OT: The Yankees

[Rich S]

What lessons are Torre's Yankees supposed to be taking from Randolph's Mets?  

[Avash]

http://www.e11even.ca/dump/ArodPurse.jpg

[Rich S]

that "photo" is old news.   What's the point here?

[DeltaOne81]

Hell if I know, Rich. Small ball I think was mainly the point. Didn't say I agreed. Just said I am marvelously amused listening to it.

Speaking of marvelously amused, that is also the point of the picture ;-)

[jtwcornell91]

[Q]Will Wrote:

 [Q2]BCrespi Wrote:

if our belived Red were down 2-1 with 50 sec to go in the ECACHL championship and we had McKee pulled and Cavanagh was racing in alone with only Downs chasing him, would you not expect him to do everything in his power, including tackling, punching, maiming, even slapping to keep his team alive?  [/Q]

You're right, A-Rod made the right move.  But that doesn't make the move any less agaisnt the rules, and the umpires absolutely made the right call to call him out on interference.  Similarly, in your scenario, if Downs has to obstruct, interfere, clutch, grab, hook, or even slap to stop the play, yeah it's the right move at the time, but that shouldn't stop the referee from calling a penalty on Downs.[/q]

In fact, he should probably call a penalty shot, which with the net empty means an automatic goal.

[mjh89]

You gotta do what you gotta do to try to win the games. A-Rod was right when he said that it put the umps in a terrible position having to make that call in front of 55,000 screaming New Yorkers. It probably would have been classier to 'accept defeat' but thats what usually left for the Red Sox.

World Series since 1918:
Yankees: 26
Sox: 1

Go Yanks.

[Dpperk29]

That isnt neccessarily(sp?) a given. I have seen a empty net penalty shot be missed before. it was a technicality that the player didn't keep the puck moving forward the whole time. He actually lost it going across the blue line and had to go back for it, hence ending his attempt. but that was a PeeWee Game...

[Jordan 04]

[Q]Rich S Wrote:

 that "photo" is old news.   What's the point here?[/q]


The point is that it's still hilarious :-D  

::rolleyes::

[DeltaOne81]

Only among Yanks fans is "not cheating" a sign of accepting defeat :-P

Let me put it this way. I don't want my team going to the next level if for the rest of time it will be remembered as the time they cheated to get there.

If a Cornell forward in forechecking in OT, pushes a guy to the ice, gets the puck a scores, and the ref didn't see it, and every single college hockey fan for the rest of time refers to it as the game Cornell stole, is that really worth it? I would rather my team not get there than get there through dishonest means.

What about the 5th down game? The crowd around here at the moment sounds to me like it would have been appropriate, in fact preferable, to refuse to admit that mistake and to try to win it. Ridiculous. Believe it or not, there *is* something more important than winning. Or is that no longer true after about the $150 million mark?

Would Mantle or Gehrig or Ted Williams have tried to slap the ball out of someone's glove? Would Gretzsky or Lemieux try to mug a guy behind the refs back? Would Larry Bird or Magic Johnson or Michael Jordan try to cheat to win a title? There's something more to being a great player than wins and losses, it's playing the game right. Hockey has the Lady Byng trophy for a reason, and the Hobey Baker reflects those values as well. But apparently, in order to believe in a sense of fair play and sportsmanship, you have to have be looking at things from Red Sox biased perspective.

My tribute to Rich S ::rolleyes:: ::rolleyes:: ::rolleyes::

[Will]

[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

I would rather my team not get there than get there through dishonest means.[/q]

The attitude of a loser. :-P Just kidding.  I can certainly see where you're coming from, but I also think it's naive to believe that in this day and age (perhaps in any age), a team can achieve a national/world championship while still doing every single thing completely fairly and honorably 100% of the time, partially since what is considered fair and honorable changes from person to person.  Some, perhaps most, of these abuses will be unnoticed, overlooked, or just ignored.  The question is how much a team believes they can get away with, whether it's slapping a ball out of someone's hand or tackling a player on a breakaway or using steroids or having the visitors use a small, uncomfortable locker room.  That being said, with regard to what the rules say, the team has no right to complain if they get caught and penalized for the offense in question.  Is all of this what competitive sports should be about?  Probably not, but I believe it to be the reality of the times, likely reflective of my already dim view of humanity at large.  Argue against me if you want--it's not like I have substantial proof to back up my claims.  I'll still believe the worst humanity has to offer will reign for some time to come, including within the sports world.

