|
="Edgy DC":o3m0m8mg]1) Because if you make it a deliberate point to prick the pride of a professional athlete, he might make it a deliberate point prick the guy batting behind you.[/quote:o3m0m8mg]
I'm not talking about pointing at someone or verbally insulting them, but celebrating your own play. If a player takes offense at another player's celebration, as long as it isn't intentionally directed at someone, that's their problem. If they decide to physically attack a player, either unarmed or with a weapon (you know, committing battery), that's up to the league and, honestly, the law to deal with. Baseball is not a combat sport, and the fact we accept a level of violent crime in it sends a much worse message than fist pumping or handshakes.
="Edgy DC":o3m0m8mg]2) Because, when "antics" cross the line into lack of class, it's embarassing to the people whose name is on your uniform.[/quote:o3m0m8mg]
But what is the accepted level of "class" we're talking about? Is there a written code of conduct that refers to this? If there is, then isn't that an issue that would be settled between the employee and the employer?
If you ordered a Happy Meal and the cashier fist pumps after the sale, without affecting his performance (the food was served as quickly and as sanitarily as it would have been sans fist pump), would you be upset at the lack of class or amused? And even if you did have a problem with the employee, if the employer did not, isn't it up to you, as a consumer, to take your business elsewhere? Or is it up to you to try to convince the employer to change their policy? What if every restaurant in the industry had the same policy, and servers were high-fiving each other after taking each order?
I'm not trying to be snarky, I just really don't get the hatred of celebration. To me, it reads as joy, which is what I'm looking for in sports. To me, the word "antics" always brings up images of monocles popping out and Abe Simpson yelling at a cloud. If someone feels disrespected by an extended high-five, I feel they're either looking to be offended or are humorless grumps, who, if given a choice, I don't feel like aligning myself with.
I don't expect or prefer corporate behavior on the field. If a player wants to act that way, bully for him. But I don't really even prefer corporate behavior in business transactions. Show me a good accountant that wants a fist bump after a deduction, and I'll take him/her.
The whole "beaning someone is a crime" thing is a different topic, but it's just how I feel. Among other reasons, I was at MFYSII when Piazza got hit in the head, and at the time I thought I just saw, in person, a human die while playing a game. Never feel comfortable about someone getting hit with a baseball since (and probably shouldn't have before then (and I can't say I've never cheered when a player got pegged on the butt, but I always feel pretty bad about it later)).
EDIT- oh, and I understand that criminal charges could never realistically be enforced when dealing with a batter getting pegged, since there's no way to establish intent, but I REALLY wish it wasn't part of the game.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 10 2008 12:39 PM
|
|
When I see Jose Reyes dancing in the dugout, it strikes me as juvenile.
And if Francisco Rodriquez ends up lifting his arms to the heavens as often as that SNY montage indicates, then that's juvenile too.
But is it offensive? No. What do I think of players who are offended by it? I think they're juvenile too.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 10 2008 12:42 PM
|
|
| ="Vince Coleman Firecracker"]
To me, the word "antics" always brings up images of monocles popping out and Abe Simpson yelling at a cloud. |
It was supposed to.
| ]But what is the accepted level of "class" we're talking about? Is there a written code of conduct that refers to this? |
I'm talking about the basic tenets of sportsmanship as taught by your 3rd grade gym treacher, Mr. Marra -- you know, don't show up your opponent. Your whole Happy Meal story isn't really apt here.
It's not about how I feel about a fist-pumping cashier, but rather about how I feel about what effect the cashier's fist-pump might have had on his counterpart at an adjoining Burger King who didnt get the sale and is looking on, and that assumes Burger Joint Cashiering is a physical competition I care about and it isn't.
|
HahnSolo
Dec 10 2008 12:45 PM
Re: Antics
|
|
="John Cougar Lunchbucket":1hsbh9p7]I happen to agree with critics of the Mets who say the team's behavior on the field is too much, and the one thing I don't look forward to is seeing K-Rod do the Electric Slide every time he gets strike 3 next year. Let the fans act like jackasses, I say. They will anyway.[/quote:1hsbh9p7]
Since K-Rod has not thrown his first pitch as a Met, this thread really is about Reyes, correct? Because who else on the current Mets are you talking about? Delgado maybe, but his antics seem to only be in collaboration with Jose. And other than the home run celebrations on the top step of the dugout (or outside the dugout), I don't find the Mets to be all that bad.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 10 2008 12:56 PM
|
|
Well, it is about Reyes, but I also seem to be arguing that the same obliviousness and lack of discipline exhibited by Reyes when he discos inhabits the entire team in its hour of need, whether that's a guy on 3rd, no outs or a relief pitcher in a big spot.
