The Poet 10:50 AM 07-07-2014
Originally Posted by icehog3:
But to your hypothesis, I have just 2 words.....Miguel Cabrera. :-) :-)
You could be right, Tom. But with all due respect to both you and Cabrera, your postulate opposing my hypothesis presupposes much. At present, Miguel ranks #228 on the hits list, with 2095. He just turned 31, and discounting his 3 years in the minors he is playing in his 12th season already. To date, he has missed no time to major injuries, yet we cannot assume he shall continue with such good fortune.
I wish him, and his fans, all good luck in his pursuit of the lofty status you propose, yet were I a betting man I'd offer odds against it.
[Reply]
icehog3 02:25 PM 07-07-2014
Salutations, Thomas, and my sincere atonement for any anguish my hypothetical contributions have engendered. I am a betting man, yet I hesitate to offer a wager, as I quite possibly may be deceased when Miguel overtakes Mr. Jeter on the list. I regret that I have but one life to give for my Tigers.
[Reply]
The Poet 06:52 PM 07-07-2014
Brother, I hope you live far beyond Cabrera's retirement, be that next week or next decade. Me, I'm shocked every morning I manage to awaken.
[Reply]
icehog3 07:01 PM 07-07-2014
Thanks Thomas, I want to enjoy a few years of pension payments, anyway.
:-)
[Reply]
AdamJoshua 10:11 PM 07-12-2014
Fan suing ESPN announcers for 10 million dollars for defamation. Seems they showed him sleeping on camera and Kruk and Shulman were calling him "fatty" among other things on camera during the broadcast. I don't know about suing for 10 million bucks, but I've never heard announcers rag on someone on camera, that's actually pretty shocking. Specially coming from Kruk who isn't exactly brilliant or a size 34... seems
fatty is going after everyone. If he's that embarrassed maybe he should hit the gym, hell I have been every day since seeing socal pics
:-) :-) :-)
Rector also named ESPN, Major League Baseball, and the Yankees as defendants.
http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/259...for-10-million
[Reply]
The Poet 11:00 PM 07-12-2014
Originally Posted by AdamJoshua:
Rector also named ESPN, Major League Baseball, and the Yankees as defendants.
I can understand naming ESPN in the suit, but how is MLB or the Yankees libel? Or why not the Red Sox also? And what sort of guy, idiot or not, pays good money to watch Yankees/Red Sox just to fall asleep in the 4th with the game 2-1?
[Reply]
AdamJoshua 12:39 AM 07-13-2014
I believe it was a Yankees home game, maybe the ushers were suppose to keep him awake or something
:-)
[Reply]
icehog3 01:44 AM 07-13-2014
Tigers on a tear, 3 out of 3 so far to push the Royals 7 1/2 back. Finishing the sweep tomorrow would put them in command of a so-so ALC.
[Reply]
The Poet 11:22 AM 07-13-2014
Originally Posted by AdamJoshua:
I believe it was a Yankees home game, maybe the ushers were suppose to keep him awake or something :-)
It was at The Stadium, and if Michael Kay on YES, or John Sterling on the Yankee radio broadcast, been the culprit I could see some culpability issue for the home team. But how can they, or MLB, be held responsible for comments made by ESPN employees?
Or maybe the Red Sox could be held responsible, as they have been so boring this season . . . on the field, anyway.
:-)
[Reply]
Tig's lost the sweep. Still, good to see them playing well going into the break.
I think that suing fan is going overboard but I'm guessing the reason the team is included is they likely own and lease out the rights to broadcast each home game. Not sure how MLB fits in unless they grant each team broadcast rights or if MLB gets a piece of broadcast profits for profit sharing purposes. I suppose he could argue each hand in the profit cookie-jar is benefiting from his belittlement on-air.
[Reply]
The Poet 12:35 PM 07-14-2014
AdamJoshua 04:53 PM 07-20-2014
As the broadcaster said: "You could throw your aaaahhhmmmm out"
[Reply]
icehog3 11:05 AM 07-23-2014
AdamJoshua 10:51 AM 07-28-2014
Two good sports with a lot of class. Love that there was someone honest enough to turn over the ring, let's face it business owners or not there's a lot of scumbags in the world and love that the Red Sox are inviting him to Fenway to see Captain Intangibles final game.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/11...sox-title-ring
[Reply]
The Poet 12:23 PM 07-28-2014
Originally Posted by AdamJoshua:
Two good sports with a lot of class. Love that there was someone honest enough to turn over the ring, let's face it business owners or not there's a lot of scumbags in the world and love that the Red Sox are inviting him to Fenway to see Captain Intangibles final game.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/11...sox-title-ring
Nice story, and good result on both sides. Let's hope it is a good game up in Fenway.
BTW, The Captain is two away from tying Yaz for #7 all-time in hits.
:-)
[Reply]
CigarSquid 12:37 PM 07-28-2014
Originally Posted by icehog3:
Tigers' bullpen blows another one. :-)
I was really pulling for the Tigers in this series against the Angels.
[Reply]
AdamJoshua 12:52 PM 07-28-2014
Originally Posted by The Poet:
Nice story, and good result on both sides. Let's hope it is a good game up in Fenway.
BTW, The Captain is two away from tying Yaz for #7 all-time in hits. :-)
That's awesome
[Reply]
The Poet 04:18 PM 07-28-2014
Originally Posted by AdamJoshua:
That's awesome
Over the past Hall Of Fame weekend, Tom Seaver opined about Jeter and the HoF. Tom Terrific presently holds the highest percentage of votes ever for election at 98.84%. Supposedly it would have been higher, but three voters submitted blank ballots in protest of Pete Rose's exclusion from the ballot . . . just one more reason I dislike Charlie Hustle. Anyhoo, Seaver expressed his belief that Jeets would be the first unanimous vote-getter to be elected to Cooperstown.
As much as I like Jeter, and respect Seaver, I disagree.
Hey, Mo will be eligible one year earlier than Jeets.
:-)
[Reply]
icehog3 06:50 PM 07-28-2014
I like Charlie Hustle, and hate Tom Seaver.
OK, I don't hate Seaver, I just feel like being argumentative. But I really do like Pete Rose. Realy, honest.
[Reply]