While watching the Detroit Tigers and Cleveland Indians play a game in the rain (yes, even an international super-stud like yours truly has his boring days), I had an epiphany.
They've had this thing wrong all along.
Any baseball fan knows that after 5 innings are completed, a major league game is "official". After that point, if the game can't be completed for any reason, it's still going down in the record books as a win for one team and a loss for the other. Whether this was caused by an earthquake, a tsunami, the plague, locusts, nuclear war, or Bieber and Shaq holding hands while parachuting naked into the stadium singing two-part harmony to the banana boat song on their Mr. Microphones, it doesn't matter. Dayo-schmayo, the game's still over. (Just a thought, but given a choice, I'd rather take my chances with the nukes than be in the stadium if the BS combo came floating down from the sky in their birthday suits).
Thing is -- what about the games that don't make it to 5 complete innings? It's happened hundreds, if not thousand of times over the years. Theoretically, if a game has gone 4 and two thirds innings, and Mother Nature decides to turn on some serious waterworks and throw a few lightning bolts around -- that game could be stopped, and never finished that day/night. It's not official yet.
Despite all the pitches thrown, possible hits, strike-outs, walks, errors, home-runs, RBIs, stolen bases, any runs scored, plays made in the field, etc., etc., it's like it never happened. It all gets erased. And that's just wrong.
There's a variety of ways these games can be "made up", or maybe not if it's toward the end of the season and replaying the game wouldn't matter either way to either team. That's happened too. But the vast majority of the time, the MLB braintrust, excuse the oxymoron if you're so inclined, will find a way to squeeze it in.
As mentioned above, the problem with the whole scenario is they start the game over from the beginning. Wouldn't it seem to make a lot more sense to continue the game from where it left off the last time around?
Consider: It would consist of less total innings, hence less wear and tear on the players. Good or bad, the stats they put up when the game originally started would still count -- as they should. More importantly, the score of the original game would reappear. If a team was ahead 10-0 after 3 innings before the rain came or the tectonic plates beneath the stadium suddenly shifted -- why should they have to start a rematch at 0-0? That's not fair.
It's even conceivably possible that erasing the stats from the start of the previous game could have implications on the record books. What if a hitter had a couple hits nullified and came up one percentage point shy of winning the batting crown at the end of the season? Not likely -- but stranger things have happened. Ya never know.
Regardless, if you're at a game, keep an eye out for the Big Aristotle and his dweeby little Canadian buddy. Ya never know when they might drop in either.
Not that I'm a big fan of such things, but that's the best argument for domed stadiums I can think of.
Hi special J. Get better soon. The kids miss you. Me too.
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
Sunday, July 7, 2013
Jaws and Matthew Stafford
In a sort of "countdown" that perhaps former radio legend Casey Kasem would be proud of, Ron "Jaws" Jaworski has recently been ranking the current (projected) NFL starting quarterbacks on the 4-letter network.
He has Lions' QB Matthew Stafford rated at #16 -- pretty much smack dab in the middle of the pack. No doubt, some hard-core Lions' fans (and reporters) will scream foul, but Jaworski certainly appears to have done his homework. And let's not forget, Jaworski had a long career as a QB himself in the NFL. Before Brett Favre came along and put the record out of sight, Jaworski once held the mark for most consecutive games started by an NFL quarterback (both Mannings have since eclipsed his former record as well). He even made it to the Super Bowl once, before his Philadelphia Eagles succumbed to the Oakland Raiders -- but at least he GOT there. That's more than a lot of modern QBs can say these days, including Matthew Stafford. In short, Jaws has no axe to grind with anybody, and he certainly has the credentials to rate quarterbacks.
At that, Jaworski made some interesting points regarding Stafford. Yes, he has a strong arm, and yes, he's thrown for a lot of passing yards the last two seasons (over 5000 in 2011, and only a whisker shy at 4967 in 2012). But he's also led the NFL in passes attempted. That's likely due to the fact the Lions haven't had any semblance of a decent running game to compliment their passing attack. They HAVE to throw. It should have come as no great surprise that wide receiver superstar Calvin "Megatron" Johnson broke the all time record for most receiving yards in a year. When in doubt -- heave it in Calvin's direction. He'll go get it.