[Jacob 03]

[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

Only among Yanks fans is "not cheating" a sign of accepting defeat  
[/q]
Nothing like the time-honored activity of generalization...

[q]
Believe it or not, there *is* something more important than winning. Or is that no longer true after about the $150 million mark?
[/q]
I guess I'd consider this a "cheap shot" if I found it offensive in some way.  In reality, it's merely throwing something in that has nothing to do with the argument- all for the sake of...well...God knows (attempted cleverness?).  

[q]
Would Mantle or Gehrig or Ted Williams have tried to slap the ball out of someone's glove? Would Gretzsky or Lemieux try to mug a guy behind the refs back? Would Larry Bird or Magic Johnson or Michael Jordan try to cheat to win a title? [/q]
These are all speculation, obviously (I can tell by the "Would"s and the "?"s), but I hope they wouldn't.  Despite the fact that you felt the need to throw in a lot of gratuitous "potshots" or what have you, I think the point you make is relevant.  Time will likely favor athletes without marks like that which A-Rod gave himself last fall.  You can also throw me in the camp that believes the "slap" in question is not analogous to any (well...most) of those penalized NHL plays.  MLB is quite different from hockey, football, and basketball where penalties/fouls are a regular occurance (even to the point where intentional incursion of them becomes an aspect of strategy).  Minor infractions in baseball are a rarity, and that means their acceptance will always be hazardous at best.  A-Rod undoubtedly knows this, and that is why what he did was worse than someone taking down a skater on a breakaway.  

And on a parting shot, I always thought that the automatic goal resulting from the thrown stick/empty net situation was, indeed, automatic (no actual idiotic performance of an empty net penalty shot needed), despite what Dpperk29 witnessed at a peewee game.  Hopefully someone who can navigate the rulebook quicker than I will clear this up.  

[jtwcornell91]

[Q]Jacob 03 Wrote:
I always thought that the automatic goal resulting from the thrown stick/empty net situation was, indeed, automatic (no actual idiotic performance of an empty net penalty shot needed), despite what Dpperk29 witnessed at a peewee game.  Hopefully someone who can navigate the rulebook quicker than I will clear this up.  [/q]

I believe the rule in college used to be that the goalie got to come back for the penalty shot if the net had been empty, but they changed it recently to make it an automatic goal.  I'd prefer that the team actually take the penalty shot on the empty net, but I don't think it was ever the college rule.

[peterg]

[Q]BCrespi Wrote:

 Alright, that's it.  I've had enough of this crap.  A-Rod's slap was the right thing to do, and anybody who thinks differently, is just like one of those moronic Red Sox trying to take pot-shots at him (for reasons I don't know.  What has he ever done to anyone?  Seriously, besides make a great deal of money and, outside of a year and a week be the best player in the game.).  Game is on the line, what are you gonna do?  Just let yourself get tagged out?  End your team's season?  I mean, sure, it looked bad, especially because it was kind of a girl-like slapping motion, but that surely shouldn't be the point here.  Here, to put it in this board's perspective, if our belived Red were down 2-1 with 50 sec to go in the ECACHL championship and we had McKee pulled and Cavanagh was racing in alone with only Downs chasing him, would you not expect him to do everything in his power, including tackling, punching, maiming, even slapping to keep his team alive?  Of course we would.  Get out behind your red(sox) tinted glasses and look at it from a serious baseball (sports?) perspective.  It was the right play, and would only have been better had he lowered his shoulder and put Bronson (I have the strangest hair in the league) Arroyo into right field, but to his credit, Arroyo stayed out of the baseline.  What would you really want him to do in that situation?[/q]

No, the right move at that point would have been to stop and make Arroyo come to him, assuring that the runner advance to second base.  By interfering with the play, he was out anyway AND Jeter had to return to first base.  Sorry, Rodriguez has a lot of positives, but THAT was not a good baseball play.

[kaelistus]

MJH89 - Oh oh..  I can play that game.. Let me pick a random year that fits my ideal insult:

2001 - Yankees 0.

I have to say, saying 26-6 makes the same point pretty well (Although its kinda a lame insult IMHO), why do so many yankee fans choose to bullshit the stats to make the discrepancy sound worse? It makes you look stupid.

In any case, I totally disagree with your AROD comment. A cheater is a cheater and it should not be tolerated or expected as "the right thing to do".  If those are your moral values then I really have nothing else to say.

[CowbellGuy]

Yankees: 26
Red Sox: 6

Is that better? Really?