I don't mean straight cause and effect, I mean, the team is unfocused in both cases.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Dec 10 2008 03:06 PM
|
|
| ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]I'm talking about the basic tenets of sportsmanship as taught by your 3rd grade gym treacher, Mr. Marra -- you know, don't show up your opponent. |
Well, Mr. Marra sounds like a good teacher who understands that the main goals of phys ed are encouraging participation and helping children learn certain social lessons. The goals of professional sports have very little, if anything to do with that. Productivity and, ultimately, entertainment are professional athletes' goals. The productivity in sports can be measured objectively, but the entertainment is completely subjective. You might be entertained by someone who quietly leaves the field after each inning, stoically going about their business, and I might be entertained by someone who does the electro-boogie after stealing a base, but I don't see any reason to think the other fan's preference is wrong.
The concept of "showing the other team up" is also subjective, with everyone drawing different lines between what is acceptable and what isn't. Some people think that it's wrong to spike the ball after scoring a touchdown, other people are disappointed when the scoring player doesn't do the worm after each score (actually, that might just be me). But I think that there's a clear line between overt and deliberate antagonization (such as pointing or yelling at a player) and celebration (anything that doesn't deliberately single out an opponent). If you want to consider some of the latter off-limits, I don't understand how people decide where the line should be. Is it OK to meet your opponent at home after a walk-off? Should the winning team shake hands with each other on the field, or should they save it for the locker room? If I hit a home run, can I clap? Can I clap twice? Three times? Is clapping seven times "showing the other team up"? Giving the "number one" sign? Is it OK if it's the World Series, game seven? The All-Star Game? Spring training? Is this decided by a majority of fans? Does this phrase really mean anything at all?
Do I like it when other teams do it? No, but tough titty toenails. I'm only actually mad because it means something bad happened to my team. If another team beat the Mets while acting like a bunch of robots, I'd hate them for being soulless androids. If they beat em while performing Cirque du Soleil, I'd hate them for all their mystery and wonder.
| ]Your whole Happy Meal story isn't really apt here. |
Yeah, I think you're right. How about this: in 1998, Roberto Benigni won an Oscar for Best Actor for Life is Beautiful, then climbed over people and exuberantly celebrated his win. Was he showing up the other nominees? If Nick Nolte was offended by this, is that his fault or Benigni's? If Nolte was so ticked off that he punched Mario Cotone in the face, is Benigni ethically liable for that? What if there was a history of disrespected runners-up punching winning producers in the face? Would he be liable then? Can Benigni's actions be considered unethical in any way?
|
attgig
Dec 10 2008 03:19 PM
|
|
bring back lastings. I wanna see a citifield leap into the stands after they cross home plate.
baseball is the only sport that this is discouraged, and I find that somewhat elitist.
heck, even tiger shows emotion on a golf course, and McEnroe introduced it in tennis a LONG time ago.
if you're not playing with emotion, then you're not playing with your all. some people happen to hide their emotions, and others wear their emotions on their sleeve. it's not a question of maturity or sportsmanship, but rather, just their personality.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 10 2008 03:41 PM
|
|
I'm all for actors punching each other in the face.
I disagree the athletes should necessarily be striving to entertain me: The athletes -- understanding going in they're all self-absorbed fucks -- should strive to excel so that the game entertains me. That can easily be achieved within the admittedly subjective and sometimes murky framework of sportsmanship.
|
TransMonk
Dec 10 2008 03:49 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 10 2008 04:34 PM
|
|
="attgig":1mcf7f8o]
baseball is the only sport that this is discouraged, and I find that somewhat elitist.
heck, even tiger shows emotion on a golf course, and McEnroe introduced it in tennis a LONG time ago.
if you're not playing with emotion, then you're not playing with your all. some people happen to hide their emotions, and others wear their emotions on their sleeve. it's not a question of maturity or sportsmanship, but rather, just their personality.[/quote:1mcf7f8o]
I tend to agree with this post.
