 2010 at 3:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”393034″][quote comment=”393027″][quote comment=”393019″][quote comment=”393014″]Aside from the length of the shorts, anyone else think the Lakers’ uniforms looked a tad better in the old days?

    http://sportsillustr...

    http://sportsillustr...

    And can I get an answer to this question? (To paraphrase Jeff Goldbloom from “Jurassic Park” — “You are going to have actual uniform discussion here, aren’t you?”)[/quote]
    I actually prefer their current look. Getting rid of the drop-shadows was a good move on their part.

    On a side note, I can’t type worth a damn today.[/quote]

    Good point — I hadn’t noticed that. But I like the trim style on the old ones better.[/quote]

    Wonder if Fletch would be seen in the third jersey?

    http://www.insidesoc...

    http://static.userla...

  • JimV19 | June 4, 2010 at 3:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”393026″]The official scorer should rule E1 on that play. The pitcher will still get a no-hitter. The batter doesn’t get credit for a hit he should have received and the next batter still made an out. Yes I know it wasn’t an error, but I am sure there must be dozens of cases where the official scorer gave feilders an error on a play to keep a no hitter alive.[/quote]

    And those cases would be wrong.

    Whatever happened to people taking pride in actually earning something? If I were a pitcher in that situation, I wouldn’t want an official scorer giving me a tainted no-hitter. That’s just as wrong as steroids are.

    Now Galarraga’s situation is a little different…for all I know. I didn’t see the game, so I don’t know if there were any other close calls that could have gone against him. Assuming there weren’t, then yes, he “deserves” a perfect game…but he still shouldn’t get it.

    The rule is what it is. You can change it in the future, but if you try to go retroactive, where does it end?

    The ’98 Padres may want game 1 of their World Series thrown out, because that Yankee grand slam never should have happened. The previous pitch was an glaringly obvious third strike that was called a ball.

    Plus, if you go retroactive you just enabled Milt Pappas to whine even more.

    It’s over. The only reason this is being discussed is because it’s the media warm fuzzy story of the week. As Ricko pointed out, where’s the fuss about the Twins/Mariners game?

    And no instant replay. In any sport. Use it only to grade the officials after the fact. You blow too many calls, you lose your job or get demoted. That would help the game more than making it last even longer while we look at yet another replay.

  • JTH | June 4, 2010 at 3:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”393036″]
    And no instant replay. In any sport. Use it only to grade the officials after the fact. You blow too many calls, you lose your job or get demoted. That would help the game more than making it last even longer while we look at yet another replay.[/quote]
    Games are already slowed down by managers/coaches/players arguing calls. Would an umpires looking at a replay instead of jawing back and forth with them really slow things down any more — especially if the challenge system I mentioned yesterday would be implemented?

  • JTH | June 4, 2010 at 3:24 pm |

    Another post, another typo…

  • M.Princip | June 4, 2010 at 3:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”393031″]”I WANT MY DAMN VIDEO GAME DO-OVER!!!
    REAL LIFE REALLY SUCKS AND I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT!!!”[/quote]

    Real life stinks when you get a bogus 100 dollar traffic ticket too. However, sweet when I can get my money back disputing it when the accuser doesn’t show up. Not as gracious as Joyce yet I’ll take it.

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 3:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”393016″]AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT…

    How things change.

    Last night the Twins announcers were discussing that at one time—and at the SAME time—the Seattle Mariners had Randy Johnson, Ken Griffey Jr., Alex Rodriguez and Edgar Martinez.

    And I thought, Oh, man, there was a time when guys like that would have worn the uniform of only one team their entire careers.

    The days of “I remember that lineup so well” (because it usually changed very little) sure are behind us now. The Big Red Machine was maybe the last such lineup that went year after year after with basically the same starting defense?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    That’s like 1999 when the Indians had Jim Thome, Manny Ramirez, Robbie Alomar, Sandy Alomar, Kenny Lofton and Omar Vizquel all at the same time. Of course, they were up 2-0 in the ALDS to the Bosox and blew it. Crap, now I’m getting depressed.

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 3:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”393016″]AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT…

    How things change.

    Last night the Twins announcers were discussing that at one time—and at the SAME time—the Seattle Mariners had Randy Johnson, Ken Griffey Jr., Alex Rodriguez and Edgar Martinez.

    And I thought, Oh, man, there was a time when guys like that would have worn the uniform of only one team their entire careers.

