Master Index of Archived Threads


Was that blood or red paint?

metirish Apr 26 2007 11:58 AM

] Sox's backup catcher allegedly says Schilling's sock from '04 was staged More than two years after the fact we still don't truly know whether that really was blood on the sock of Boston's pitcher / publicist Curt Schilling during the 2004 postseason. But last night we may received the most credible evidence that it was staged with - get this - red paint. Red Sox officials are incensed this morning it's even a question, and Yankees fans surely have to be bothered by this, as well. Every time that darn Schilling sock is mentioned, it reminds Yankee fans of perhaps their worst week in franchise history, when they became the first baseball team to blow a 3-0 lead in a best-of-seven series, to the Red Sox, no less. The latest sock controversy came about during the Orioles' telecast of their game at Fenway last night when Gary Thorne said on the air that the bloodied sock was in fact red paint. Thorne, the former Mets broadcaster who also does work for ESPN, even outed Red Sox backup catcher Doug Mirabelli as his source. So why would Thorne lie about this, especially on the air? When the Boston Globe's Red Sox beat writer Gordon Edes approached him in between innings, Thorne stood by what he had said, telling the reporter, "Go ask him." That makes us believe Mirabelli did tell Thorne the blood on the sock was in fact paint. But was he saying it in jest? Messing around with Thorne, thinking the broadcaster knew it was a joke? Or perhaps he was serious? Mirabelli vehemently denied that to Edes, saying, "What? Are you kidding me? He's --- lying. A straight lie. I never said that. I know it was blood. Everybody knows it was blood … I honestly don't know who Gary Thorne is." But, seriously, why would Thorne lie? Makes no sense. Lest we forget Schilling's reputation for seekng out the spotlight. He calls into a Boston sports talk radio station, has his own blog and has been known to post comments on both Red Sox and Yankee fan message boards. Schilling, manager Terry Francona and GM Theo Epstein all seemed insensed by what they deemed absolutely false accusations, according to this morning's Globe story. And Red Sox owner John Henry, who is almost always willing to offer comments through e-mail, was noticeably mum today. "I have no information on this subject," he said. Maybe former Red Sox players Johnny Damon and Mike Myers, who both crossed over to the dark side and signed with the Yankees before the 2006 season, will speak publicly about this later this afternoon. But probably the only way to put an end to this may just be to test the sock, as silly as that may sound. There were two (allegedly) bloody socks, from Game 6 of the ALCS and Game 2 of the World Series, but only one sock exists today. Because Game 6 of the ALCS played at Yankee Stadium, the bloodied sock was handled afterward by Yankee Stadium visiting clubhouse attendants. They have no recollection of what happened to it, so they believe it was tossed away into the garbage, where surely many Yankee fans believe it belongs. But the bloodied sock from World Series Game 2 is still on display at baseball's Hall of Fame, according to its Web site. So then maybe it's time to take a day off from drug testing and do some sock testing. Because if it is paint, as Thorne insists Mirabelli said, wouldn't it be fun to see Schilling explain that? Oh, and by the way, Schilling and the Red Sox visit the Bronx for three games beginning tomorrow night. Good timing, eh?

Edgy DC Apr 26 2007 12:05 PM

There might have been a second bleeder. The real mystery to me was why Mirablelli sat on the bench in game five while Jason Varitek kept chasing Wakefield's knucklers to the backstop.

Nymr83 Apr 26 2007 02:30 PM

I think they should get the sock and test the substance, whoever is lying should retire in disgrace.

metirish Apr 26 2007 02:31 PM

Nymr83 wrote: I think they should get the sock and test the substance, whoever is lying should retire in disgrace. It's in the HOF I think...if not Barbara Walters probably has it.

Edgy DC Apr 26 2007 02:37 PM

Checking the sock won't clarify whether Thorne or Mirabelli is doing the lying.

metsmarathon Apr 26 2007 02:48 PM

if mirabelli was really clever, he'd've painted it with schillings' own blood.

Nymr83 Apr 26 2007 03:25 PM

Edgy DC wrote: Checking the sock won't clarify whether Thorne or Mirabelli is doing the lying. true but it would either exonerate or indict Schilling.

soupcan Apr 26 2007 05:04 PM

]"We have no reason to doubt Curt, who has a profound respect for the history of the game and is cognizant of his role as a history maker," Baseball Hall of Fame spokesman Jeff Idelson said. "The stain on the sock is now brown, which is what happens to blood over time." If it was paint it would still be red.

metirish Apr 26 2007 08:53 PM

Things got cleared up today with this story. ] Thorne backed off Thursday after talking to Mirabelli before the Red Sox played the Orioles. Thorne said Mirabelli had been joking. "He said one thing, and I heard something else. I reported what I heard and what I honestly felt was said," Thorne said. "Having talked with him today, there's no doubt in my mind that's not what he said, that's not what he meant. He explained that it was in the context of the sarcasm and the jabbing that goes on in the clubhouse. "I took it as something serious, and it wasn't," Thorne said. Mirabelli confirmed the story, saying, "He knows that I believe 100 percent that I thought the sock had blood on it. It never crossed my mind that there wasn't blood on that sock. If he misinterpreted something said inside the clubhouse, it's unfortunate." Mirabelli said he spoke with Thorne in the Boston clubhouse about six months after the 2004 playoffs. "As he was walking away he asked, 'How about the bloody sock?' I said, 'Yeah, we got a lot of publicity out of that, and that was all he can recall me saying," Mirabelli said. "He said he assumed what I meant was that the sock was fake and that it was just a publicity stunt. That by no means is what I meant. There was never a doubt in mind there was blood on the sock."

