And...we CAN win without Daniel Nava.
Go figure.
Go figure.
I certainly hope Jeter is more respected, after all Ortiz is a known cheater. Sox fans save the rationalizations, he failed a test and that is a fact.Out here the West the Giants are playing great ball, it's amazing in that they don't have a single player on the field that one should be a starter in the All-Star.Robert Crawford said:?.. If Jeter, another ambassador of the game and probably more respected than Ortiz made those comments, it would be a big time controversy and will be played up on ESPN and the rest of the sports media.
Red Sox fans participate in this thread a lot, but not one has commented on Ortiz's comments. Their silence gives me the impression that they're alright with his comments and his consistent behavior. Maybe, I'm being presumptuous and that's not the case.Patrick_S said:I certainly hope Jeter is more respected, after all Ortiz is a known cheater. Sox fans save the rationalizations, he failed a test and that is a fact.Out here the West the Giants are playing great ball, it's amazing in that they don't have a single player on the field that one should be a starter in the All-Star.
A fact? Really?Patrick_S said:I certainly hope Jeter is more respected, after all Ortiz is a known cheater. Sox fans save the rationalizations, he failed a test and that is a fact.
Maybe. Maybe not.Robert Crawford said:Red Sox fans participate in this thread a lot, but not one has commented on Ortiz's comments. Their silence gives me the impression that they're alright with his comments and his consistent behavior. Maybe, I'm being presumptuous and that's not the case.
Red Sox fans can't make up their minds about one of their own. God forbid, if Jeter or everybodys favorite target Arod made those comments.Mike Frezon said:Maybe. Maybe not.
It's not a question about me being able to make up my mind. I know exactly how I feel.Robert Crawford said:Red Sox fans can't make up their minds about one of their own. God forbid, if Jeter or everybodys favorite target Arod made those comments.
Mike Frezon said:It's not a question about me being able to make up my mind. I know exactly how I feel.
It's more to the point that one shouldn't be presumptuous and read motives into something unsaid.
For the record, my issue with Mr. Ortiz right now is when he (as in yesterday's game) hits a sky-high pop fly just to the first-base side of the pitcher's mound and never leaves the batter's box. I've got no tolerance for that.
Red Sox fans participate in this thread a lot, but not one has commented on Ortiz's comments. Their silence gives me the impression that they're alright with his comments and his consistent behavior. Maybe, I'm being presumptuous and that's not the case.
YesMike Frezon said:A fact? Really?
At least, when it comes to the Red Sox/Yankees it sure is.Mike Frezon said:Robert:
Yes, it was that very quote of yours which prompted my response (which you highlighted). So, unless we are completely misunderstanding each other (something which we have been quite successful at in the past), I was directly responding that one shouldn't infer intent or meaning upon things that have not been said.
Patrick:
Where are you finding those Ortiz drug test results? Unless when you say he "failed a test" you mean it was a grammar school spelling test or something of the sort.
So who knows what the truth is. . .people will believe what they want to believe.. . .we can legally say the following, each of which we suggest must be considered in assessing any and all newspaper reports stating a player has "tested positive for steroids in 2003.”
First, the number of players on the so-called "government list" meaningfully exceeds the number of players agreed by the bargaining parties to have tested positive in 2003. Accordingly, the presence of a player's name on any such list does not necessarily mean that the player used a prohibited substance or that the player tested positive under our collectively bargained program.
Second, substantial scientific questions exist as to the interpretation of some of the 2003 test results. The more definitive methods that are utilized by the lab that administers the current Drug Agreement were not utilized by the lab responsible for the anonymous testing program in 2003. The collective bargaining parties did not pursue definitive answers regarding these inconclusive results, since those answers were unnecessary to the administration of the 2003 program.
Third, in 2003, legally available nutritional supplements could trigger an initial "positive" test under our program. To account for this, each "test" conducted in 2003 actually consisted of a pair of collections: the first was unannounced and random, the second was approximately 7 days later, with the player advised to cease taking supplements during the interim. Under the 2003 program, a test could be initially reported as "positive", but not treated as such by the bargaining parties on account of the second test.
Aaron,Aaron Silverman said:The biggest joke in a season of big jokes (David Price not being ejected for drilling Mike Carp) just got even bigger -- Brandon Workman (who hit nobody) has been given a 6-game suspension.
FWIW, I don't have a huge problem with Price hitting Ortiz. But everything that's followed has been a stain on the sport of baseball.
Yet I think you just did!Robert Crawford said:Well, I'm not going to rub it in any further, but Ortiz needs to stop whining and just play ball.
It makes sense in the Yankee Universe.Mike Frezon said:Yet I think you just did!
FWIW, I agree with you 100% on that count.
But it seems rather ridiculous for Workman to receive 6 days and Price to get only...nothing?!? Not sure in whose universe that makes any sense. Especially since it was after Price's pitch which hit Ortiz the warnings were issued.
And like Aaron said, I've got no problem with Price throwing at Ortiz, but it was obvious that it was on purpose--even to the home plate umpire.
Price must've had quite the belly laugh today when he saw that ruling.
Zing!Robert Crawford said:It makes sense in the Yankee Universe.
I understand Red Sox fans having a hard on for Price. But, with that said, I thought that Carp pitch was by accident. Now, since the umpire issued a warning earlier, he had justification to throw Price out of the game after that pitch, but it is a judgment call that the home umpire has to determine intention. Looking back on it with all the after-game BS, throwing Price out of the game at that time, probably would've been an easier road to take for that whole umpiring crew. At least, you would've had both teams pissed at you.Aaron Silverman said:Zing!
Does anyone other than the home plate umpire and Joe Torre think that Price hit Carp by accident?