    The days of “I remember that lineup so well” (because it usually changed very little) sure are behind us now. The Big Red Machine was maybe the last such lineup that went year after year after with basically the same starting defense?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I still have my first baseball glove that wasn’t a hand-me-down… it’s a MacGregor Big Red Machine model… just wish I had the real autographs like in the photo instead of just the fakes on my glove. Awesome.

  • Chance Michaels | June 4, 2010 at 3:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”393036″][quote comment=”393026″]The official scorer should rule E1 on that play. The pitcher will still get a no-hitter. The batter doesn’t get credit for a hit he should have received and the next batter still made an out. Yes I know it wasn’t an error, but I am sure there must be dozens of cases where the official scorer gave feilders an error on a play to keep a no hitter alive.[/quote]

    And those cases would be wrong.

    Whatever happened to people taking pride in actually earning something? If I were a pitcher in that situation, I wouldn’t want an official scorer giving me a tainted no-hitter. That’s just as wrong as steroids are.[/quote]

    And that’s something else in Joyce’s favor. It would have been very easy for him to call Jason Donald out and end the game. But regardless of the accuracy of the call, he called what he saw.

    As much as Joyce now regrets “taking away” the perfect game, he wasn’t going to hand him one.

  • Giancarlo | June 4, 2010 at 3:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”393016″]
    The days of “I remember that lineup so well” (because it usually changed very little) sure are behind us now. The Big Red Machine was maybe the last such lineup that went year after year after with basically the same starting defense?
    —Ricko[/quote]

    LA Dodgers’ infield 1974 through 1981:

    Garvey – Lopes – Russell – Cey

    (Sooner or later I’ll think of something to say about uniforms…)

  • marc | June 4, 2010 at 4:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”393043″][quote comment=”393016″]
    The days of “I remember that lineup so well” (because it usually changed very little) sure are behind us now. The Big Red Machine was maybe the last such lineup that went year after year after with basically the same starting defense?
    —Ricko[/quote]

    LA Dodgers’ infield 1974 through 1981:

    Garvey – Lopes – Russell – Cey

    (Sooner or later I’ll think of something to say about uniforms…)[/quote]

    Garvey’s forearms were huge enough to take up a spot in the infield all by themselves.

  • JimV19 | June 4, 2010 at 4:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”393037″][quote comment=”393036″]
    And no instant replay. In any sport. Use it only to grade the officials after the fact. You blow too many calls, you lose your job or get demoted. That would help the game more than making it last even longer while we look at yet another replay.[/quote]
    Games are already slowed down by managers/coaches/players arguing calls. Would an umpires looking at a replay instead of jawing back and forth with them really slow things down any more — especially if the challenge system I mentioned yesterday would be implemented?[/quote]

    I wouldn’t allow the arguing, either. They should toss Piniella and guys like him if they come out of the dugout to argue.

    You want to yell at the ump? Fine, do it between innings or from the dugout without disrupting the flow of the game.

    Don’t mean to get all Grantland Rice on everyone, but if adversity is a true test of character, then aren’t blown calls a true test of sportsmanship? I just think replay diminishes the need for something that’s already sorely lacking in sports: sportsmanship.

    “This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains.” Nowhere in that quote does it say, “Sometimes you go to the replay.” Let’s keep it simple. I don’t care how big the money has gotten in sports. It’s still a game.

  • Giancarlo | June 4, 2010 at 4:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”393043″]

    LA Dodgers’ infield 1974 through 1981:

    Garvey – Lopes – Russell – Cey

    (Sooner or later I’ll think of something to say about uniforms…)[/quote]

    And they wore the SAME UNIFORM during that entire stretch!

    This has been Giancarlo’s Believe It or Not

  • Phil in Joplin (new witty name coming soon!) | June 4, 2010 at 4:56 pm |

    Does anyone have an Ebbets Free Shipping promo code?

  • Gusto44 | June 4, 2010 at 4:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”393029″]When Pete Rose signed with the Expos after being with the Red and Phillies…

    “Pete Rose wearing a hat that’s largely BLUE? WTF, does THAT look weird!”

    Likewise Willie Mays in Mets’ royal. And pinstripes, yet!

    Now days, no big deal. Happens all the time.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Another weird sight was Willie Stargell in a Braves uniform coaching Atlanta when Chuck Tanner was managing there. Very odd, indeed.

  • LI Phil | June 4, 2010 at 5:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”393046″]

    And they wore the SAME UNIFORM during that entire stretch![/quote]

    that must have been one helluva huge uniform

  • Tom Valentino | June 4, 2010 at 5:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”392974″]Here is a picture of the NBA trophy on the floor when Cleveland was in the finals.

    http://www.flickr.co...

