Saturday, October 6, 2012

Braves "fans"

I'm sure there are people who really are fans of the Atlanta Braves.  I've never met one though.  I've loved baseball longer than I've ever loved anything else in my life.  I guess there's supposed to be a caveat for my family and whatnot, but there are times that I could do without them.  Baseball has been the one constant.  I've always loved baseball.  And I've never met an actual Atlanta Braves fan.  I even used to live in Georgia, but I've still never met and actual Braves fan.  I've met people who called themselves Braves fans, naturally, but you know...

I was watching the game tonight when the left field umpire made the (absolutely correct) infield fly rule call in the 8th inning.  Before you start imitating those degenerate hillbillies and start throwing virtual beer cans at me, let's take a look at the rule (emphasis mine).

"On the infield fly rule the umpire is to rule whether the ball could ordinarily have been handled by an infielder, not by some arbitrary limitation such as the grass, or the base lines. The umpire must rule also that a ball is an infield fly, even if handled by an outfielder, if, in the umpire's judgment, the ball could have been as easily handled by an infielder."
Simply take the rule for what it says.  Could the ball have been handled by the shortstop, as easily as it could have been handled by the left fielder?  Yep, and you're lying to yourself if you say otherwise.  The word is "could," not "was."  He was camped under the ball, not backpedaling, with his hand raised to signal that he was calling off the outfielder.  If you're an umpire observing this situation, the only logical conclusion to draw is that the ball could "ordinarily" be handled by the infielder.  So you must make the call.  It's right there in the rule.  The umpire doesn't have a crystal ball telling him that the shortstop will misjudge the ball by about ten feet and then bail out at the last second.  For the bulk of that baseball's flight, everybody watching that game would have agreed that the ball could be handled by the shortstop - "ordinarily."

Where the umpire erred was in his delayed signal.  I have no idea when he yelled, as they always do, "Infield fly, batter's out!"  The call is usually a boring formality, handled in such a way that the verbal call goes out and then the hand is raised.  All we can see on the video is the hand being raised, but logic would dictate that there was some sort of call made at least a second or so before the hand went up.

That being said, the call and the signal should have been given sooner.  The point of the rule is to protect the runners from getting erased by shady double plays.  As soon as the rule is invoked and the batter is called out, the runners no longer have to decide what to do on the bases.  They can simply stay put, without any risk of being forced at the next base.  Or they can run, at their own risk, and let the chips fall where they may.  The umpire was clearly trying to make sure that the shortstop was under the ball before he gave the signal, but there would have been no controversy at all if he had made the call sooner.  Drunken rednecks in Atlanta still would have bitched about the call, but there would have been no legitimate controversy.

None of this excuses what happened at Turner Field tonight.  The correct call was made, less quickly than it should have been made, but it was correct in any event.  Then those losers at the stadium delayed the game by fifteen minutes while they threw their assorted garbage on the field.

As tends to happen on this blog, we're now going to get to the point of this post, several hundred words after I began typing it.  Judging from the reaction that you saw on television tonight, you might be tempted to think that these people in Atlanta are die-hard baseball fans.  They're not.  That's what I'm here to tell you.  Your first clue should have been that they don't understand the infield fly rule.  From what I've seen tonight though, most people don't understand the infield fly rule.  So I guess I don't get to use that on my 'baseball fan' qualifying exam.

I'll instead do what I like to do on this blog, when I'm not making smartassed remarks about the president or engaging in wishful thinking about Notre Dame.  I'm going to tell you a story.

(I'm presently enrolled in an online composition course at Arizona State.  The teachers don't ever let me wander around and explore the shit that pops into my head before I say what needs to be said.  They want every part of a given paper to relate to the assignment.  Unfortunately for you, this blog is not graded for credit.  So you'll just have to wait until I'm good and ready to get to the point.  I think I'm ready now.)

I was wrapping up a hell of a bender in Detroit with a buddy one night when we heard that Pete Rose was going to be allowed to be honored in Atlanta before a World Series game.  There was one of those 'greatest of all time' teams being unveiled, or something like that.  It was the first time that Pete Rose was allowed to be associated with Major League Baseball, following his lifetime ban.  My drinking buddy at the time was a huge Pete Rose fan, so we decided that we would get tickets and fly to Atlanta for the game.  World Series tickets would be tough to get though, so we were prepared to pay a heavy price.

There was one thing to try before we resorted to using a scalper though.  When I shook off my hangover the next morning, I logged on to ticketmaster.com.  This was quite a few years ago, mind you, so things on the internet weren't entirely the same as they are now.  (It was '99, I think.  I might be off by a year or two.)  Anyhow, there had been an announcement that something like 3,000 seats would be released on Ticketmaster that day, so I expected the servers to be tied up.  The present system puts you into a virtual waiting room until your spot in line comes up, then you tie into the server and see what's available.  Back then it was the Wild West.  If you got in before the whole thing crashed, good for you.  Otherwise, sorry about your luck.