Jaws also pointed out that while Stafford was much more successful throwing the ball from the "shotgun" formation (roughly 83% of Lions' passing plays), he didn't fare nearly as well when he took the snap from under center on yet other passing plays. Further, Jaworski said (and showed tapes to back it up) Stafford had poor mechanics when it came to being a drop-back passer. Oftentimes Stafford could be seen as off balance, throwing off the wrong foot in desperation, appearing confused and/or panicky, and generally making bad decisions before cutting it loose into the defensive coverage that was going on downfield. Even a Megatron can't get them all. Hence, while Stafford has 80 career TD passes, he's also thrown 54 interceptions. This is not exactly a terrible ratio -- but it's hardly stellar either.
Matthew Stafford has four years of experience under his belt as a Detroit Lions' quarterback. His career QB rating stands at 82.8. Just about average.
Then again, he's never won a single playoff game, and his career record stands at a not-so-respectable 17-28.
Jaws had Stafford at #14 after the Lions posted a 10-6 record two years ago, before getting blown out by the New Orleans Saints in a playoff game. After the Lions went 4-12 last year, including losing their last 8 in a row, Stafford only dropped two spots to #16.
If anything, Jaworski was generous with his appraisal of the modern-day Georgia peach.
He has Lions' QB Matthew Stafford rated at #16 -- pretty much smack dab in the middle of the pack. No doubt, some hard-core Lions' fans (and reporters) will scream foul, but Jaworski certainly appears to have done his homework. And let's not forget, Jaworski had a long career as a QB himself in the NFL. Before Brett Favre came along and put the record out of sight, Jaworski once held the mark for most consecutive games started by an NFL quarterback (both Mannings have since eclipsed his former record as well). He even made it to the Super Bowl once, before his Philadelphia Eagles succumbed to the Oakland Raiders -- but at least he GOT there. That's more than a lot of modern QBs can say these days, including Matthew Stafford. In short, Jaws has no axe to grind with anybody, and he certainly has the credentials to rate quarterbacks.
At that, Jaworski made some interesting points regarding Stafford. Yes, he has a strong arm, and yes, he's thrown for a lot of passing yards the last two seasons (over 5000 in 2011, and only a whisker shy at 4967 in 2012). But he's also led the NFL in passes attempted. That's likely due to the fact the Lions haven't had any semblance of a decent running game to compliment their passing attack. They HAVE to throw. It should have come as no great surprise that wide receiver superstar Calvin "Megatron" Johnson broke the all time record for most receiving yards in a year. When in doubt -- heave it in Calvin's direction. He'll go get it.
Jaws also pointed out that while Stafford was much more successful throwing the ball from the "shotgun" formation (roughly 83% of Lions' passing plays), he didn't fare nearly as well when he took the snap from under center on yet other passing plays. Further, Jaworski said (and showed tapes to back it up) Stafford had poor mechanics when it came to being a drop-back passer. Oftentimes Stafford could be seen as off balance, throwing off the wrong foot in desperation, appearing confused and/or panicky, and generally making bad decisions before cutting it loose into the defensive coverage that was going on downfield. Even a Megatron can't get them all. Hence, while Stafford has 80 career TD passes, he's also thrown 54 interceptions. This is not exactly a terrible ratio -- but it's hardly stellar either.
Matthew Stafford has four years of experience under his belt as a Detroit Lions' quarterback. His career QB rating stands at 82.8. Just about average.
Then again, he's never won a single playoff game, and his career record stands at a not-so-respectable 17-28.
Jaws had Stafford at #14 after the Lions posted a 10-6 record two years ago, before getting blown out by the New Orleans Saints in a playoff game. After the Lions went 4-12 last year, including losing their last 8 in a row, Stafford only dropped two spots to #16.
If anything, Jaworski was generous with his appraisal of the modern-day Georgia peach.
