Less major league baseball this week for the Nachoman than usual, folks. I’ve got two weeks of heavy umpiring, plus two weekends straight out of town. Currently I’m in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, at a board meeting of the US Association of Young Physicist Tournaments. We’re considering moving our yearly physics debate tournament to Oak Ridge because, as Oak Ridge High School physics teacher Peggy Bertrand puts it, “In Oak Ridge you can’t throw a stone without hitting a physicist.” In central Virginia the same mantra applies, as long as you throw your stone with a cruise missle.
Don’t worry, despite my travels, I have compiled some interesting tidbits about baseball, which you can read in the rest of this 3000 word column. But the first tidbit is about both baseball and physics. Kind of.
The USAYPT needs money. (Who doesn’t?) We need to be able to pay travel costs for the jurors at our yearly tournament, and we’d like to make it less expensive for the teams to attend. The USAYPT directors are all physics teachers, who are utterly clueless about raising money. I thought, perhaps, that the major leagues’ most famous and only physicist might be able to help out.
The following is a letter I sent to Jeff Francis, the pitcher for the Colorado Rockies who had declared a physics major in university in British Columbia before he was drafted. Mr. Francis is on the DL this year, but he signed a fat contract recently… so he might have time and money on his hands.
Dear Mr. Francis,
I’m going to tell you about “physics fights.” I’d like to invite you to sponsor and judge an international physics debate tournament. Let me explain…
I’ve been teaching high school physics for 13 years, most of which have been spent at a boys’ boarding school. I’ve watched your career with some interest, as you’re the only authentic physicist that I know of in the major leagues. (I can’t tell for sure from your bio… clearly you declared a physics major in college, but did you graduate with a degree? If not, how far did you get? What classes did you get to? I’d love to know…)
Anyway, I’ve been professionally involved with baseball as well as physics. I work for STATS, INC scoring games; you are on my list of pitchers whose games I love to work, because you work fast and throw strikes. I’ve written the Everything Kids Baseball Book. I broadcast Woodberry Forest’s games over the internet for the players’ parents to hear. Last year I was given a sabbatical, so I attended the Harry Wendelstedt Umpire School. (If you ever have a chance to talk to Paul Nauert, the school’s chief instructor, ask him about me. I was the crazy guy in the orange shirt and squash goggles who was really, really loud and asked lots of questions.)
For a few years, my main focus outside the classroom has been the USAYPT. I am the director of a day-long tournament in which schools from all over the world come to Woodberry Forest to present their work on four undergraduate-level research problems. The tournament itself consists of “Physics Fights,” ritualized debates in which teams of students present and dispute their results. Think of typical high school debate team, but with physics rather than with politics.
The tournament is growing. Last year we had eight teams attend, including teams from California, New York, Virginia, Tennessee, Singapore, Australia (Brisbane Girls’ Grammar School), and Slovakia. In order to accommodate this expansion, we need to make the tournament into a two-day event.
The issue with a two-day tournament is getting a professional jury. So far, we have survived by asking college professors within a 2-hour radius of Woodberry to volunteer for a day. For a two-day event, we would need to pay for transportation and hotel costs, and hopefully give each juror a small stipend. Problem is, we don’t have that money.
We could run this two-day tournament for $20,000. Our organization’s secretary is starting the process of fundraising, but I thought I’d start with you… on one hand, we hope you’d sponsor us out of the goodness of your heart and a desire to help physics students the world over. That said, think of the unparalleled public relations opportunity this could be... “Major League Pitcher Judges International Physics Tournament” as a headline on Deadspin or as a Sportscenter story could be a coup for you, your team, and for our organization.
The USAYPT is a registered 501(c)(3) public charity, meaning all donations to us are tax deductable. Check our website (www.usaypt.org) for more details about us. Our 2010 tournament will be held on the Friday-Saturday February 5-6. You may contact me via the email address or phone number shown below. I look forward to hearing from you…
Greg Jacobs
Hey, Nachoman, that letter might work! Jeff Francis might be totally inspired to reply!
