ESPN doing a great job of piling on

[USSoccer]

Lost in the Game 6 gnashing of teeth is that we should have won Game 7 if not for typical horrendous pitching staff management by Baker.

[jiml60]

We are many posts into a "Game 6 blame" discussion and no one has yet mentioned Mark Prior throwing 116 pitches with a double-digit lead in Game 2, after his arm had been flogged into oblivion in the second half.

 

You should all be ashamed.

 

Meh, I mentioned that Dusty finally decided prior had enough and that he wasnt sharp in the 7th despite a 1-2-3 inning. There is so much you can discuss about that game and series, it would fill a book.

 

Prior never should have gone out for that 8th inning. He wasn't sharp in the 7th as all 3 outs were hard hit balls. Prior had lost it at that point.

[javy knows my name]

MAKE IT STOP

[Warren Brusstar]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

[jersey cubs fan]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

Interesting statement in a post written very clearly in a "I am a better fan than you" voice.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed.

[Warren Brusstar]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed.

 

He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game.

[Sammy Sofa]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed.

 

He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game.

 

Those are meatballs who do that. They differ from the meatballs who insist it's all his fault, but they're still meatballs.

[Flames24Rulz]

/thisthreadsucks

[Little Slide Rooter]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed.

 

He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game.

 

Those are meatballs who do that. They differ from the meatballs who insist it's all his fault, but they're still meatballs.

 

It was a crucial moment not only for the series but Cubs history in general. However, you really cant blame the 1 guy who caught the ball, especially when their were several people after it. In an alternate universe, there is no fan intereference, Moises doesnt catch the ball, and Alex Gonzalez still boots that routine DP and earns the spot in history he deserves as The Cubs Bill Buckner.

[UMFan83]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm all over the place on this. On one hand I do think the play had an effect on the collapse, but not because Bartman necessarily interfered.

 

We have no way of knowing for sure how much this changed things, but Prior stepped off the mound and started shouting and pointing at the fan, an odd reaction considering Prior usually had a fairly calm demeanor on the mound. So now a play that doesn't have much of an effect on the game (worst case is a foul ball and strike 2 with 1 on 1 out and a 3 run lead) is blown up by Prior's (and Alou's) over the top reaction. Who knows if that causes anyone to lose composure. If the next pitch is a strikeout, everyone eases up and the play is quickly forgotten. But the result of the AB was a walk. The next batter singled. Now you start to feel the pressure a little and start looking back to what could have been out number 2. A ground ball goes to Gonzalez. He knows he has to get 2 here and takes his eyes off the ball a little. A play he's made with amazing consistency 100 times this year (many thought he could win a GG at SS). This time he boots it and everyone is safe. Bases loaded and tying run in scoring position. Derrick Lee comes up, and a gassed and suddenly aware of the stakes Prior hangs one which is ripped in the gap for a double to tie the game. The collapse is on.

[Sammy Sofa]

It was a crucial moment not only for the series but Cubs history in general. However, you really cant blame the 1 guy who caught the ball, especially when their were several people after it. In an alternate universe, there is no fan intereference, Moises doesnt catch the ball, and Alex Gonzalez still boots that routine DP and earns the spot in history he deserves as The Cubs Bill Buckner.

 

Just to clarify, Bartman didn't catch the ball.

[davearm2]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed.

 

He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game.

Calling it a critically important moment in an historic game is overplaying it. IMO.

 

And it ignores that Bartman did what any other fan would have done in the same circumstances -- and every other fan in his vicinity was trying to do.

 

What happened was, the Cubs choked in the 8th, and again in game 7. The Bartman nonsense is just needless dramatization.

[Sammy Sofa]

How is it "needless?" It happened, it was unusual and dramatic, and the larger context of it being Wrigley and the Cubs and the WS on the line and him being a Cubs fan makes it an incredibly unique story. If it happened in a movie you likely wouldn't believe it.

[Little Slide Rooter]

It was a crucial moment not only for the series but Cubs history in general. However, you really cant blame the 1 guy who caught the ball, especially when their were several people after it. In an alternate universe, there is no fan intereference, Moises doesnt catch the ball, and Alex Gonzalez still boots that routine DP and earns the spot in history he deserves as The Cubs Bill Buckner.

 

Just to clarify, Bartman didn't catch the ball.

 

Closest to it. Plus he was an easy scapegoat.

[UMFan83]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed.

 

He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game.

Calling it a critically important moment in an historic game is overplaying it. IMO.

 

 

By itself it can't be a critically important moment. Maybe in hindsight with everything that happened after it.