For a busy event, the Ticketmaster system usually crashed within five or ten minutes of tickets going on sale.  The tickets had been on sale for an hour or so by the time I got up, so I expected to find that the system was down or that the tickets were all gone. Nope.  There were no delays as I logged in to the site.  I requested four tickets.  I got four tickets.  Beauty.

The drinking buddy from the night before was going with me, obviously.  Another guy that we knew decided that he would buy a plane ticket and join us as well.  (I flew for free back then, since my kind and loving wife was a flight attendant.  The other two fellas had to buy plane tickets.)  Anyhow, the three of us went to Atlanta and we had one extra seat to spare.

We went to a bar near the stadium for some pre-game festivities.  The bar was pretty crowded, but we got a table.  We sat and talked with Braves "fans" and Yankees fans for quite a while.  Nobody wanted our extra ticket, even though we were offering it for free.  We wound up leaving it at the bar for anyone who cared to take it.  I assume that someone eventually grabbed it.  I don't know.  We never sat in our seats at the game, since we were perfectly content to wander around the stadium and make frequent stops at the beer concessions.

The Braves were pretty good back then, as you probably gathered from the fact that they were in the World Series.  I used to see their playoff games on television.  Thousands of fans doing their little war chant and tomahawk chop - the atmosphere seemed electric.  It wasn't.  The whole thing was fake.  When the PA system played the war chant, the fans would do their little chopping motion.  When the music stopped, the fans stopped.  It was cheesy, uninspiring, and lame.  And there were a lot of empty seats.  At key points in the game, when the fans should have been going apeshit, the place was dead.

This whole experience threw my buddies and me for quite a loop.  As you may or may not recall, the Tigers were awful at the time.  The crowds at Tiger Stadium weren't very large, to say the least, but at least the fans at the games gave a shit about baseball.  When a mediocre hitter managed to slap one through the right side with a runner in motion, putting men at first and third with one out, the place went nuts.  In Atlanta - during a World Series game - there was no such dynamic.  The baseball fans there really sucked - seriously.

One of my friends was pretty drunk by the time the game really got going.  He and I had purchased a pair of caps with that little sissy 'A' logo on them and started rooting for the Braves right at the start of the game.  Why?  'Cause screw the Yankees.  That's why.  We were Braves fans that night, so we wanted the Braves to win.  Whenever he would start shouting loudly and trying to get the crowd fired up, other people would start yelling... at him... telling him to sit down and shut up.  I'm not kidding.

As the years have gone by since that time, we've all seen reports about the fact that the Braves have won all kinds of division titles and such, but they still don't sell out their stadium for playoff games.  (Tonight's game was not a sellout, incidentally.)  And then, when one controversial (but correct) call is made, that bunch of bums is going to spend fifteen minutes throwing shit on the field? 

Give me a break.  Where was the outrage when the Braves made 3 errors tonight?  How about the 12 men that they left on base? Going 1-for-8 with men in scoring position?  How about the swing and miss that didn't count before Ross hit that homerun?  No, no, no.  Those things don't explain why the Braves are done for the season.  It was an umpire making a judgment call on a play that the Cardinals shortstop wound up botching.  That's why the Braves lost.  These people are pathetic.

Cliff's Notes version of this post - Braves fans, to the extent that there actually are Braves fans, are a bunch of losers.

Friday, October 5, 2012

I suppose this one will follow a predictable path.

Sununu being Sununu, Sununu calls it like he sees it.


Oh my... did he really?  Setting aside how refreshing it was to see a guy who knew exactly what he was trying to say, and didn't flinch when the hacktastic hack known as Andrea Mitchell gave her predictably hacktastic response, we all know what comes next...


I've always been amused by this line of thought.  Newt Gingrich refers to record numbers of people on food stamps, so obviously Newt Gingrich is a racist.  It never occurs to the people making the accusation that they're the ones who equated food stamps with a given race, not Gingrich.  Now, just wait and see.  Sununu called the president lazy, so now Sununu will be a racist.  It might take a day or two, but you'll hear it.  The people hurling the charge will be blissfully unaware that they are the ones who connected laziness with race, but they'll "lean forward" anyway.