    This annoyed me back in ’07: Would it have been so hard for them to cut the trophy graphic around the letters instead of just hacking it straight across the top and bottom of “Cavaliers”? The way they did it just looked so half-assed.

  • Michael Emody | June 4, 2010 at 5:47 pm |

    I’ve got ESPN Classic on as I drink coffee and prepare to mow the back yard before it rains (again!). Anyway- they’re running the seventh game of the 87 World Series, Twins vs Cardinals. It’s the height of the high stirrup era. Anyway, they ran a piece they did on the Twins during the 87 spring training, and the Twins were wearing the powder blue old uni pants in all the shots. So, for whatever it’s worth, the Twins seem to wait till opening day to wear new uni’s, using the old one’s thru spring training. Standard practice, for the most part.

    Shit. Still not raining. Oh, well…

  • Mike Engle | June 4, 2010 at 5:52 pm |

    Michael Wilbon is wearing an EDGE-style Blackhawks jersey on PTI, but the NHL shield looks to have been cut out.

  • The Hemogoblin | June 4, 2010 at 6:46 pm |

    I have stirrups! On a Friday! Hurrah!

    If the combination of my crappy phone and Twitpic would work, I would show you the proof.

  • Mike Engle | June 4, 2010 at 7:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”393053″]I have stirrups! On a Friday! Hurrah!

    If the combination of my crappy phone and Twitpic would work, I would show you the proof.[/quote]
    No stirrups on me, but Mr. Marshall: any chance of bringing hockey designs into the stirrup game? I’d love to have a pair of Habs barber-pole stirrups just to give all of Montreal a collective dizzy spell and a headache.

  • JimV19 | June 4, 2010 at 7:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”393048″]Another weird sight was Willie Stargell in a Braves uniform coaching Atlanta when Chuck Tanner was managing there. Very odd, indeed.[/quote]

    That was just wrong on so many levels. I actually had to buy a Braves t-shirt then. As soon as Willie was no longer with them I got rid of that thing.

  • JimV19 | June 4, 2010 at 7:36 pm |

    Knowing Phil, he’ll look in the mirror on his day off and say to himself, “You know, you do enjoy a vacation.” Ten seconds later, “Did you enjoy it? OK, back to work on another project.”

    Great job filling in for Paul. Now be as non-constructive as you can for a whole day. Rest is your friend.

  • Kyle F | June 4, 2010 at 7:37 pm |

    Watchin LSU v. Dartmouth on ESPNU and dartmouth has many players wearing two different style old English Ds on their unis

  • Teebz | June 4, 2010 at 8:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”392995″][quote comment=”392993″][quote comment=”392956″]I believe the term “The Finals” is trademarked by the NBA as well, and they wouldn’t allow the NHL to use the term. That’s why on the patches and the ice it just reads Stanley Cup Final, not finals. Not a big NBA fan to begin with, but that just seems a bit excessive.[/quote]

    I believe the term “Finals” would indicate there is more than one Final. The NBA can keep their trademark since they clearly hold more than one Final per year to determine a champion.

    What’s that? They don’t have more than one Final? How dumb.[/quote]

    Then technically, wouldn’t only the final game of “The NBA Final” be the only one you could call that? :-) There needs to be at least 4 games, so they need to call it “Finals.”[/quote]

    No. It’s the final series. Regardless of how you view it, it’s either the Final or the Final Series. Neither is plural.

  • interlockingtc | June 4, 2010 at 8:39 pm |

    We argue so passionately about this perfect game/blown call business and why? Because we relate to this shit. It’s got humanity written all over it. e see somebody has pitched a perfect game and we think: huh, whaddya know. And, we mostly forget about it. Really.

    But this imperfection…now that’s something that sticks in our craw. We relate to the pitcher, we relate to the umpire: because we do things well sometimes that may be taken for granted or acknowledged in some weird way we didn’t expect or worse, ridiculed or misunderstood. How do we respond to that? We’ve all been there; or we judge someone on his or her efforts–at work even– hastily and unfairly, even when we consider ourselves to be a fair and reasonable person (and we all do, right?). Then, later (even seconds later) we see what we’ve done and and feel remorse or embarrassment. Then again, perhaps we let the incident stir in our head for a few days…and then forget about it. We’re funny that way. But that’s humanity.

    We relate to this episode and I think it’s great. It’s a good debate. But remember (and I am a fan)…it is just a game. A game full of humans and all their foibles. A fun diversion, a little drama played out with a beginning and an end.