Yes. And Bud Selig might appoint me Official Physicist of the National League.
And if a frog had wings, he wouldn’t bump his but on the ground when he hopped.
Weird situation of the week
At our monthly meeting, an umpire crew brought up an unusual play they had seen at a local high school game. With runners at first and third, the runner on first base took a lead near the outfield grass. The pitcher threw to the first baseman, who began chasing the runner – who bolted into right field! As the Keystone Cops-style chase ensued, the runner on third jogged home. Is this fair?
Several rules issues are in play here. To start with, the initial lead on the outfield grass is perfectly acceptable. A runner is not required to remain in a straight line between first and second base. (No one ever questions a runner’s right to take a wide turn around first when legging out a double, do they?) The rules state that the runner establishes his own baseline; that means, if the runner wants to establish a baseline in the outfield, so be it.
So, you ask, what’s that rule that allows a runner to be called out for running “out of the baseline?” The key point is that the “out of the baseline” rule only applies WHEN A PLAY IS BEING MADE ON THE RUNNER. If no one is attempting to put the runner out, then he can go where he likes. But when a fielder tries to tag him, he must stay on a line between his position and the base he’s going to. He goes more than three feet outside that line to avoid a tag, he’s out.
In this case, once the first baseman takes a step toward the runner in a bona fide attempt to put him out, that constitutes a “play.” The runner at this point must go straight from his position toward first or second base. When he runs into the outfield, he leaves his established baseline to avoid a tag; thus, he is called out.
Awkward Joey Votto Interview
David Brown, of Yahoo’s “Big League Stew” blog, convinced Joey Votto to grant an interview for his “Answer Man” feature. (Scroll down to the bottom to read Answer Man” features from folks other than Joey Votto.)
In Mr. Brown’s interviews, he asks offbeat, oddball questions designed to get the normally staid baseball men to loosen up and give authentic, spontaneous responses. I suppose the idea of the feature is to reveal a more authentic characterization of the player than can be inferred from the clichés he must spout after each game. Problem was, Mr. Votto didn’t seem to understand the purpose or tone of the interview. He did NOT loosen up. And afterwards, he complained to a beat reporter about Mr. Brown’s interview. He said he should have refused to answer most of these questions… he called his cooperativeness in the face of strange questions a “learning experience.” Come now, Mr. Votto… I don’t deny that the press corps can be evil incarnate to the professional athlete, but giving your fans a peek into your stance on bowling and mustaches should not be a PR disaster for you.
Deep Dish writes:
We haven't had the chance to talk baseball much over the past couple of weeks.
Yeah, Deep Dish, amazing how crazy it can be as a teacher at a boarding school even though a trained orangutan could teach my courses in the spring. With only a week to go before the AP physics exam, my guys are either ready or they’re not. Once high school baseball season is over and I stop umpiring, I'll be ready to watch baseball religiously again. And the Reds will be out of the race by then, so I'll be willing to watch the Cubs or Cardinals or whoever. Not the Yankees, though. I flipped on the TV at 8:30 Sunday night and they were STILL playing a game that started at 4:00.
Here's a random prediction for 2009: keep your eyes on the Pirates.
I've happened to see bits and pieces of a few of their games for no real reason. Tonight I watched the first four innings of their game against the Padres (who have also come a long way). This is backed up by absolutely no concrete statistical data, but it seems to me the Pirates are doing a few things really well:
1) Starting pitching -- actually, I do have some data here. Combined, their starters have one of the lowest ERAs in the majors.
Agreed. Still small-sample-size time, though... I saw the same thing about the Royals LAST year, when they were hanging around after a month. We all know how that turned out, right, KC fans?
2) Defense. They're hustling and getting to a lot of tough balls.
Yes. This is perhaps the most underappreciated aspect of good teams: defensive talent and hustle. It can't be measured well.