All hail Andy Murray
Wow. Andy Murray is really something. In a spectacular display of tennis skills, Murray defeated Serb Novak Djokovic 6-4, 7-5, 6-4 to win the 2013 Gentlemen's Wimbledon Championship.
It wasn't exactly what one would normally consider a drubbing or a rout, but it was pretty convincing nonetheless. I doubt many foresaw Murray knocking off Djokovic in straight sets. After all, there's a reason, actually many of them, the Serb has been ranked #1 in the world for a while. He's an all-around fantastic player himself.
In the post-match on-court interviews, both men showed what class individuals they are. In my opinion, they exhibited a perfect blend of thank-yous, appreciation, grace, and humility. Gentlemen indeed.
While Djokovic certainly remains a formidable opponent, let's not forget Murray also won the gold medal at the Olympics a while back.
And now finally -- FINALLY -- after 77 loooooong years, a native son has recaptured his homeland's ultimate tennis prize.
He earned it, he deserved it, well done, and bravo to Andy Murray.
Let the party begin.
It wasn't exactly what one would normally consider a drubbing or a rout, but it was pretty convincing nonetheless. I doubt many foresaw Murray knocking off Djokovic in straight sets. After all, there's a reason, actually many of them, the Serb has been ranked #1 in the world for a while. He's an all-around fantastic player himself.
In the post-match on-court interviews, both men showed what class individuals they are. In my opinion, they exhibited a perfect blend of thank-yous, appreciation, grace, and humility. Gentlemen indeed.
While Djokovic certainly remains a formidable opponent, let's not forget Murray also won the gold medal at the Olympics a while back.
And now finally -- FINALLY -- after 77 loooooong years, a native son has recaptured his homeland's ultimate tennis prize.
He earned it, he deserved it, well done, and bravo to Andy Murray.
Let the party begin.
Saturday, July 6, 2013
Detroit Tiger All-Stars
Six members of the Detroit Tigers will be going to this year's All-Star game. Some of them are no-brainers while others leave a person to wonder.
Obviously, starting pitcher Max Scherzer, who is currently 13-0, should be at the head of the list. As should 3rd baseman Miguel Cabrera. After winning the triple crown last year, Cabrera is tearing it up again in 2013. Last time I looked, Cabrera was leading the American League in batting average by a wide margin, and wasn't far behind in the home run and RBI departments.
Justin Verlander is going. As a reigning Cy Young winner, JV was always going to attrract attention. And Verlander's been good this year. He's hardly his former unhittable self having posted a 9-5 record, but that's not too shabby.
Prince Fielder is having a good year so far, but whether it qualifies as All-Star caliber is certainly debatable.
Aging Torii Hunter will be on the roster as well. So far, Hunter has seemed to defy Father Time. He's hitting close to .300, still has good range in the outfield to "go and get em", and it certainly appears his throwing arm is as strong and accurate as ever. In years past, All-Star voting has basically been a popularity contest based on a player's former contributions to the game -- and/or his public image. Yet despite being an all-around nice guy, is Hunter truly amongst the top current 5-6 outfielders in the American League? I dare say a lot of people would take issue with that.
The puzzler would seem to be shortstop Jhonny Peralta. Yes, after a miserable 2012 showing, he's rebounded to have a very good year so far in 2013. At last look, he was hitting over .300, had seven homers, and 40 RBIs, while committing only 4 errors in the field over the first half of the season. That's pretty impressive for a shortstop.
So how come I still get this nagging feeling that Peralta being in the All-Star game doesn't feel right?
Yeah, ever lovable Detroit Tiger manager Jim Leyland will be running the dugout of the American League All-Stars, and the Marlboro Man can pretty much do whatever he wants with the players at his disposal. Might favoritism come into play? Nah. Not Jimbo. Perish the thought.
Still, it seems like there ought to be a better option than Peralta. Is it too late to drag Alan Trammell out of retirement? How about Luis Aparicio? Bet the fans would get behind a 79-year-old former household name patrolling the #6 spot on defense for a few innings. Don't think he'd steal many bases like he used to, though.
