K-Town

Because the fact that giving HFA to one league because it's an odd-numbered year instead of an even-numbered year on the calendar is SO MUCH more appropriate?? I think it's cool that the game means something. Frankly, I don't think it hurts a thing. And "This Time It Counts" isn't the promo that they use anymore. That slogan only lives because posters on message boards keep bringing it up over and over again.

The Mets aren't a stellar ball club? You comfortable with a rotation of Pedro, Glavine, Trachsel, Duke and a rookie not Liriano or a Tiger? Maybe if it were 1996. Their pitching staff has the 2nd best ERA in the NL. Yeah....... I'd be pretty comfortable with that. Do I think that they're as good as the top AL teams? Probably not, but they could probably hold their own in a 7-game series. Seriously though....... to say that they're not "stellar" is quite a stretch.

The Mets aren't a stellar ball club?

exactly. people can argue all they want that there is only one meaning of the word and everybody's minds operate the same way, but any linguist would tell you that is not true whatsoever. you can say Ozzie or my cousin meant it as a slur against homosexuals, but nobody knows how Ozzie's or my cousin's mind works. language is very imprecise, and there are alot of people who lack the ability to articulate with the proper words. as for jam's comments, I have heard and know of several homosexuals that call each other or other homosexuals "[expletive]" and "queer" all the time. do they have no harmful intentions when using that word? the answer is obvious, sometimes they do and sometimes they don't, just like the rest of us. the term is much more flimsy and has alot more meanings and connotations than most racial slurs. one of those meanings is a catchall phrase used by unarticulate people to have no more signicance that calling someone a "jerk." the best analogy I can think of is using the word "gyp" when somebody rips you off. that's the word you know and came to use, not even realizing it is a derrogatory phrase about gypsies. there is nothing in peoples heart or mind that means it as an insult against a group of people. it's just the word that they use in that situation. It doesn't matter. Adult professionals don't use a string of expletives that end with the word "[expletive]", when addressing another individual. Your Junior High classmates might, but a professional baseball manager can't do that. It's completely inappropriate, no matter how you try to twist it.

Sucker-punch might be a stretch. Your last post makes some sense. Maybe it was more of a "cheap shot" than a "sucker punch".

So Pierzynski made no attempt to defend himself because he LIKES being punched in the face?? That doesn't make much sense. You have allready lost this argument. You need to know when your beaten. You have no idea what a sucker punch is. You tell me what a sucker-punch is. To me, it's when a guy punches someone else who isn't expecting it. That's pretty simple. Considering nobody has ever been punched at home plate by a catcher (that I'm aware of), you surely don't think that AJ expected it, do you? And if he did expect it, then explain to me why he made absolutely no attempt to defend himself.

So Pierzynski made no attempt to defend himself because he LIKES being punched in the face?? That doesn't make much sense.

So, he just mouthed words? I have no idea. All we know is that Barrett wasn't provoked by anything that Pierzynski said, because he didn't even hear AJ say anything.

What, do you think some third party is gonna yell "ROUND! ONE! ... FIGHT!" like in Street Fighter II? I think people can figure out when a fight is gonna start. Some of you people still don't get what a sucker-punch is. Main Entry: sucker punch Function: transitive verb : to punch (a person) suddenly without warning and often without apparent provocation - sucker punch noun Was there any warning that Barrett might throw a punch? Not unless you consider "I didn't have the ball" to mean "I'm going to hit you". That's quite a stretch. Was there a lack or provocation? Considering that Barrett is a catcher, and that catchers get bowled over on almost a daily basis....... I'd also say it's quite a stretch to say that Barrett was provoked into throwing a punch. Therefore, the shoe fits. would you expect a big smooch if someone grabbed you around the neck and spoke to you with words that are not allowed in this forum? would you feel provoked if someone ran into to you in an unnecessary way, in an unnecesary situation, and in an unnecessary location? I think the better point is that Palphabet is a catcher, and therefore should know there are situations in which the collission is appropriate and that there is an appropriate way to do it. they both broke unspoken codes. catchers get bowled over on a dailey basis...yeah, that's it. bowled over by the king of Siam, yeah that's it. Funny........ Barrett thought it was a clean play........ even a "great play". "I came out and blocked the plate," Barrett said. "[Pierzynski] had every right to hit me -- every right. He made a great play in taking me out before the ball could get to me. I was really trying to protect the plate. http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060520&content_id=1462906&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc

What, do you think some third party is gonna yell "ROUND! ONE! ... FIGHT!" like in Street Fighter II? I think people can figure out when a fight is gonna start. Some of you people still don't get what a sucker-punch is. Main Entry: sucker punch Function: transitive verb : to punch (a person) suddenly without warning and often without apparent provocation - sucker punch noun Was there any warning that Barrett might throw a punch? Not unless you consider "I didn't have the ball" to mean "I'm going to hit you". That's quite a stretch. Was there a lack or provocation? Considering that Barrett is a catcher, and that catchers get bowled over on almost a daily basis....... I'd also say it's quite a stretch to say that Barrett was provoked into throwing a punch. Therefore, the shoe fits. What did AJ say to Barrett? I clearly saw his lips moving, but I haven't seen mention of it anywhere. According to Barrett, Pierzynski didn't say anything, so let's put that to rest. Barrett said he didn't hear Pierzynski say anything, but he may have said something to the White Sox catcher. http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060520&content_id=1462906&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc

What, do you think some third party is gonna yell "ROUND! ONE! ... FIGHT!" like in Street Fighter II? I think people can figure out when a fight is gonna start. Some of you people still don't get what a sucker-punch is. Main Entry: sucker punch Function: transitive verb : to punch (a person) suddenly without warning and often without apparent provocation - sucker punch noun Was there any warning that Barrett might throw a punch? Not unless you consider "I didn't have the ball" to mean "I'm going to hit you". That's quite a stretch. Was there a lack or provocation? Considering that Barrett is a catcher, and that catchers get bowled over on almost a daily basis....... I'd also say it's quite a stretch to say that Barrett was provoked into throwing a punch. Therefore, the shoe fits.