3) Moving runners over -- sac bunts and sac flies all over the place.
Perhaps, but those are still outs. Baseball Prospectus rates managers essentially in REVERSE order of the number of sacrifice bunt and hit and run orders. One of the themes of modern statistical analysis is that "little ball," as championed by Dusty Baker et al, is in general less likely to produce runs than Earl Weaver style wait-for-the-three-run-homer. How many times last year -- three, maybe? -- did Dusty Baker order one of his middle-of-the-order guys to bunt late in a tie game... the guy failed, then hit a two-strike walk-off home run.
4) Terrific new old-school uniforms--Obviously the most important factor at work.
Awesome. I haven't see them, but they've got to be better than the technically illegal duds the Pirates have worn for the past two years. (Illegal because of the patterned dots on the sleeves.) I wore an old-school Astros hat to the cookout yesterday, and a student from Texas offered his compliments. You see, I'm the only man in America who liked the 1980s Mike Scott era "rainbow" uniforms.
Cubs are up-and-down. The Cards look really good (the starting pitching point applies here as well). And the Reds played well against the Cubs during their series last week. Cueto beat Zambrano, I think.
As I predicted last year, Johnny Cueto has outperformed Edinson Volquez this year, primarily because Edinson couldn’t hit Jabba the Hutt with the ball if he were standing next to Princess Leia.
NL Central could be more interesting than many thought -- in the preseason predictions almost everyone had the Cubs running away with it.
Could be, but I think the Cardinals defense, or lack thereof, might be their eventual undoing. That and their relief pitching – I watched Kyle McClellan walk three in 0.2 innings before giving up a game-winning two run single.
Don’t worry, folks, you’ll hear more from Deep Dish in later episodes of Nachoman’s Baseball.
The dangers of generalizing based on one week
Carroll Rogers of the Atlanta Journal Constitution wrote one of those 500 word “what we've learned about our team in six games” articles a while back. The Braves started the year 5-1; since then they’ve gone 5-10, and now stand solidly in third place in the NL east. Here’s were the six things that Mr. or Ms. Rogers said he or she had learned. (I don't know whether Carroll Rogers is male or female. That wouldn't matter at all to the Nachoman, except that I desire to refer to him/her with an honorific. Do I say Mr. Rogers? Ms. Rogers? No, I choose "Mx. Rogers." I use "Mx." when a person's gender is unknown and/or irrelevant. Good grammatical invention, no? No? Really, no? Phthphth. I'm using it anyway.)
1. “ The Braves have some pop after all.” Mx. Rogers went on to list all of the Braves with a home run six games into the season. Of course, the Braves rank 23rd in the major leagues in homers as of April 30.
Don’t worry, despite my travels, I have compiled some interesting tidbits about baseball, which you can read in the rest of this 3000 word column. But the first tidbit is about both baseball and physics. Kind of.
The USAYPT needs money. (Who doesn’t?) We need to be able to pay travel costs for the jurors at our yearly tournament, and we’d like to make it less expensive for the teams to attend. The USAYPT directors are all physics teachers, who are utterly clueless about raising money. I thought, perhaps, that the major leagues’ most famous and only physicist might be able to help out.
The following is a letter I sent to Jeff Francis, the pitcher for the Colorado Rockies who had declared a physics major in university in British Columbia before he was drafted. Mr. Francis is on the DL this year, but he signed a fat contract recently… so he might have time and money on his hands.