Ah well. It will probably boil down to Leyland changing a lot of pitchers and using his "bullpen" wisely.
Translation? Advantage National League.
Obviously, starting pitcher Max Scherzer, who is currently 13-0, should be at the head of the list. As should 3rd baseman Miguel Cabrera. After winning the triple crown last year, Cabrera is tearing it up again in 2013. Last time I looked, Cabrera was leading the American League in batting average by a wide margin, and wasn't far behind in the home run and RBI departments.
Justin Verlander is going. As a reigning Cy Young winner, JV was always going to attrract attention. And Verlander's been good this year. He's hardly his former unhittable self having posted a 9-5 record, but that's not too shabby.
Prince Fielder is having a good year so far, but whether it qualifies as All-Star caliber is certainly debatable.
Aging Torii Hunter will be on the roster as well. So far, Hunter has seemed to defy Father Time. He's hitting close to .300, still has good range in the outfield to "go and get em", and it certainly appears his throwing arm is as strong and accurate as ever. In years past, All-Star voting has basically been a popularity contest based on a player's former contributions to the game -- and/or his public image. Yet despite being an all-around nice guy, is Hunter truly amongst the top current 5-6 outfielders in the American League? I dare say a lot of people would take issue with that.
The puzzler would seem to be shortstop Jhonny Peralta. Yes, after a miserable 2012 showing, he's rebounded to have a very good year so far in 2013. At last look, he was hitting over .300, had seven homers, and 40 RBIs, while committing only 4 errors in the field over the first half of the season. That's pretty impressive for a shortstop.
So how come I still get this nagging feeling that Peralta being in the All-Star game doesn't feel right?
Yeah, ever lovable Detroit Tiger manager Jim Leyland will be running the dugout of the American League All-Stars, and the Marlboro Man can pretty much do whatever he wants with the players at his disposal. Might favoritism come into play? Nah. Not Jimbo. Perish the thought.
Still, it seems like there ought to be a better option than Peralta. Is it too late to drag Alan Trammell out of retirement? How about Luis Aparicio? Bet the fans would get behind a 79-year-old former household name patrolling the #6 spot on defense for a few innings. Don't think he'd steal many bases like he used to, though.
Ah well. It will probably boil down to Leyland changing a lot of pitchers and using his "bullpen" wisely.
Translation? Advantage National League.
Aaron Hernandez and the jersey thing
P. T. Barnum had it exactly right. There's a sucker born every minute. I'll go one step further and say it's scary how many people will believe anything they hear or read -- particularly when the source is someone in a position of authority. Like politicians, cops, corporate execs, and the otherwise usual gang of users, abusers, liars and deceivers that prey on the masses in various ways to enhance their own standing.
And now yet another example has come to light. After former New England Patriot tight end Aaron Hernandez was charged with a variety of crimes, the most serious being murder, the team quickly released him. Yes, yours truly pays attention to the news updates and, yes, the initial reports don't appear to bode well for Hernandez. It looks bad. But did he really commit these crimes? The honest answer is -- at this point we have no idea. Yes, there will always be the zealots that, in their ignorance, rush to judgment and want to start warming up the electric chair, prepping the gas chamber, or getting the needles ready before all the evidence, or lack thereof, has been presented in a court of law and a jury has duly deliberated. One would like to think the days of lynch mobs and vigilantes are a thing of the past -- and hopefully they are. But the mentality remains amongst some.
In an obvious PR move, the New England Patriots are currently hyping a program whereby anyone that had purchased a jersey with Aaron Hernandez's name and number on it could trade it in for any other jersey of their choice. In my world, this is called a feeble attempt at damage control. Somehow the brain trust of the Patriots must think putting a "recall" on Hernandez jerseys will distance them from any affiliation with their former tight end.
And you know what's amazing? Like lemmings, the people are standing in line to do just that. They can't wait to trade in their Hernandez jerseys for another one. Phineas Taylor Barnum is smiling somewhere. Yet another generation of suckers is alive and well.
Why do I say that? Because potentially a Hernandez jersey could soar in value. Particularly if he's convicted of the crimes he's been accused of. That would put him on the list of notoriety.