[UMFan83]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed.

 

He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game.

Calling it a critically important moment in an historic game is overplaying it. IMO.

 

And it ignores that Bartman did what any other fan would have done in the same circumstances -- and every other fan in his vicinity was trying to do.

 

Also the point that, the end result of that play was a 3-2 count. He didn't even lose the batter because of Bartman. In fact, he gained a strike on the play, which very slightly altered the Cubs odds of winning the game. Even if you look at it with the end result of the AB, which was a walk, it is still 3-0 with 2 runners on and one out. Prior still got a double play grounder to end the inning. If you want to argue that Bartman slightly messed with the Cubs composure which tightened everyone up and began a chain of events that led to a collapse as I did above, then you have an argument.

 

Add to the fact that there was a play that inning that had infinite more effect on the game than Bartman's gaffe (Gonzo's error), it seems strange to focus any of our attention on Bartman.

Edited June 20, 2011 by UMFan83

[davearm2]

How is it "needless?" It happened, it was unusual and dramatic, and the larger context of it being Wrigley and the Cubs and the WS on the line and him being a Cubs fan makes it an incredibly unique story. If it happened in a movie you likely wouldn't believe it.

I wouldn't believe what, that a fan tried to catch a foul ball hit straight to him?

[Sammy Sofa]

How is it "needless?" It happened, it was unusual and dramatic, and the larger context of it being Wrigley and the Cubs and the WS on the line and him being a Cubs fan makes it an incredibly unique story. If it happened in a movie you likely wouldn't believe it.

I wouldn't believe what, that a fan tried to catch a foul ball hit straight to him?

 

Yes, OK, pretend that it had absolutely no meaning outside of that.

 

And no, I'm not blaming Bartman for anything, but to act like it was a total non-story is absurd.

[davearm2]

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers.

 

He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game.

 

In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

 

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed.

 

He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game.

Calling it a critically important moment in an historic game is overplaying it. IMO.

 

And it ignores that Bartman did what any other fan would have done in the same circumstances -- and every other fan in his vicinity was trying to do.

 

Also the point that, the end result of that play was a 3-2 count. He didn't even lose the batter because of Bartman. In fact, he gained a strike on the play, which very slightly altered the Cubs odds of winning the game. Even if you look at it with the end result of the AB, which was a walk, it is still 3-0 with 2 runners on and one out. Prior still got a double play grounder to end the inning. If you want to argue that Bartman slightly messed with the Cubs composure which tightened everyone up and began a chain of events that led to a collapse as I did above, then you have an argument.

But even then, Bartman didn't do all that. Bartman did what any fan would have done, including all the ones around him.

 

It'd be equally as foolish to argue Luis Castillo slightly messed with the Cubs composure which tightened everyone up and began a chain of events that led to a collapse by hitting the ball in the perfect spot.

[Sammy Sofa]

You're arguing against something that nobody really here is saying. Nobody here is saying that he lost them the game. The closest you've got is a guy saying that he thinks the Cubs would have won the series if Alou caught the ball. There's a huge difference between saying he cost them the game/series and recognizing that it was a very emotional, very unusual, very dramatic event that was the precursor to even more high drama for the rest of the inning.

[davearm2]

How is it "needless?" It happened, it was unusual and dramatic, and the larger context of it being Wrigley and the Cubs and the WS on the line and him being a Cubs fan makes it an incredibly unique story. If it happened in a movie you likely wouldn't believe it.

I wouldn't believe what, that a fan tried to catch a foul ball hit straight to him?

 

Yes, OK, pretend that it had absolutely no meaning outside of that.

 

And no, I'm not blaming Bartman for anything, but to act like it was a total non-story is absurd.

The story of that game/series is that the Cubs choked.

 

The story of that specific play is that interference could conceivably have been called (but IMO correctly was not).

 

The identity of the fan involved is a complete non-story. Or should have been.

[Sammy Sofa]

Actually, a single fan being blamed for a team and fanbase's nearly a century's worth of misery continuing is a pretty remarkable and interesting story. I have no idea why you're going to keep pretending that this isn't an unusual story, but go right ahead.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Actually, a single fan being blamed for a team and fanbase's nearly a century's worth of misery continuing is a pretty remarkable and interesting story.

 

is it as remarkable as blaming livestock?

[davearm2]

Actually, a single fan being blamed for a team and fanbase's nearly a century's worth of misery continuing is a pretty remarkable and interesting story. I have no idea why you're going to keep pretending that this isn't an unusual story, but go right ahead.

You call it remarkable and interesting. I call it absurd and ridiculous.