Dear Mr. Francis,
I’m going to tell you about “physics fights.” I’d like to invite you to sponsor and judge an international physics debate tournament. Let me explain…
I’ve been teaching high school physics for 13 years, most of which have been spent at a boys’ boarding school. I’ve watched your career with some interest, as you’re the only authentic physicist that I know of in the major leagues. (I can’t tell for sure from your bio… clearly you declared a physics major in college, but did you graduate with a degree? If not, how far did you get? What classes did you get to? I’d love to know…)
Anyway, I’ve been professionally involved with baseball as well as physics. I work for STATS, INC scoring games; you are on my list of pitchers whose games I love to work, because you work fast and throw strikes. I’ve written the Everything Kids Baseball Book. I broadcast Woodberry Forest’s games over the internet for the players’ parents to hear. Last year I was given a sabbatical, so I attended the Harry Wendelstedt Umpire School. (If you ever have a chance to talk to Paul Nauert, the school’s chief instructor, ask him about me. I was the crazy guy in the orange shirt and squash goggles who was really, really loud and asked lots of questions.)
For a few years, my main focus outside the classroom has been the USAYPT. I am the director of a day-long tournament in which schools from all over the world come to Woodberry Forest to present their work on four undergraduate-level research problems. The tournament itself consists of “Physics Fights,” ritualized debates in which teams of students present and dispute their results. Think of typical high school debate team, but with physics rather than with politics.
The tournament is growing. Last year we had eight teams attend, including teams from California, New York, Virginia, Tennessee, Singapore, Australia (Brisbane Girls’ Grammar School), and Slovakia. In order to accommodate this expansion, we need to make the tournament into a two-day event.
The issue with a two-day tournament is getting a professional jury. So far, we have survived by asking college professors within a 2-hour radius of Woodberry to volunteer for a day. For a two-day event, we would need to pay for transportation and hotel costs, and hopefully give each juror a small stipend. Problem is, we don’t have that money.
We could run this two-day tournament for $20,000. Our organization’s secretary is starting the process of fundraising, but I thought I’d start with you… on one hand, we hope you’d sponsor us out of the goodness of your heart and a desire to help physics students the world over. That said, think of the unparalleled public relations opportunity this could be... “Major League Pitcher Judges International Physics Tournament” as a headline on Deadspin or as a Sportscenter story could be a coup for you, your team, and for our organization.
The USAYPT is a registered 501(c)(3) public charity, meaning all donations to us are tax deductable. Check our website (www.usaypt.org) for more details about us. Our 2010 tournament will be held on the Friday-Saturday February 5-6. You may contact me via the email address or phone number shown below. I look forward to hearing from you…
Greg Jacobs
Hey, Nachoman, that letter might work! Jeff Francis might be totally inspired to reply!
Yes. And Bud Selig might appoint me Official Physicist of the National League.
And if a frog had wings, he wouldn’t bump his but on the ground when he hopped.
Weird situation of the week
At our monthly meeting, an umpire crew brought up an unusual play they had seen at a local high school game. With runners at first and third, the runner on first base took a lead near the outfield grass. The pitcher threw to the first baseman, who began chasing the runner – who bolted into right field! As the Keystone Cops-style chase ensued, the runner on third jogged home. Is this fair?
Several rules issues are in play here. To start with, the initial lead on the outfield grass is perfectly acceptable. A runner is not required to remain in a straight line between first and second base. (No one ever questions a runner’s right to take a wide turn around first when legging out a double, do they?) The rules state that the runner establishes his own baseline; that means, if the runner wants to establish a baseline in the outfield, so be it.
So, you ask, what’s that rule that allows a runner to be called out for running “out of the baseline?” The key point is that the “out of the baseline” rule only applies WHEN A PLAY IS BEING MADE ON THE RUNNER. If no one is attempting to put the runner out, then he can go where he likes. But when a fielder tries to tag him, he must stay on a line between his position and the base he’s going to. He goes more than three feet outside that line to avoid a tag, he’s out.
In this case, once the first baseman takes a step toward the runner in a bona fide attempt to put him out, that constitutes a “play.” The runner at this point must go straight from his position toward first or second base. When he runs into the outfield, he leaves his established baseline to avoid a tag; thus, he is called out.
