OMG how could I have misread that?
Thanks for the correction!
It could’ve been the situation (it wasn’t, but it was possible). Consider:
Batter 1; out
Batter 2: out
Batter 3: reaches on error
Batter 4: homers
Batter 5 (Perez): homers
Unearned run. Well, all three are unearned, but more specifically Perez’s home run is unearned. But you were close: a solo homer can’t be unearned if it is the only run of the inning (which I believe Perez’s was)–but it’s the “only run” part that’s determinative.
Yeah but either way I misread that page. It was early, 0400-0430 this morning. I must not have been awake.
The words you just read were of me trying to make excuses. 
Y’know, one nice thing of this series is NOT seeing a guy sitting behind home plate wearing a Marlins jersey.
Not sure if I’m being whooshed, but he’s definitely there.
I’m definitely a fan of the tight low scoring game…I really enjoy the tension of a 1-0 game and have no problem seeing good pitching beat good hitting. Like a couple of others upstairs I would agree that the 1991 Series is the gold standard where excitement is concerned–the best WS of my time, and the first one I remember was 1968, so that’s a lot to choose from.
That being said, I thought Sunday’s game was terrific too. And if all the games I’ve seen in person the one that stands out the most was an extra inning affair that ended 18-16. I think there’s room for both.
(I do find the language we use to describe the two types of games to be illuminating. The 1-0 game is often seen as an example of the phrase I used (good pitching beats good hitting) but I’ve never heard a 25-run slugfest described in the reverse terms (good hitting beats good pitching)–instead it’s Good hitting clobbers lousy pitching. Funny how that works.)
“Verlander has shown no signs of wiltering.”
John Smoltz, engaged in the time-honored color-guy practice of mangling the English language.
I’m watching the international broadcast (I think it’s Buck Martinez and some other guy) and one of them made a reference to “hall of fame” catcher Thurman Munson.
Speaking of Verlander, he really is the X factor of this postseason. You gotta figure that if Boston, Cleveland or New York had made that deadline deal they would be in the series against L.A…
Not a whoosh… the guy in the upper left of the TV screen? That might be a Marlins jersey. I’m used to seeing the guy in the 1st or 2nd row, and centered. Obvious. That guy is in row 5 or 6, it looks like, and way off to the left. I thought he was wearing an Astros jersey. It might be Marlins.
No, not a whoosh.
I saw him standing up just before the game started, and I’m fairly certain that’s a Marlins jersey, but I can’t say with 100% certainty now.
I actually have been liking Smoltz’s commentary. It’s Buck I can do without.
Yep, this. I need Buck to shut up.
Really. Hey YOU, shut the Buck up!
OK, so that homer just made me very happy. But why in the fuck would we be trying to get six outs from Kenley Jansen YET AGAIN?!? Have we learned nothing?!?!
I don’t think Clevelnd’s getting Verlander would have made much of a difference except for not having to face him if they met Houston. Pitching wasn’t their problem. Kluber didn’t pitch like he did during the season, but I’m not starting Verlander over him in any case.
Surprised here, too.
I sure hope not.
I laughed at your taunt despite being in a precariously fragile state.
Well, Jansen threw only a few pitches in the 8th.
But he sat a long time, too.
Well, that’s it. Congrats to the Dodgers for this win.
Game 7, here we come!