I think it’s fairly safe to assume that Jeter would have been on second with two outs had it not been for the interference call that landed him back on first.
Would Sheffield still have popped out? No way of knowing; different pitch selection, maybe; different results, possibly. I don’t know what difference it would have made, but I do know that in almost any situation you’d rather have a guy on second with two outs than at first with two outs, though first and second with one out is obviously the best situation.
Red Sox fan here. I think “cheating” is kinda harsh, but I do think dumb is more accurate. It cost Jeter a base & took away all the momemtum the Yankees were gaining after Jeter plated Cairo. The 10 minutes it took to sort it out gave Arroyo time to regroup & settle down.
Oh we can speculate till the cows come home. Perhaps if he hadn’t had pulled his stunt, it would have set a reality in motion where Sheff was smashed with a ball in the face and put out of the series. We can blame this mistake, or the 56 others the Yanks have made in this series.
It’s not cheating - it’s breaking the rules. And it’s a dumb play. The motions you go through when you try to barrell through a defensive player are very different than the swatting that A-Rod did. A-Rod got caught breaking the rules. The Yankees paid the penalty. Rodriguez was a whiny little bitch. That’s all.
But to argue that a professional baseball player universally acknowledged as one of the best in the game “flubbed the execution” strikes me as pretty ridiculous.
Torre’s gotta back his player, sure. But Rodriguez doesn’t have to act like the wronged party. Torre came out to discuss the home run, too. Remember what Matsui did? No arguing, no whining - he knew it was a homer, and he acted like a professional. I’ve got no problem with that.
You play, and you play hard. Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. But whining about it afterwards, especially when you’re the one who was wrong, isn’t gonna win you any respect, and it’s not going to win you any more games. Suck it up and act like a man, A-Rod.
Firstly, I have been a fan of the Yankees since the disgraceful days of Horace Clarke and company 1969 (this pre-dates Steinbrenner in case you don’t know who Horace Clarke was).
Secondly, anything Steinbrenner does payroll-wise is within the rules. He likes to win, he doesn’t sock money away like other piss-poor owners, he even moves more of his own money into the Yankees when needed. You’re jealous.
Thirdly, your triple A level Twins don’t compete because your owner gladly takes
his cut of the luxury tax that Mr. Steinbrenner shells out, and promptly sticks it in his pocket (instead of increasing his payroll).
Actually, you demonstrate my stereotype. Arrogant, contemptuous of other teams, boasting about dominating the game financially with little concern for how it affects the health of the game as national pasttime, and insulting to anyone who’s not on the bandwagons.
Rooting for the Yankees is like rooting for Microsoft.
There was a famous saying back in the day (by Red Smith) that “rooting for the Yankees was like rooting for US Steel.” Red Smith was a pulitzer prize winning sportswriter of the New York Times, and I would expect most Yankees fans to get the allusion. I guess I was wrong.
George Will was the first to update the metaphor.
The metaphor has been updated and is completely apt. First, the Yankees prefer to buy out the competition rather than face them. They acquired A Rod, for example, just so the RedSox couldn’t have him. Second, the Yankees of this Century demonstrate about as much heart and personality as Microsoft. Third, and most importantly, both companies have come to represent the big bully in American business, rolling over the small, shamelessly sucking the life and soul out of everything.
Um… no. they acquired A Rod because Aaron fucking Boone blew out his knee, leaving them with a big hole at 3rd. The sox failed to acquire A Rod because they were cheapskates and wouldn’t pony up the extra dough, expecting the player to give up the money, which the union disallowed.
The Yankees did NOT buy A-Rod just so the Red Sox couldn’t have him.
The Sox had a monetary “deal-break” point, and they reached it. John Henry and Tom Hicks couldn’t make the financing work. The Sox announced the deal as “dead.”
Steinbrenner stepped in- he basically said, “Twelve million extra? Do it.” So they did it. Say what you want about Steinbrenner- he got what he wanted.
Clubs like the Brewers make a profit because teams like the Yankees write them big fat revenue-sharing checks, which they then pocket. The Yankees make a profit on licensing, merchandising, and concessions. None of which would be as lucrative if the Yankees weren’t successful, which they are because they go out and get the best players, consequences be damned. And, before you say that the Yankees are so bad for your own hometown team, O defenders of the small markets, just look at the spike in ticket sales when the Yankees come to town.
“Rooting for the Yankees is like rooting for US Steel,” or Microsoft, or whoever means that it’s no fun to root for them becuase they’re “guaranteed” to win. But that comes from commitment TO winning.
The Yankees operate under the same rules as every other team does. So quit bitching at them for playing the numbers game well. I’m a Mets fan. My team does the same throwing-money thing. I don’t like the Yanks because they get A-Rod and we get Mo fucking Vaughn. But the Brewers could have A-Rod too, if they wanted him. Problem is, it costs money and they don’t want to risk a guaranteed profit by betting on something as nebulous as, say, trying to win baseball games.
A-Rod was right to try to dislodge the ball. A-Rod was right to argue with the umpires. A-Rod was right to stick to his story in postgame. The only thing A-Rod did wrong was not make it look more natural.
I never watched the A-Rod signing hullabaloo, so I don’t know much, but could you explain this for me? The union would not let a player renegotiate a contract to take less money? A-Rod was willing to play for Boston for $X million dollars, but he couldn’t because the union wouldn’t let him because X was less than what he was due to make? Do I have that right?