Awkward Joey Votto Interview
David Brown, of Yahoo’s “Big League Stew” blog, convinced Joey Votto to grant an interview for his “Answer Man” feature. (Scroll down to the bottom to read Answer Man” features from folks other than Joey Votto.)
In Mr. Brown’s interviews, he asks offbeat, oddball questions designed to get the normally staid baseball men to loosen up and give authentic, spontaneous responses. I suppose the idea of the feature is to reveal a more authentic characterization of the player than can be inferred from the clichés he must spout after each game. Problem was, Mr. Votto didn’t seem to understand the purpose or tone of the interview. He did NOT loosen up. And afterwards, he complained to a beat reporter about Mr. Brown’s interview. He said he should have refused to answer most of these questions… he called his cooperativeness in the face of strange questions a “learning experience.” Come now, Mr. Votto… I don’t deny that the press corps can be evil incarnate to the professional athlete, but giving your fans a peek into your stance on bowling and mustaches should not be a PR disaster for you.
Deep Dish writes:
We haven't had the chance to talk baseball much over the past couple of weeks.
Yeah, Deep Dish, amazing how crazy it can be as a teacher at a boarding school even though a trained orangutan could teach my courses in the spring. With only a week to go before the AP physics exam, my guys are either ready or they’re not. Once high school baseball season is over and I stop umpiring, I'll be ready to watch baseball religiously again. And the Reds will be out of the race by then, so I'll be willing to watch the Cubs or Cardinals or whoever. Not the Yankees, though. I flipped on the TV at 8:30 Sunday night and they were STILL playing a game that started at 4:00.
Here's a random prediction for 2009: keep your eyes on the Pirates.
I've happened to see bits and pieces of a few of their games for no real reason. Tonight I watched the first four innings of their game against the Padres (who have also come a long way). This is backed up by absolutely no concrete statistical data, but it seems to me the Pirates are doing a few things really well:
1) Starting pitching -- actually, I do have some data here. Combined, their starters have one of the lowest ERAs in the majors.
Agreed. Still small-sample-size time, though... I saw the same thing about the Royals LAST year, when they were hanging around after a month. We all know how that turned out, right, KC fans?
2) Defense. They're hustling and getting to a lot of tough balls.
Yes. This is perhaps the most underappreciated aspect of good teams: defensive talent and hustle. It can't be measured well.
3) Moving runners over -- sac bunts and sac flies all over the place.
Perhaps, but those are still outs. Baseball Prospectus rates managers essentially in REVERSE order of the number of sacrifice bunt and hit and run orders. One of the themes of modern statistical analysis is that "little ball," as championed by Dusty Baker et al, is in general less likely to produce runs than Earl Weaver style wait-for-the-three-run-homer. How many times last year -- three, maybe? -- did Dusty Baker order one of his middle-of-the-order guys to bunt late in a tie game... the guy failed, then hit a two-strike walk-off home run.
4) Terrific new old-school uniforms--Obviously the most important factor at work.
Awesome. I haven't see them, but they've got to be better than the technically illegal duds the Pirates have worn for the past two years. (Illegal because of the patterned dots on the sleeves.) I wore an old-school Astros hat to the cookout yesterday, and a student from Texas offered his compliments. You see, I'm the only man in America who liked the 1980s Mike Scott era "rainbow" uniforms.
Cubs are up-and-down. The Cards look really good (the starting pitching point applies here as well). And the Reds played well against the Cubs during their series last week. Cueto beat Zambrano, I think.
As I predicted last year, Johnny Cueto has outperformed Edinson Volquez this year, primarily because Edinson couldn’t hit Jabba the Hutt with the ball if he were standing next to Princess Leia.
NL Central could be more interesting than many thought -- in the preseason predictions almost everyone had the Cubs running away with it.
Could be, but I think the Cardinals defense, or lack thereof, might be their eventual undoing. That and their relief pitching – I watched Kyle McClellan walk three in 0.2 innings before giving up a game-winning two run single.