Quick sidebar time, in case you wonder where I stand.  Who has two thumbs and is lazy?  This guy. (This is where you have to picture me pointing at myself with both thumbs.  You knew that, right?)

http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2009/10/101809.html
http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2009/02/21009.html
http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2009/09/91709.html
http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2007/11/111007.html
http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2008/02/21308.html
http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2008/02/21008.html
http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2008/03/3408.html
http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2008/08/81208.html
http://vitocorleone99.blogspot.com/2010/10/101710.html

That's a sampling of posts where I informed you internet people that I'm lazy.  And I'm pretty damned white, so I guess I don't equate laziness with dark skin.

I don't know how quick the Republicans are when it comes to battling smears these days.  Historically speaking, the answer is that they seem to be caught off guard more often than not.  This one should be easy to handle though.  First because it's so predictable.

Second, well.  Click the image to hear it from the man himself.


If there's anybody calling Sununu a racist in the near future, and you know there will be, just pass along this link and watch the equivocation begin.

Thursday, October 4, 2012

I don't watch debates.

In point of fact, I don't follow politics much at all.  I scan the headlines once or twice a day, to see what's going on in the world, but that's about it.  My viewpoints are pretty well established, so it's not like I'm in need of much persuasion.  And I don't really talk with people about politics anymore, so it's not like I'm going to do much persuading.  Therefore, I just ignore it whenever possible.

Last night, it was impossible to ignore the fact that there was a presidential debate.  It was easy enough to ignore the debate, mind you.  I just watched the Tigers wrap up their season and then read some of the news articles reacting to Cabrera's Triple Crown.  The inevitable MVP debate began almost immediately as well, so I was interested to hear some of the perspectives on that.

So ignoring the debate was no problem at all.  Ignoring the fact that there was a debate - different story entirely.  I have an e-mail address that is probably on every spam mailing list known to mankind.  I've been using it since the very early days of free e-mail and I've registered for hundreds of websites with it.  So it comes as no surprise that I was bombarded last night with pre-debate and post-debate spam.  Basically there were Republican and/or conservative groups claiming that Romney whipped the shit out of Obama, then there were Democrat and/or liberal groups claiming that Obama would do better next time.

Nobody thinks Obama won, apparently.  That's quite unusual, according to my experience with these things.  There's always a parade of Baghdad Bobs out there saying that their guy was awesome, even when wasn't.  If there are people praising Obama's performance from last night, I haven't seen them.  Based on an unscientific poll of last night's and this morning's spam e-mail, I'd say it looks like Obama must have been pretty damned bad.

There were three different spammers who hit me with the following video this morning.


It's only something like 30 seconds long, so I watched it.  As it played the first time, I wasn't sure whom the ad was supporting.  It looked like it was probably a Romney ad about taking charge or whatever, but it didn't seem to have a coherent point.  Then, at the end, it had the bit about being paid for by the Democrats.  So I guess "Romney is a bully" is about the best they can do at this point.  Like I said earlier, apparently Obama didn't have a good debate.  But the link from my e-mail had taken me to breitbart.tv or something like that.  Democrats wouldn't have sent me there.

I went back to my e-mail inbox and found that the spam message was from one of those "grassroots" conservative groups.  You know the ones - raising money through donations and then paying salaries to a few dozen people who just spam the shit out of anybody who may have ever held a conservative point of view about anything.  Yeah, it was one of those.

There was another spam message from some sort of Catholic pro-life outfit, talking about other parts of the debate.  I assume that they are still pissed about that Sebelius/Obamacare debacle.  I didn't read the whole e-mail.  I did notice that they also linked to the Breitbart story about this ad though.  Sort of a non sequitur with respect to their mission, it seemed, but I guess everybody likes to make fun of clueless political operatives.  Whoever produced this ad was pretty damned clueless.

Which brings us to the third spam message.  The third group to send me a link to this video was some sort of union activism outfit.  Since I signed up with the Teamsters, I get all kinds of that stuff.  They started with the standard bit about how Romney will kill every job in America by the end of February.  Then they included a link to this same DNC video.  This link was to a YouTube version hosted by DemRapidResponse.  The thing only had something like 300 views when I clicked on it.

In browsing around under that DemRapidResponse account on YouTube and then the main democrats.org stuff, I can't find any mention of this ad.  If I'm being told by conservative groups that I should watch a DNC ad, and I'm being told by at least one liberal group that I should watch a DNC ad, then why doesn't the DNC seem to want to acknowledge that the ad exists?  It's all just really weird.

And so is the ad.  Really weird.  The president has to deal with the reputation that he's an effete pansy every time Putin spits in his face or the ChiComs tell him where to stick it, so I don't understand why his supporters would produce an ad that reinforces this reputation.  You lost a debate.  BFD.  Live to fight another day.  Don't rush out there and produce an ad that makes the other guy look like a more assertive leader.
There have been Visits to this here blog dohickie.