Sure, most people would be turned off at the thought of owning a pair of Hitler's cufflinks, a Stalin military uniform, or perhaps even a lock of Charles Manson's hair. But guess what? Whether you like it or not, there are those out there that would pay a small fortune for such items.
And for the New England Patriots and/or previous Hernandez fans that had previously purchased a Hernandez jersey -- what exactly do they get by trading it in? A Tom Brady jersey? There's a million of them already out there. They're not worth squat.
Hernandez may or may not be the monster he's accused of being.
But if I had one of his jerseys -- I'd hang on to it just in case.
Remember OJ? Think of him what you will, but how much do you think one of his original USC or Buffalo Bills jerseys would fetch on eBay right about now?
And now yet another example has come to light. After former New England Patriot tight end Aaron Hernandez was charged with a variety of crimes, the most serious being murder, the team quickly released him. Yes, yours truly pays attention to the news updates and, yes, the initial reports don't appear to bode well for Hernandez. It looks bad. But did he really commit these crimes? The honest answer is -- at this point we have no idea. Yes, there will always be the zealots that, in their ignorance, rush to judgment and want to start warming up the electric chair, prepping the gas chamber, or getting the needles ready before all the evidence, or lack thereof, has been presented in a court of law and a jury has duly deliberated. One would like to think the days of lynch mobs and vigilantes are a thing of the past -- and hopefully they are. But the mentality remains amongst some.
In an obvious PR move, the New England Patriots are currently hyping a program whereby anyone that had purchased a jersey with Aaron Hernandez's name and number on it could trade it in for any other jersey of their choice. In my world, this is called a feeble attempt at damage control. Somehow the brain trust of the Patriots must think putting a "recall" on Hernandez jerseys will distance them from any affiliation with their former tight end.
And you know what's amazing? Like lemmings, the people are standing in line to do just that. They can't wait to trade in their Hernandez jerseys for another one. Phineas Taylor Barnum is smiling somewhere. Yet another generation of suckers is alive and well.
Why do I say that? Because potentially a Hernandez jersey could soar in value. Particularly if he's convicted of the crimes he's been accused of. That would put him on the list of notoriety.
Sure, most people would be turned off at the thought of owning a pair of Hitler's cufflinks, a Stalin military uniform, or perhaps even a lock of Charles Manson's hair. But guess what? Whether you like it or not, there are those out there that would pay a small fortune for such items.
And for the New England Patriots and/or previous Hernandez fans that had previously purchased a Hernandez jersey -- what exactly do they get by trading it in? A Tom Brady jersey? There's a million of them already out there. They're not worth squat.
Hernandez may or may not be the monster he's accused of being.
But if I had one of his jerseys -- I'd hang on to it just in case.
Remember OJ? Think of him what you will, but how much do you think one of his original USC or Buffalo Bills jerseys would fetch on eBay right about now?
Wimbledon. What are the chances?
It's been a very strange Wimbledon tournament indeed. On the ladies' side, the two finalists weren't even amongst the top 10 seeds. French woman Marion Bartoli entered the tournament seeded #15. Her opponent will be German Sabine Lisicki, who checked in at #23. This wasn't supposed to happen. With all due respect to two highly skilled tennis players, and I dare say quite beautiful ladies, this might be akin to the Detroit Lions facing the Cleveland Browns in the Super Bowl. Some things just boggle the imagination. But it's real, and they both certainly earned it. Who will win that match is anybody's guess, but with both Germany and France being in such close proximity to where Wimbledon is being played in England, there's little doubt the fans of both finalists will be out in force at center court rooting on their countrywomen.
Even though the men's final will feature #1 against #2, many are likely surprised it played out that way. Though seeded a bit lower, such notables as Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer were dispatched early in the tournament. This leaves the gorilla in the room, Serbian Novak Djokovic, who finally outlasted Argentine Juan Martin del Potro in an epic semi-final, going up against Scotsman Andy Murray. There is absolutely NO doubt who the fan favorite will be.