The fact that it seems to piss off the Phillies fanbase and announcers most makes me even more pro-antics.
Now if we could just get one of our guys to emphatically say that we're the team to beat this spring...
ON EDIT: Ugh, I'm Lastings Milledge.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Dec 10 2008 03:53 PM
|
|
| ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]I disagree the athletes should necessarily be striving to entertain me: The athletes -- understanding going in they're all self-absorbed fucks -- should strive to excel so that the game entertains me. That can easily be achieved within the admittedly subjective and sometimes murky framework of sportsmanship. |
But, setting aside behavior, their performance is part of the entertainment. By performing well, they entertain their fans, who want to see their team win. And, for people who enjoy watching a stoic ballplayer briskly and unemotionally trot around the bags after a home run, that's their entertainment preference. A player who behaves that way is making a decision, whether he realizes it or not, to entertain his audience with his stoicism.
You enjoy watching players who, in addition to performing, behave they way you want them to behave. That's your preferred entertainment. I also enjoy watching those players, in addition to enjoying watching Lastings Milledge give out high fives to the crowd. That's my preference.
I don't see how one preference can be considered more ethical than the other.
|
Vic Sage
Dec 10 2008 03:59 PM
|
|
what Firecracker said?
ditto.
|
Kong76
Dec 10 2008 04:02 PM
|
|
I'm in the everything in moderation and if you over do it and then you don't
back it up with winning divisions then you should tone it down until you do
camp.
I think Jose will show even more maturity this year.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 10 2008 06:27 PM
|
|
="attgig":1rao6nna]bring back lastings. I wanna see a citifield leap into the stands after they cross home plate.
baseball is the only sport that this is discouraged, and I find that somewhat elitist.[/quote:1rao6nna]
What are you talking about? There is no penalty for dancing in baseball. In football it's 15 yards after the kickoff, or something.
|
TransMonk
Dec 10 2008 07:57 PM
|
|
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8fsxK4H1LIU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8fsxK4H1LIU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
Edgy DC
Dec 10 2008 09:43 PM
|
|
Where the line is regarding sportsmanship is subjective, but we figure it out as a reasonable consensus builds the further one goes over it.
When (without hopefully flames being fanned by a dopey columnist) a large group of your teammates, your hometown fans, or your country (in international sports) are declaring themselves embarassed by you, you've gone over the line.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Dec 11 2008 07:11 AM
|
|
So, you should conform your behavior to what a "large group" expects it to be? There are a "large group" of people that want to see more celebrating. Should the non-celebraters feel they've "gone over the line" with their non-celebration?
I don't think this is an issue that you can pin any sort of intrinsic value to. Is it unethical to celebrate? Ethical? Evil? Good? Of course it isn't any of those. If you prefer not to see it, that's fine, but you have no grounds to declare it wrong.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 11 2008 07:59 AM
|
|
="Vince Coleman Firecracker":n8sa80tk]So, you should conform your behavior to what a "large group" expects it to be?[/quote:n8sa80tk]
If they matter to you. We all do. Social norms exist everywhere. They're challenged daily. Sometimes the norm yields, sometimes the challenger. And sometimes the challenger is rejected outright.
="Vince Coleman Firecracker":n8sa80tk]I don't think this is an issue that you can pin any sort of intrinsic value to. Is it unethical to celebrate? Ethical? Evil? Good? Of course it isn't any of those.[/quote:n8sa80tk]
This isn't about celebrating. It's about all sorts of behavior under the heading of "antics."