Don’t worry, folks, you’ll hear more from Deep Dish in later episodes of Nachoman’s Baseball.
The dangers of generalizing based on one week
Carroll Rogers of the Atlanta Journal Constitution wrote one of those 500 word “what we've learned about our team in six games” articles a while back. The Braves started the year 5-1; since then they’ve gone 5-10, and now stand solidly in third place in the NL east. Here’s were the six things that Mr. or Ms. Rogers said he or she had learned. (I don't know whether Carroll Rogers is male or female. That wouldn't matter at all to the Nachoman, except that I desire to refer to him/her with an honorific. Do I say Mr. Rogers? Ms. Rogers? No, I choose "Mx. Rogers." I use "Mx." when a person's gender is unknown and/or irrelevant. Good grammatical invention, no? No? Really, no? Phthphth. I'm using it anyway.)
1. “ The Braves have some pop after all.” Mx. Rogers went on to list all of the Braves with a home run six games into the season. Of course, the Braves rank 23rd in the major leagues in homers as of April 30.
2. The rotation is shored up. Here Mx. Rogers might be on more solid ground, but not because of one week’s worth of performance. It was clear before even Derrick Lowe and Javier Vasquez had even thrown a pitch that the Braves had improved on last year’s starters. Mx. Rogers noted that Braves starters were, after one week, fourth in baseball in ERA; now they’ve only dropped to 6th.
3. The bullpen might have some issues. Gotta love these “might” predictions – they “might” be right, they “might” be the worst sort of bet-hedging. After a few well-publicized first week meltdowns, the Braves bullpen has settled a bit. But they’re still only 20th best in the majors by ERA. (Once again, this isn’t something Mx. Rogers learned in week 1 – the flakiness of the Braves bullpen was a topic in Baseball Prospectus’s Braves article this year.)
4. Jeff Francoeur is showing signs of a comeback. Mr. Francoeur’s OPS stands at .729. That ranks 132nd out of the 198 qualified (i.e. 3.1 plate appearances per game) players in the majors.
What’s funny about this one is how Mx. Rogers draws general conclusions from pitches faced – “He’s going a little deeper into counts (3.62 pitches per plate appearance is up from 3.49 last year).” Really? After 25 at-bats, Mx. Rogers, you think 0.13 pitches per plate appearance is significant? Had Mr. Francoeur seen just THREE more pitches all year, he would be back to his old tricks of jumping on pitches early in the count.
5. Jordan Schafer can hang with the big boys. Well, his OPS is .827. Not bad. Good enough for 82nd of the 198 qualified major leagures. Does that qualify as "hanging with the big boys?" Only time will tell.
No Busch at Busch
Busch beer was created as a homage to Busch stadium. Well, not really a homage, more like a marketing ploy… when the original stadium was built, major league baseball did not allow fields to be named after products or companies. (Baseball has since changed their collective minds.) Nonetheless, it was forbidden to name the field “Budweiser Stadium.” So the Busch family named the field after themselves, “Busch Stadium.” And they created Busch beer.
But now, as reported by Chad Garrison in the
, it is difficult to find Busch Beer at Busch stadium. He and concessionaire Sportservice dispute precisely how many concession stands offer the namesake beverage; he says 3, Sportservice says 10-15. Nevertheless, most beer kiosks offer only Bud, Bud Light, Bud Dry, Bud Ice, Lady Bud, Raspberry Bud, and Tartar Control Bud.
Announcers being critical for the sake of being critical
Leadoff the 5th inning Sunday in San Diego, Macias hit a ball deep into the corner in right field. He picked up the ball (replays showed him looking into right field before he rounded the second base bag) and turned on the jets for third base.
Problem was, he stumbled about three steps beyond second, and he almost fell to the ground. He regained his footing, but a perfect throw retired him in a close play.
The Pirate announcers used this occasion to launch into a diatribe about the “poor baserunning decision.” As the rules of baseball read, apparently, anyone who makes the first out of the inning at third base should be publicly humiliated.