Nymr83 Apr 26 2007 09:45 PM

boo, i was hoping for more name-calling

metirish Apr 26 2007 09:49 PM

Seems strange that Thorne would wait a few years to mention it....

Centerfield Apr 27 2007 12:02 AM

Hearing him speak today, I get the feeling that Gary didn't consider the sock, real or fake, to be a big deal. That's why he didn't mention it for two years, that's why he never followed up to make sure it was accurate. In other words, he didn't think he was breaking a story. Of course, Gary should know better considering how much press it got and considering it sits in the Hall of Fame. Bad job by Gary...even if true, he's publicizing info given to him by Mirabelli that would make Mirabelli look bad. For that reason alone, he should fact-check and make sure Doug is ok with him going public with it. But I like that the 2004 Yankee collapse was in the headlines again. I could talk about that series every day. I'm hoping that tomorrow someone mentions that Arroyo's braids were extensions causing his former teammates to come to bat for him.

Willets Point Apr 27 2007 03:11 AM

Curt Schilling responds in his blog 38 Pitches (which is actually a blog worth reading).

Edgy DC Apr 27 2007 07:53 AM

Comparing Gary Thorne to Jon Heyman. Harsh.

metirish Apr 27 2007 08:22 AM

Edgy DC wrote: Comparing Gary Thorne to Jon Heyman. Harsh. Yeah that's harsh,one of the things I like about Thorne is that he does speak his mind,I remember a few times when doing Mets games that he didn't hold back,had a few harsh words for Bobby V's club house when he did games for WP11.

metirish Apr 27 2007 09:02 AM

Not sure what to make of the blog,he's a self serving jerk at times. ] The only problem I have is this. If you look back, from the day of game six in the ALCS, through today, you won’t find a newspaper article, radio or TV interview in which I offered the blood, the sock, the game, any of it, as a topic. I haven’t talked about it since the post game interview room that night. I would like to see that Barbara Walters interview ,IIRC you hobbled out on crutches and Babs gushed over you...and your ankle.

dinosaur jesus Apr 27 2007 12:14 PM

If it wasn't real, it was the greatest piece of gamesmanship in baseball history. I'd respect that as much as his pitching with pain.

Edgy DC Apr 27 2007 01:12 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 27 2007 01:23 PM

He indicts Gary Thorne as being in Heyman's class and he did Barbara Walters? I'm not defending Thorne for a second here, but Barbara Walters kind of robs you of the right to be a media critic.

Willets Point Apr 27 2007 01:15 PM

I like that he uses CHB (which means Curly Haired Boyfriend), Carl Everett's derogatory term for Boston Globe columnist Dan Shaughnessy (who may be the worst, reactionary, write-by-the-numbers, sports columnist ever).

metirish Apr 27 2007 01:20 PM

This beats Banagher..... ] The saddest part in all of this is the following. Yesterday, as I was warming up for the game, I got to see a young kid, could not have been more than 20, who had served in Iraq. He was being honored by the Orioles and threw out the first pitch. He was a double amputee who’d lost the lower portion of both of his legs serving his country. He refused to use his cane and getting to see him do that was incredible. Instead of finding this kid and writing a story that truly matters, something that would and could truly inspire people, the media chose to focus on a story that was over two years old and a completely fabricated lie. What a job. Curt managed to work in God into his blog as well,not saying he's comparing himself to God but Jesus Christ he's a bit much.

silverdsl Apr 27 2007 01:33 PM

I hope someone takes Schilling up on this: ]Someone gave me a great idea to end this once and for all. No one will ever need to bring it up again. I’ll wager 1 million dollars to the charity of anyones choice, versus the same amount to ALS. If the blood on the sock is fake, I’ll donate a million dollars to that persons charity, if not they donate that amount to ALS. Any takers? Personally, I'm sick of hearing about the bloody sock, and the various conspiracy theories associated with it. So I'd be very happy if the question of is it real or is it fake was answered once and for all, and at the same time a good cause benefited. I don't always agree with Schilling, but I think he often has interesting things to say, and I like that he's pretty candid too. A blog is the perfect venue for him to go on at length about whatever he wants, and people can either choose to read it or not.

iramets Apr 27 2007 01:36 PM

silverdsl wrote: A blog is the perfect venue for him to go on at length about whatever he wants, and people can either choose to read it or not. But what if he reveals a state secret, and the world comes crashing down around him? Loose lips sink ships, dsl.

Rotblatt Apr 27 2007 01:54 PM

]Remember this, the surgery was voluntary. If you have the nuts, or the guts, grab an orthopedic surgeon, have them suture your ankle skin down to the tissue covering the bone in your ankle joint, then walk around for 4 hours. After that go find a mound, throw a hundred or so pitches, run over, cover first a few times. When you’re done check that ankle and see if it bleeds. Game, set, and match, right there. The dude stitched up his ankle so he could play, sacked up, and pitched out of his mind. End of story. Or is someone claiming that he didn't have surgery?