Djokovic is the #1 player in the world, and he's earned it as well. From foot-speed to endurance, to thunderous serves, returns, volleys, and groundstrokes, to finesse, and to every shot in the book -- the man seems to have mastered all the facets of the game. Andy Murray will definitely have his hands full with this guy. He's just that good.
Thing is, when that match commences, 99% of the fans will be rooting for Murray. It's the ultimate "road trip" for Djokovic. If he can block that out and play like he did against del Potro, then he'll probably win. But that's no given. Even though the Serb has certainly shown he has the stamina and mental willpower to persevere when things get tough -- it might just be that almost 5 hour grueling semi-final match took a bit out of him. He may be a lot of things -- but he's human.
By most accounts, Djokovic is a good guy and a gentleman. Sure, he'll occasionally pump his fists or scream on the court after a climactic moment where he has prevailed, but everybody does that. And yes, he's been known to do some serious partying with the pretty girls in his homeland when he's in between big tournaments -- but so what? Given the chance -- what man in his position wouldn't do the same thing? There's a time to play -- and there's a time to play.
If Djokovic wins the Wimbledon title, it will be pretty much business as usual. The Brits haven't had a native champion since 1936, and one more year without won't be that big of a deal. Though disappointed, they'll quickly move on. Kind of like the above mentioned Lions and Browns fans. Every year they hope, only to see it wind up as another round of futility. Some things are just meant to be -- or not meant to be.
But if Murray somehow pulls off an "upset" over Djokovic at Wimbledon -- entirely possible -- then the recent turmoil in Egypt will pale by comparison. The "United Kingdom" would go into orbit with their celebrating -- and good for them.
I hope it happens.
Oops, this just in......
Mademoiselle Bartoli has defeated fraulein Lisicki 6-1, 6-4. The Fatherland takes one on the chin -- again.
Ach du lieber!!
Even though the men's final will feature #1 against #2, many are likely surprised it played out that way. Though seeded a bit lower, such notables as Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer were dispatched early in the tournament. This leaves the gorilla in the room, Serbian Novak Djokovic, who finally outlasted Argentine Juan Martin del Potro in an epic semi-final, going up against Scotsman Andy Murray. There is absolutely NO doubt who the fan favorite will be.
Djokovic is the #1 player in the world, and he's earned it as well. From foot-speed to endurance, to thunderous serves, returns, volleys, and groundstrokes, to finesse, and to every shot in the book -- the man seems to have mastered all the facets of the game. Andy Murray will definitely have his hands full with this guy. He's just that good.
Thing is, when that match commences, 99% of the fans will be rooting for Murray. It's the ultimate "road trip" for Djokovic. If he can block that out and play like he did against del Potro, then he'll probably win. But that's no given. Even though the Serb has certainly shown he has the stamina and mental willpower to persevere when things get tough -- it might just be that almost 5 hour grueling semi-final match took a bit out of him. He may be a lot of things -- but he's human.
By most accounts, Djokovic is a good guy and a gentleman. Sure, he'll occasionally pump his fists or scream on the court after a climactic moment where he has prevailed, but everybody does that. And yes, he's been known to do some serious partying with the pretty girls in his homeland when he's in between big tournaments -- but so what? Given the chance -- what man in his position wouldn't do the same thing? There's a time to play -- and there's a time to play.
If Djokovic wins the Wimbledon title, it will be pretty much business as usual. The Brits haven't had a native champion since 1936, and one more year without won't be that big of a deal. Though disappointed, they'll quickly move on. Kind of like the above mentioned Lions and Browns fans. Every year they hope, only to see it wind up as another round of futility. Some things are just meant to be -- or not meant to be.
But if Murray somehow pulls off an "upset" over Djokovic at Wimbledon -- entirely possible -- then the recent turmoil in Egypt will pale by comparison. The "United Kingdom" would go into orbit with their celebrating -- and good for them.
I hope it happens.
Oops, this just in......
Mademoiselle Bartoli has defeated fraulein Lisicki 6-1, 6-4. The Fatherland takes one on the chin -- again.