="Vince Coleman Firecracker":n8sa80tk]If you prefer not to see it, that's fine, but you have no grounds to declare it wrong.[/quote:n8sa80tk]
I haven't declared anything to be anything. I don't know what "if you prefer not to see it" is supposed to mean. Some insult, I guess.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Dec 11 2008 08:22 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC"]| ="Vince Coleman Firecracker"]If you prefer not to see it, that's fine, but you have no grounds to declare it wrong. |
I haven't declared anything to be anything. I don't know what "if you prefer not to see it" is supposed to mean. Some insult, I guess. |
Not at all. I'm just saying that's what you (well, not necessarily you, but a theoretical someone who doesn't like antics) prefer to watch. In this case, neither side (people who like to watch the type of celebrating we're talking about or people who don't) can claim they're a majority, nor can they claim they're somehow right in preferring what their preference is, and neither side should expect all players to behave exactly as they want them.
There's nothing intrinsically right or wrong with Jose Reyes' handshake things, just as there's nothing intrinsically right or wrong with players who don't celebrate as wildly. It's a matter of preference whether a fan wants to see one or the other.
And I apologize that my post said "you" declare it wrong, I didn't mean that. I meant it's not right for anyone (including [url=http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/watchdog/blog/2008/07/larry_andersen_suggets_plantin.html]Larry Anderson[/url]) to declare any non-antagonistic celebration wrong.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 11 2008 08:29 AM
|
|
This relativism is silly. I have a right to declare what's embarassing to me as a fan. I have a right to vote with my dollars and to shun him. We can talk about it, discuss it, and --- if my ignorant views spread --- lead society to reject him and his kinfolk. I can even come up with social science and psychological support --- non-subjective ones --- for why a particular behavior is damanging to the the team's interests or society's.
These may well be nonsense. Or very supporable. But if a man pees on the plate every time he hits a homer and makes a motion to cut the ump's throat, you'll hear from me.
And that's what we're talking about. But no, I haven't rejected anybody, and I think the case against Reyes is greatly exaggerated, but they've used it to get in his head.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 11 2008 08:32 AM
|
|
I shoulda known that this would careen into various defenses of "playing with fire and emotion" and ethics and so forth.
My point was that the Mets have just acquired another guy whose behavior on the field is demonstrative with respect to his peers and can be construed as unsportsmanlike or disrepectful to the game and opponents. I wondered aloud whether the obliviousness and self-satisfaction that kinda behavior broadcasts reveals itself in other ways.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Dec 11 2008 09:16 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC"]This relativism is silly. I have a right to declare what's embarassing to me as a fan. I have a right to vote with my dollars and to shun him. We can talk about it, discuss it, and --- if my ignorant views spread --- lead society to reject him and his kinfolk. I can even come up with social science and psychological support --- non-subjective ones --- for why a particular behavior is damanging to the the team's interests or society's.
These may well be nonsense. Or very supporable. But if a man pees on the plate every time he hits a homer and makes a motion to cut the ump's throat, you'll hear from me.
And that's what we're talking about. But no, I haven't rejected anybody, and I think the case against Reyes is greatly exaggerated, but they've used it to get in his head. |
You absolutely have I right to declare something embarrassing to you, but when people claim celebrations are embarrassing to "the sport," they're using their own entertainment preference to mean something larger and more authoritative than what it is. And, as a customer, you absolutely can take your money elsewhere, just like how people with the opposite feelings on the "antics" issue can choose to support the most flamboyant teams.
As for shunning the kinfolk, etc, well, that's an unethical response to something (if we're still talking about fist-pumps and the like) that is ethically neutral.
Even if a person could show social scientific and psychological support that that a type of behavior, while not wrong on its own, is damaging to a society, that is only part of a debate about personal freedom versus the greater social good that we see manifested to varying degrees in nearly every aspect of our lives.
And I'm not talking about threatening to slash an ump's neck, I'm talking about holding your arms over your head or pointing a finger to the sky after you succeed at something.
As for getting into Reyes' head, I'm honestly not sure if you're referring to a particular incident, but Jose Reyes just finished a season in which he faced his harshest criticism for on-field antics and performed better than almost everyone else in the sport. THT ranked him tied for 7th in Win Shares, and Prospectus had him 7th in VORP. If someone's in his head, they can stay in there as far as I'm concerned.