    Keep instant replay out of ALL sports as far as I’m concerned. I’ve been witness to some grand officiating mistakes in my life and have felt both the outrage and the relief. But, in the end…so what? It’s just a game.

  • LI Phil | June 4, 2010 at 8:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”393059″]
    in the end…so what? It’s just a game.[/quote]

    well said, jim

    it’s amazing how we sometimes forget that…

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 9:31 pm |

    Problem with widespread use of replay in baseball: so much continuing (and contingent) action.

    FOR EXAMPLE…

    1 out, runners on 2nd and 3rd.
    Sinking liner toward center. Looks like a sure hit. Runners take off without tagging.
    CF makes miraculous effort, dives, comes up with ball off the grass.
    Ump doesn’t signal “Out”, therby indicating a trap.
    Runner on third keeps on going and scores.
    Runner on second, realizing what’s going on, holds up for a second before continuing on toward third. Seeing that hesitaton, CF comes and throws, but ball sails over third base and into the dugout. That runner scores, too.

    Okay, 2 runs in, still 1 out, guy who hit the ball advanced to second on the throw.

    Got it so far?

    Defensive manager challenges: My CF caught that ball.

    Now we have a delay, but the replay shows it WAS a clean catch.

    Okay, sort that out, including how to reset those non-tagging runners.

    And do it without another delay for the inevitable argument from one manager or the other regarding the reset.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 9:36 pm |

    And that’s one of the LESS complicated situations I can think of.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 9:47 pm |

    So Phil gets to play hookey tomorrow.
    Cool.

    Do that have replay review in hookey?

  • Gusto44 | June 4, 2010 at 10:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”393055″][quote comment=”393048″]Another weird sight was Willie Stargell in a Braves uniform coaching Atlanta when Chuck Tanner was managing there. Very odd, indeed.[/quote]

    That was just wrong on so many levels. I actually had to buy a Braves t-shirt then. As soon as Willie was no longer with them I got rid of that thing.[/quote]

    Even though Stargell was one of my favorite Pirates, I could never bring myself to buying merchandise from another MLB team.

  • Bernard | June 4, 2010 at 10:22 pm |

    Not generally a fan of the alternate (softball) jersey, but the Bucs look pretty damn good in their black Friday jerseys, high cuffed with black socks.

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 10:34 pm |

    Twins in their navy alt at Oakland (A’s in all white). Seems to be their home alt.

    Says “Twins” (home wordmark) on chest, not “MINNESOTA” as on their past road alt, or “Minnesota” as on their new road grays.

    It’s been a long (albeit short) week, and I’m sleepy, but I don’t know that they’ve worn those on the road this year. Admittedly haven’t watched every game, so who knows.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | June 4, 2010 at 10:40 pm |

    John Wooden died at 9:45 EDT tonight.

  • Gusto44 | June 4, 2010 at 11:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”393065″]Not generally a fan of the alternate (softball) jersey, but the Bucs look pretty damn good in their black Friday jerseys, high cuffed with black socks.[/quote]

    They do look good, and there is historical context involved. The Bucs did wear uniforms with a “P” at different times from the teens to the 1930s.

  • KevinW | June 5, 2010 at 12:37 am |

    [/quote]The ’98 Padres may want game 1 of their World Series thrown out, because that Yankee grand slam never should have happened. The previous pitch was an glaringly obvious third strike that was called a ball.[/quote]

    Mr. Vilk thank you, because you are the only person outside of San Diego who remembers Rich Garcia calling that a ball and Tino Martinez hitting the next pitch out for a grand slam.

    Seriously though, that was a long time ago and did not decide the series, just like the play yesterday did not decide the game. There are about 100 games left, if the Tigers want a decent season they need to get over it and get on to tomorrow.

  • Only Sane Man | June 6, 2010 at 10:30 am |

    This is why traditionalist baseball fans are idiots. They care more about preserving some false memory of the halcyon days of the game (a state of the game that never actually existed) than getting things right. Why are the umpires there at all, if we are so in love with “human error”? Let the players call their own rules, huh? Any moron can see that the umpires are there as impartial arbiters to make sure the rules of baseball get followed to the letter. It’s absurd to argue that when there’s a chance to get a call right, we should willfully get it wrong instead to preserve “the human element” or “the tradition of the sport”. Eff that. The point of officials is to get the call correct, and if they can’t do it in real time (Joyce clearly proved he couldn’t), we’ll find a technology that can get it right. This isn’t the 1890s, so stop living in the past. Joyce failed at his only job (to get the damn call right), and it’s time to bring in technologies that can make sure it never happens again.