Yes, that’s usually a good rule of thumb – if you can’t make it to third easily, then with no outs, stay at second. In this case, though, Macias would have made it to third easily had he not stumbled! And even with the stumble, it took a perfect relay throw to get him! How is that a bad baserunning decision? What, was Mr. Macias supposed to anticipate his stumble?
No, folks, this is instead a bad announcing decision, to criticize a player incorrectly. FSN Pittsburgh compounded their error upon return from commercial – they showed the entire play again, including the stumble and the bang-bang play at third. The same announcer maintained his idiocy – despite the video evidence to the contrary, he claimed that Mr. Macias would have been thrown out easily even had he not stumbled. Aarrgh! Are you too vain to admit you made a mistake in your criticism? Of course you are… instead of acknowledging that you were too quick to throw stones, you essentially told your audience that the sky is green. If Macias was not thrown out “easily” in the real play, how would he have been thrown out by a greater distance without a stumble? Grrr.
And Marv Levy is still in negotiations about the Bills game
The Cincinnati-Pittsburgh game of Sept. 27 has been moved to 4:15 so that the New York-Tennessee game can be played at 1:00. This is due to the Jewish Holiday of Yom Kippur.
NachoGrandpa says: Apparently Dolly Parton and Reba McIntyre complained that they wouldn't be able to watch the game and also make it to Kol Nidre.
Next Week
The Nachoman notes his displeasure that most Oak Ridge residents look and act like physicists, not like the Oak Ridge Boys. I didn’t hear country music anywhere in the town.
Announcers being critical for the sake of being critical
Leadoff the 5th inning Sunday in San Diego, Macias hit a ball deep into the corner in right field. He picked up the ball (replays showed him looking into right field before he rounded the second base bag) and turned on the jets for third base.
Problem was, he stumbled about three steps beyond second, and he almost fell to the ground. He regained his footing, but a perfect throw retired him in a close play.
The Pirate announcers used this occasion to launch into a diatribe about the “poor baserunning decision.” As the rules of baseball read, apparently, anyone who makes the first out of the inning at third base should be publicly humiliated.
Yes, that’s usually a good rule of thumb – if you can’t make it to third easily, then with no outs, stay at second. In this case, though, Macias would have made it to third easily had he not stumbled! And even with the stumble, it took a perfect relay throw to get him! How is that a bad baserunning decision? What, was Mr. Macias supposed to anticipate his stumble?
No, folks, this is instead a bad announcing decision, to criticize a player incorrectly. FSN Pittsburgh compounded their error upon return from commercial – they showed the entire play again, including the stumble and the bang-bang play at third. The same announcer maintained his idiocy – despite the video evidence to the contrary, he claimed that Mr. Macias would have been thrown out easily even had he not stumbled. Aarrgh! Are you too vain to admit you made a mistake in your criticism? Of course you are… instead of acknowledging that you were too quick to throw stones, you essentially told your audience that the sky is green. If Macias was not thrown out “easily” in the real play, how would he have been thrown out by a greater distance without a stumble? Grrr.
And Marv Levy is still in negotiations about the Bills game
The Cincinnati-Pittsburgh game of Sept. 27 has been moved to 4:15 so that the New York-Tennessee game can be played at 1:00. This is due to the Jewish Holiday of Yom Kippur.
NachoGrandpa says: Apparently Dolly Parton and Reba McIntyre complained that they wouldn't be able to watch the game and also make it to Kol Nidre.
Next Week
The Nachoman notes his displeasure that most Oak Ridge residents look and act like physicists, not like the Oak Ridge Boys. I didn’t hear country music anywhere in the town.
NM
P.S. Thanks a million to neighbor Jason Getz -- who needs a theme name -- for tracking down an early draft of this column and sending it to me via email.
1 comment:
I'm very interested in any posts with you, I respect and often try to visit you. Thank you.
Post a Comment