And, JCL, yes, this topic is pretty far afield from your original question. The Mets missed the playoffs the last two years primarily (I'd contend, anyway) because of problems with the bullpen. Had their bullpen (on the whole, not a very demonstrative group) been a wee bit better the last two seasons, would we be talking about how Jose Reyes' "antics" inspire his team and encourage espirit de corps?
|
Edgy DC
Dec 11 2008 09:30 AM
|
|
="Vince Coleman Firecracker":1zwlsdu2]And I'm not talking about threatening to slash an ump's neck, I'm talking about holding your arms over your head or pointing a finger to the sky after you succeed at something.[/quote:1zwlsdu2]
We're talking broadly about antics.
="Vince Coleman Firecracker":1zwlsdu2]As for getting into Reyes' head, I'm honestly not sure if you're referring to a particular incident...[/quote:1zwlsdu2]
I'm referring to my first post.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Dec 11 2008 09:40 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC":2630r3db]We're talking broadly about antics.[/quote:2630r3db]
Okay, then put me down as being against singling out an opponent or threatening others, but for all celebratory behavior.
="Edgy DC":2630r3db]I'm referring to my first post.[/quote:2630r3db]
I agree that Jose's been put in a lose-lose spot, but his performance doesn't reflect that. He's everything short of an MVP, and he might even get that, as well.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 11 2008 09:47 AM
|
|
| ]And, JCL, yes, this topic is pretty far afield from your original question. The Mets missed the playoffs the last two years primarily (I'd contend, anyway) because of problems with the bullpen. Had their bullpen (on the whole, not a very demonstrative group) been a wee bit better the last two seasons, would we be talking about how Jose Reyes' "antics" inspire his team and encourage espirit de corps? |
Perhaps then he'd have "more to show for it," though that's not a defense I'd advoacte personally.
And I think the entire organization is to blame for their failures, since it (maybe like certain demonstrative ballplayers) appeared entirely too satisfied with itself despite having so little to actually "show." Maybe that's what I'm getting at, the whole idea of the arrogance in the marketing of the team as some kind of dynasty based on a pretty good run two years ago. I dunno.
|
attgig
Dec 11 2008 10:33 AM
|
|
="John Cougar Lunchbucket":236dg64d]="attgig":236dg64d]bring back lastings. I wanna see a citifield leap into the stands after they cross home plate.
baseball is the only sport that this is discouraged, and I find that somewhat elitist.[/quote:236dg64d]
What are you talking about? There is no penalty for dancing in baseball. In football it's 15 yards after the kickoff, or something.[/quote:236dg64d]
right, and baseball is the only thing that sportswriters will completely go after the player if they do something like that. where in football, it's only the retards like 81, and TO that get that hype. anyone else... it's just passed over.
i guess another way to think about it is in football, you get -15 yards where in baseball you get a free base off a hit by pitch....
|
Edgy DC
Dec 12 2008 06:38 AM
Antics, Part II
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 12 2008 07:09 AM
|
|
Cole Hamels talks antics, and labels the Metsies on the Benigno Show
<blockquote><a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/20081212_Phillies_ace_Hamels_takes_bait__labels_Mets_as__quot_choke_artists_quot_.html"><img src="http://media.philly.com/designimages/PhiComLogo_Header.gif"></a>
Phillies ace Hamels takes bait, labels Mets as "choke artists"
By DAVID MURPHY
Philadelphia Daily News
dmurphy@phillynews.com
SAY THIS: Cole Hamels knew it.
After ripping Jose Reyes and labeling the Mets "choke artists" and taking the bait on every leading question thrown his way - and they were all leading - the Phillies' ace lefthander laughed into the mouthpiece of his phone and uttered something obvious.
"You guys are going to kill me," Hamels said to a pair of hosts on New York's WFAN radio station yesterday. "I know."
Two years after Jimmy Rollins labeled the Phillies the team to beat and a year after Carlos Beltran instructed the media to tell Rollins otherwise, Hamels dipped his toe into the already well-populated waters of Phillies-Mets lore, using a 10-minute appearance to both promote DVDs and take umbrage with Reyes' home-run pimpage.
The headline-maker was an exchange Hamels had with hosts Joe Benigno and Evan Roberts in which one asks Hamels if he thinks the Mets are choke artists.
This is the exchange:
Question: "Do you think the Mets are choke artists? A lot of Mets fans think they are. Do you look at it from afar and say, honestly, we know they are going to find a way to lose this thing?"