Actually, based on paper, most prognosticators thought they'd win the division, didn't they? They're about where I expected them to be right now, actually. I know they'd have rough stretches. There is a guy that you might have heard of that was the big reason behind this. His name is Pujols. Not sure if you've heard of him. Yeah. So?

Actually, based on paper, most prognosticators thought they'd win the division, didn't they? They're about where I expected them to be right now, actually. I know they'd have rough stretches. I don't think the prediction to win the central was based on their pitching. To me, it was more an indictment of the rest of the division. Could be. Carpenter is a stud. I think everyone assumed that Mulder would be terrific. Suppan is ALWAYS steady. Marquis looked like a solid #4, and most folks figured that one of Reyes/Wainwright/Ponson would impress. I wouldn't say that the pitching looked great, but they certainly looked solid and deep. And, they may yet be. They certainly aren't right now. If by being a career .500 pitcher ( 100-98 ) with a career ERA of 4.68 means steady, which I suppose it could be, you are kinda right. But I don't think Suppan is a very reliable starter, IMHO. Suppan has had an ERA+ of under 100 only once in the last 7 years. That's steady........ and not just kinda.

Guillen equated homosexuals and child molestors while in New York last year. Not sure about the context but Guillen did it. Link? Also, I agree with everything Rocket Sauce said. http://www.deadspin.com/sports/ozzie-guillen/ozzie-guillen-sexual-profiler-117119.php http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2005/08/09/bucmlb09.htm

Actually, based on paper, most prognosticators thought they'd win the division, didn't they? They're about where I expected them to be right now, actually. I know they'd have rough stretches. I don't think the prediction to win the central was based on their pitching. To me, it was more an indictment of the rest of the division. Could be. Carpenter is a stud. I think everyone assumed that Mulder would be terrific. Suppan is ALWAYS steady. Marquis looked like a solid #4, and most folks figured that one of Reyes/Wainwright/Ponson would impress. I wouldn't say that the pitching looked great, but they certainly looked solid and deep. And, they may yet be. They certainly aren't right now.

Actually, based on paper, most prognosticators thought they'd win the division, didn't they? They're about where I expected them to be right now, actually. I know they'd have rough stretches.

Do you have alot of experience at being plowed over by a baserunner and then throwing a punch?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! :lol: :lol: or "i didnt have the ball, bitch" Whatever. I don't see a reason to make this case any longer. I think that many of you are trying to convince yourselves that it was OK, rather than me.......

Your efforts to bait people into pointless arguments not withstanding, your post makes little sense. What does the bolded even mean? How did AJ not have a chance to defend himself? He could have moved his shoulder up to deflect the punch when he saw it coming or turned away. Instead he stood there like a doofus. He was standing face to face with Barrett. Should Barrett have wound up, three stooges style, before he punched? What sort of warning should have been given? Perhaps he could have said , "Attention, sir! We are now combatants!!!" Your definition of sucker punch makes no sense but considering you come here for the sole purpose of baiting Cubs fans into arguments, I'm not really surprised. There should be some indication that a fight is about to occur. You either say "Let's go!" or "I'm going to knock your teeth out", or something. Considering words are exchanged on the ball field every day without punches being throw, I don't think there's ANY way that AJ could have expected that. If you have no clue that someone is about to hit you, and then they hit you, then it's a sucker-punch, in my opinion. From Webster: to punch (a person) suddenly without warning and often without apparent provocation - sucker punch noun That's pretty much EXACTLY what happened.

If a guy isn't given an opportunity to defend himself, then it's a sucker-punch, in my opinion. Any of us can walk up to a guy and punch him in the face. Heck, my sister could do it, if the guy didn't know it was coming (and she'd likely at least knock the guy down or leave a mark....... unlike Barrett's love-tap).

=D>

Hey...... it's not as cold over here as they told me it would be! We'll be scratching each others eyes again soon enough, I'm afraid.... :wink:

did he really say something like this about Grimsley? You almost have to assume that he did, or Mariotti wouldn't have printed it, would he?? If he did say that, ......... wow.

Weren't there a gazillion other writers printing pretty much the same thing that Mariotti printed that day (Concerning the Tracey/Guillen incident)? Why attack Mariotti?

You're all absolutely right about the derogatory sexual slurs. I'm not debating that at all. They have no place anywhere. But you know what? Someone decides to badmouth me in the newspaper, I'm going to use every swear word I can find. It may not be professional in the sports sense, but attacks upon a person don't have to be professional. Both of them just need to keep their traps shut if nothing productive is going to come out of them. did I miss something - did Mariotti say something about Guillen? If not, what gives him the obligation to open his mouth to defend an opposing manager? That is simply classless and really his comments are extraordinarily offensive. Guillen apparently has also made some criticisms of Ozzie and Chad Tracey or something...the Dusty thing was not the only trigger. It'd be interesting to know what the trigger was. Considering the magnitude of this story, I'm surprised the "trigger" hasn't been made more clear.......