Ach du lieber!!
Friday, July 5, 2013
Suspensions and Dirty Harry
Detroit Titger pitcher Rick Porcello took the mound Friday night against the Cleveland Indians. This comes in the wake of Porcello being suspended by major league baseball for 6 games after the powers that be concluded he had intentionally "hit" an opposing batter a few days ago.
True, nobody but likely Porcello himself knows for sure whether he plunked that batter on purpose or a pitch "just got away from him". Yet in the baseball world an unwritten rule has long applied. You hit one of ours, and we're going to hit one of yours. Sometimes the payback will happen the very next inning, and other times it might fester for weeks or months. But it always seems to eventually come around. Baseball players have long memories and slights don't go unavenged. This is pretty much universally accepted, even though sometimes a player that had absolutely nothing to do with the original offense has to pay the price by absorbing the pain of a 95 MPH fastball thudding into his body somewhere. It's not fair to that player, but it's always been that way, and sometimes a guy just has to "take one for the team". It goes with the territory. It might fairly be said that trying to figure out who originally started one these family feuds is akin to solving the age-old chicken and the egg question.
Thing is, Porcello, like most other athletes in the world of the Big 4 American professional sports (MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL), has a right to an appeal once the original punishment has been handed down from on high. While such appeals are pending, players are allowed to keep playing. There's a couple different ways of looking at this.
First, the league offices are pretty much a kangaroo court to start with. They hand out punishment without even affording the "accused" the benefit of a trial, where all the evidence could be presented and arguments made both ways. Bang, you're hit, no pun intended. Then again, I think we can safely assume the league takes into account such things as thoroughly reviewing video tapes of the actual incident, as well as pondering any "priors" that may have led to it, before meting out "justice". Basically, they do the best they can with what info they have, and most times they get it right. But not always.
On the other hand, one is left to wonder about the appellate process itself when it comes to professional sports. Oftentimes, when the player/coach appeals his fine/suspension (to the same people that handed it down in the first place -- but that's a story for another day), it will be reduced. In Porcello's case, the 6 game suspension might well become a 3 day suspension. The evidence that led to the original sentence wouldn't have changed one bit. Tapes don't lie.
So why don't the sports execs deal with such matters like they're handled in the real world? An example..... If a citizen is accused of stealing a car or robbing a bank, and the evidence appears to be overwhelming against him/her, they can plead guilty and receive a certain sentence. Because it saves the prosecution the time and energy that would have been necessary to go through a trial, oftentimes a deal, or plea-bargain is reached, resulting in a more lenient punishment.
However, if that same defendant insists on going to trial and is still found guilty, it's almost a guarantee he/she will get slapped with a much harsher sentence. The stakes, and consequences go up. It really shouldn't make a difference, because after all, the crime hasn't changed -- only the punishment. But right or wrong, we all know that's how the system works.
So again, why shouldn't multi-millionaire professional athletes have to face the same dilemma? If they want to appeal -- go for it. But if they're still found guilty, the penalty should go UP -- not down.
It appears athletes have nothing to lose and everything to gain by appealing fines/suspensions handed down by the league office for whatever infractions they've been deemed guilty of.
To be sure, yours truly is no big fan of power-hungry executives looking to flex their muscles or overzealous prosecutors trying to pad their convinction rate. Lord know, we have way too many of them.
But every once in a while, methinks it would be rather refreshing if an athlete appealed his original punishment, only to be found still guilty, and the sentence went up. In a perfect world, we might hear the following:
"OK, Mr. Porcello. Upon further review, we still find you guilty of the crime. Your argument for lenience has been carefully considered, and rejected. In lieu of what this court considers a frivolous appeal which was totally without merit, your original sentence of a 6 game suspension has now been amended to 12 games. Further, as a condition of your probation, you are also sentenced to 200 hours of community service -- such labors to be alternately performed as a manservant to Judge Judy and Roseanne Barr. This court is adjourned."
Now do just one athlete like that -- and the rest of them would think twice about that whole appeal thing for something they were obviously guilty of in the first place.