Hamels: "Last year and this year, I think we did believe that. Three years ago, we didn't, because they smoked everybody. I really thought that was the year they were going to the World Series. Unfortunately, it didn't happen. That's kind of what we believe and I think we will always believe it until they prove us wrong."
Q: "Wow. It's worth repeating. You say the Mets are choke artists?"
Hamels: "Yeah, for the past 2 years they've been choke artists."
Perhaps the most interesting portion of the interview, conducted ostensibly so Hamels could hawk a set of DVDs commemorating the Phillies' World Series run, came earlier, when Hamels told a story about Shane Victorino's grand slam off CC Sabathia in Game 2 of the National League Division Series.
Throughout the season, the Phillies fancied themselves a team of ballplayers who played the game the "right way." Never was this more evident than after a late-July game in which Reyes hit a three-run home run that eventually proved to be the difference in a 6-3 Mets win. After the game, several Phillies were steamed about the way Reyes conducted himself, rounding the bases, holding one finger in the air.
So when Victorino raised his finger in the air while circling the bases after his slam off Sabathia, a few enterprising teammates hung a sign in his locker that said something to the effect of "J-Reyes?"
"When Jose Reyes hits home runs, he puts his finger up like he won the game, and he might have only hit it in the first inning or the third inning," Hamels said in the interview. "When Shane did it, he did the same, exact thing. So we said, 'Shane, this doesn't win the game, we still have a lot of game to play. Why are you trying to be like Jose Reyes?' That was kind of where it came from. Even though you hit the big home run, you don't need to pimp it. You just need to run around the bases and kind of get the game started. That's kind of where it came from."
The man who gave up that home run to Reyes, Ryan Madson, happened to be making a public appearance last night at the Phillies-hosted premiere of "The Perfect Season," a DVD edited and produced by team videographer Dan Stephenson.
Madson shrugged off Hamels' remarks.
"All that stuff, that happens all the time," Madson said. "Jimmy did it a few years ago. It's good. It's good for the game. It's good for us two teams. It makes it interesting."</blockquote><br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
metirish
Dec 12 2008 06:45 AM
|
|
It doesn't bother me what he says about choking , the whole thing with Reyes though is getting old, like Jimmy Rollins never raises his finger and points to the sky after hitting a home run.
I don't think Reyes can shake this label now anyway.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 12 2008 07:42 AM
|
|
Too bad Hamels cannot act with the dignity afforded a WS champion but as mentioned before their using Reyes' "antics" as a rallying point has been all to their advantage.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
MFS62
Dec 12 2008 07:55 AM
|
|
Would he have used the term "choke artists" of Joe hadn't used it first?
Later<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
Edgy DC
Dec 12 2008 07:55 AM
|
|
Not that Hamels has ever showed himself to be the smart one, but doesn't he see that playing that choke card is another way of saying his team didn't deserve it*?
*which I don't think is true.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 12 2008 07:59 AM
|
|
As 62 points out, Beningo fed him the term "choke artists" and Hamels simply agreed to it. But yeah, it's not to your advantage to say the other team choked. Your position ought to be that your team outplayed them.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
Edgy DC
Dec 12 2008 08:09 AM
|
|
Well, the author points it out too.
I think worms can figure out what Beningo is up to.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
Fman99
Dec 12 2008 08:13 AM
|
|
Ugh. I'd trade 100 years of this pablum for one inning of actual baseball.
Stupid winter.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
Edgy DC
Dec 12 2008 08:16 AM
|
|
| ]"All that stuff, that happens all the time," Madson said. "Jimmy did it a few years ago. It's good. It's good for the game. It's good for us two teams. It makes it interesting." |
Yes, it makes it interesting to deliberately rile the mooks.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
metirish
Dec 12 2008 08:19 AM
|
|
Getting played by Benigno , not a good thing.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
Centerfield
Dec 12 2008 09:50 AM
|
|
This team needs to come out next year showing some sack with a "Fuck the World" attitude.
I'd like to see the Mets play up their celebrations when they're playing the Phils. I would like to see a full marching band waiting in the bullpen that will come out and perform a Sousa march after every home run.
Even if it costs us 15 yards.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 12 2008 09:53 AM
|
|
They'll be out for blood after Jerry's Gangster camp.<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 12 2008 10:11 AM
|
|
It was actually Evan Roberts serving up the poison question, not Baddabingo.
But this is a non-story in search of a controversy anyway;
The Mets? Yeah, they were chokers over the last two years when they lost but not in the before that when they won, and I'll let you know about the future as soon as I see the results
Wow, thems fightin' words..<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
TransMonk
Dec 12 2008 10:20 AM
|
|
="Centerfield":3iehvx6z]This team needs to come out next year showing some sack with a "Fuck the World" attitude.[/quote:3iehvx6z]
Yup!<br><br><br><I>(Merged from Antics, Part II, 12/23/2008</i>)
|
Edgy DC
Dec 23 2008 10:00 AM
Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Dec 23 2008 10:14 AM
|
|
Bobby says Marianito hates Frankie. Why? ANTICS!
<blockquote>Mets' image won't be helped by K-Rod
By Bob Klapisch
Special to ESPN.com
In the days before the All-Star Game at Yankee Stadium, Mariano Rivera asked Yankees clubhouse employees for a small but important favor: keep Francisco Rodriguez's temporary locker as far away from his as possible.
It was a stunning request from the mild-mannered Yankee, but given how different the two closers are, perhaps not so surprising. By signing with the Mets, K-Rod will bring to Citi Field all the qualities that Rivera finds distasteful, not the least of which are Rodriguez's self-congratulations after each of his saves.
If Rivera took exception to K-Rod's two-handed point to the skies, imagine how the rest of the National League will feel about it in 2009. The Mets already have an image problem with the Phillies, and their new bullpen savior isn't likely to improve matters.
In fact, K-Rod has been a Met for a little more than a week, and is already immersed in the division's war of words. He declared the Mets, not the Phillies, were the team to beat. The world champs have other ideas: Cole Hamels made the back pages of the New York tabloids recently after calling the Mets "choke artists" on a local radio show.
Of course, K-Rod was lured to Flushing to heal that very wound. The Mets' bullpen blew 29 saves last season, which is why K-Rod's lack of restraint made no difference to Omar Minaya during negotiations with the free agent. The Mets' general manager reckons that, if Rodriguez can secure the ninth inning, he's free to act as if he's brought down the Berlin Wall.
<img src="http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2008/1218/mlb_u_frodriguez_200.jpg" align="right">The Mets certainly are beyond caring what the National League -- and, specifically, the Phillies -- think of them. And Rodriguez isn't about to temper his behavior now that he believes he's been validated by a three-year, $37 million contract.
"Of course, I'm never going to change the way I do my job. Never going to change," Rodriguez told reporters. "There might be a little more adrenaline … the New York fans, they make a lot of noise. I try to rob that energy from the crowd. For me, all the noise they're going to make excites me more."
K-Rod's celebrating profile will be layered atop Jose Reyes' customized high-fiving after scoring an important run in a big game -- outside the dugout. Such gloating, which has been part of the Mets' legacy since the '80s, has been steadily irritating opponents for the past four years.
But unlike the 1986 club, as arrogant as it was successful, the latter-day Mets have collapsed in the past two Septembers -- choked, just as Hamels says. They've yet to win a pennant since the miniature renaissance began in 2006, despite an influx of marquee talent and the ballooning of the payroll over $130 million.
That's the fine line Jerry Manuel must navigate in his first full season as the Mets' manager: He wants his players to emote, but without looking foolish.
Without citing Reyes in particular, Manuel copped to the Mets' immaturity. Indeed, one baseball executive said, "If you don't think [the celebrating] has any consequence, then why does a team like the Marlins always love to stick it to the Mets?"
The implied answer, of course, is that the Marlins -- who, despite being out of the playoff race, denied the Mets a playoff berth in the final weekends of the 2007 and 2008 seasons -- were paying the Mets back for their showboating sins.
"I think there were times when we were out of rhythm with what was going on," Manuel admitted, before adding, "if you can back it up, that's fine with me. And you have to do it in a way that's somewhat respectful to the game."
Manuel will certainly clamp down on open-air celebrating in a one-sided blowout. No argument there. But it's those one-run games with the Phillies that will test the manager's authority.