High stakes indeed. It's like the immortal line once uttered by Dirty Harry -- "Do you feel lucky, punk?" Or perhaps "make my day".
Either way, it would get their attention.
True, nobody but likely Porcello himself knows for sure whether he plunked that batter on purpose or a pitch "just got away from him". Yet in the baseball world an unwritten rule has long applied. You hit one of ours, and we're going to hit one of yours. Sometimes the payback will happen the very next inning, and other times it might fester for weeks or months. But it always seems to eventually come around. Baseball players have long memories and slights don't go unavenged. This is pretty much universally accepted, even though sometimes a player that had absolutely nothing to do with the original offense has to pay the price by absorbing the pain of a 95 MPH fastball thudding into his body somewhere. It's not fair to that player, but it's always been that way, and sometimes a guy just has to "take one for the team". It goes with the territory. It might fairly be said that trying to figure out who originally started one these family feuds is akin to solving the age-old chicken and the egg question.
Thing is, Porcello, like most other athletes in the world of the Big 4 American professional sports (MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL), has a right to an appeal once the original punishment has been handed down from on high. While such appeals are pending, players are allowed to keep playing. There's a couple different ways of looking at this.
First, the league offices are pretty much a kangaroo court to start with. They hand out punishment without even affording the "accused" the benefit of a trial, where all the evidence could be presented and arguments made both ways. Bang, you're hit, no pun intended. Then again, I think we can safely assume the league takes into account such things as thoroughly reviewing video tapes of the actual incident, as well as pondering any "priors" that may have led to it, before meting out "justice". Basically, they do the best they can with what info they have, and most times they get it right. But not always.
On the other hand, one is left to wonder about the appellate process itself when it comes to professional sports. Oftentimes, when the player/coach appeals his fine/suspension (to the same people that handed it down in the first place -- but that's a story for another day), it will be reduced. In Porcello's case, the 6 game suspension might well become a 3 day suspension. The evidence that led to the original sentence wouldn't have changed one bit. Tapes don't lie.
So why don't the sports execs deal with such matters like they're handled in the real world? An example..... If a citizen is accused of stealing a car or robbing a bank, and the evidence appears to be overwhelming against him/her, they can plead guilty and receive a certain sentence. Because it saves the prosecution the time and energy that would have been necessary to go through a trial, oftentimes a deal, or plea-bargain is reached, resulting in a more lenient punishment.
However, if that same defendant insists on going to trial and is still found guilty, it's almost a guarantee he/she will get slapped with a much harsher sentence. The stakes, and consequences go up. It really shouldn't make a difference, because after all, the crime hasn't changed -- only the punishment. But right or wrong, we all know that's how the system works.
So again, why shouldn't multi-millionaire professional athletes have to face the same dilemma? If they want to appeal -- go for it. But if they're still found guilty, the penalty should go UP -- not down.
It appears athletes have nothing to lose and everything to gain by appealing fines/suspensions handed down by the league office for whatever infractions they've been deemed guilty of.
To be sure, yours truly is no big fan of power-hungry executives looking to flex their muscles or overzealous prosecutors trying to pad their convinction rate. Lord know, we have way too many of them.
But every once in a while, methinks it would be rather refreshing if an athlete appealed his original punishment, only to be found still guilty, and the sentence went up. In a perfect world, we might hear the following:
"OK, Mr. Porcello. Upon further review, we still find you guilty of the crime. Your argument for lenience has been carefully considered, and rejected. In lieu of what this court considers a frivolous appeal which was totally without merit, your original sentence of a 6 game suspension has now been amended to 12 games. Further, as a condition of your probation, you are also sentenced to 200 hours of community service -- such labors to be alternately performed as a manservant to Judge Judy and Roseanne Barr. This court is adjourned."
Now do just one athlete like that -- and the rest of them would think twice about that whole appeal thing for something they were obviously guilty of in the first place.
High stakes indeed. It's like the immortal line once uttered by Dirty Harry -- "Do you feel lucky, punk?" Or perhaps "make my day".
Either way, it would get their attention.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)