What happens, say, the first time K-Rod strikes out Ryan Howard to nail down a Mets victory at Citizens Bank Park? You don't have to ask -- <table align="left" cellpadding="8" width="300"><tr><td><font size="5"><b>"Of course, I'm never going to change the way I do my job. Never going to change."</b></font>
-- Francisco Rodriguez</td></tr></table>Rodriguez will have his guns (OK, index fingers) blazing toward the heavens. It'll certainly light the fuse, which, sooner or later in the summer, figures to ignite a fire.
Hamels' remark was one of the topics of conversation during the Mets' annual Christmas party for children Wednesday.
"Words aren't going to do anything in December," pitcher Mike Pelfrey told The New York Times. "I could not care less about what Cole Hamels said or anybody else on that team said. We've gotten a lot better this offseason, and we need to continue to make some more moves."
For now, the Mets are focusing on finding at least two more starting pitchers; they're hopeful of re-signing free agent Oliver Perez, and they have an eye on Randy Wolf. And it's not impossible for Pedro Martinez to return on a one-year contract.
But whoever takes the mound for the Mets will eventually hand the ball to J.J. Putz in the eighth inning, followed by K-Rod in the ninth.
Love him or loathe him, Rodriguez has made this much clear: He refuses to be ignored. The world (and the Phillies) will be watching.
Bob Klapisch is a sports columnist for The Record (N.J.) and a regular contributor to ESPN.com.</blockquote>
|
metirish
Dec 23 2008 10:13 AM
|
|
Happy fuckin Christmas to you too Bob..
| ]
If Rivera took exception to K-Rod's two-handed point to the skies, imagine how the rest of the National League will feel about it in 2009. The Mets already have an image problem with the Phillies,
|
Rivera of course is not in the NL...
|
themetfairy
Dec 23 2008 10:27 AM
|
|
Barf
|
seawolf17
Dec 23 2008 10:49 AM
|
|
It's 1986, baby. FIGHT!
|
Centerfield
Dec 23 2008 10:55 AM
|
|
What seawolf said.
|
G-Fafif
Dec 23 2008 12:33 PM
|
|
No game can be said to be truly official unless it is started by Mariano Rivera and the applause washes over him like soft rain.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Dec 23 2008 12:40 PM
|
|
The Klap, ALWAYS looking for something bad to write about the Mets. And with a little Yankee love, thrown in like a cherry on top.
Note, again, the unnamed source to throw a pretty mild brick. Klap, you can't get someone to go on the record saying the Marlins got all bent out of shape and delighted in beating the Mets? Maybe talk to, I don't know, one of the Marlins, maybe? They're a pretty chatty bunch. Made no bones about the joy they took and why.
Lazy, lazy, lazy. Then again, we have no proof the unanmed person actually exists, and boy, that quote fits perfectly with very point Klapisch was trying to make. Funny how that happens.
And, if I remember correctly, Reyes toned down his schtick last year, and people told him to loosen up and have fun again.
As for the scenario he describes in the story, with Met-Rod striking out Ryan Howard in a big at-bat, if he doesn't show some kind of emotion in that situation, he's a freaking cyborg ... like Rivera.
If I'm paying $47 for a seat in the boonies and paying $5 for a Diet Coke, I kinda like seeing that the guys on the field are a little excited.
|
Fman99
Dec 23 2008 01:13 PM
|
|
Jeez, you'd think Rivera farts cinnamon and shits gold coins. "Don't put his locker near mine, he might contaminate it!" Douche.
And of course ol' stupid Mets-hating MFY-loving Bob Klapisch is there to wear Mo's jock like a surgical mask.
Fuck these people. This palaver is activating my brain vein.
|
G-Fafif
Dec 23 2008 01:25 PM
|
|
="Fman99":2j726juf]Jeez, you'd think Rivera farts cinnamon and shits gold coins.[/quote:2j726juf]
Actually, they run an infomercial on just such a contraption on YES.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 23 2008 01:29 PM
|
|
I bet everyone else in the Yankee bullpen finds themselves strangely craving Cin-A-Bon whenever they sit next to Rivera.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
