Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kyyle23

Gary Thorne says Bloody sock was fake

Recommended Posts

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2849747

 

In the bottom of the fifth, according to The Boston Globe, Orioles play-by-play man Gary Thorne said on the air that he had been told by Red Sox catcher Doug Mirabelli that the substance was paint, not blood.

 

 

"The great story we were talking about the other night was that famous red stocking that (Schilling) wore when they finally won, the blood on his stocking," Thorne told broadcast partner and Hall of Fame pitcher Jim Palmer, according to the Globe.

 

 

"Nah," Thorne said, according to the Globe. "It was painted. Doug Mirabelli confessed up to it after. It was all for PR. Two-ball, two-strike count."

 

 

Two innings later, according to the newspaper, Thorne explained Mirabelli had told him the story "a couple of years ago."

 

 

"Go ask him [Mirabelli]," Thorne said, according to the Globe.

 

 

After the game, Mirabelli flatly and angrily denied Thorne's story.

 

 

"What? Are you kidding me? He's [expletive] lying. A straight lie," Mirabelli said, according to the Globe. "I never said that. I know it was blood. Everybody knows it was blood."

 

"It gets stupider," Schilling added, according to the newspaper. "I got the 9-inch scar for you. You can see it. ... There are some bad people in your line of work, man."

 

 

Red Sox manager Terry Francona also questioned the story.

 

"What Schill did that night on the sports field was one of the most incredible feats I ever witnessed," Francona said, according to the Globe. "[Thorne's remarks] go so far past disappointing. Disrespectful to Schill, to his vocation. I'm stunned.

 

"I am just floored. Schill takes his share of shots, and this one is so far below the belt that I'm embarrassed and I wish somebody would have had the good conscience to ask me," Francona said, according to the newspaper.

 

 

How long until they test the sock in cooperstown to prove that it was real? :lol:

Edited by kyyle23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether or not the sock was bloody is debatable.

 

Whether or not Curt Schilling is a total dickface isn't.

 

At least in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(KevHead0881 @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 09:32 AM)
Whether or not the sock was bloody is debatable.

 

Whether or not Curt Schilling is a total dickface isn't.

 

At least in my mind.

 

So, you're a Shilling fan ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other big news today, Michael Jordan was a good basketball player, Bill Wirtz is a bad owner, and the Cubs suck. Come on, EVERYBODY knew that thing was fake, it couldn't have been more obvious it was fake when they zoomed in on the sock during the playoff game at Yankee Stadium. Just glad somebody is pointing it out, and nobody should be surprised a dickhead, attention whore like Schilling would fake it to get more attention. It's not enough he pitched great in the playoffs for 2 World Champs, he needs more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 10:14 AM)
In other big news today, Michael Jordan was a good basketball player, Bill Wirtz is a bad owner, and the Cubs suck. Come on, EVERYBODY knew that thing was fake, it couldn't have been more obvious it was fake when they zoomed in on the sock during the playoff game at Yankee Stadium. Just glad somebody is pointing it out, and nobody should be surprised a dickhead, attention whore like Schilling would fake it to get more attention. It's not enough he pitched great in the playoffs for 2 World Champs, he needs more.

Honestly, I had no idea. What made you think it was fake? Just curious what the evidence is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(KevHead0881 @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 09:32 AM)
Whether or not the sock was bloody is debatable.

 

Whether or not Curt Schilling is a total dickface isn't.

 

At least in my mind.

 

It wouldn't suprise me one bit if he stayed up until 6 a.m the night before painting the thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the sock in cooperstown is from the WS game, so you cant really test the sock in question. Also considering the blood spot didnt change at all throughout the game in the ALCS, it was pretty obvious that something wasnt right with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 01:32 PM)
the sock in cooperstown is from the WS game, so you cant really test the sock in question. Also considering the blood spot didnt change at all throughout the game in the ALCS, it was pretty obvious that something wasnt right with it.

So obvious that you never said or thought something until now?

 

 

:unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit I never thought anything of the sock.

 

Although, I didn't praise its existence as the embodiment of courage in sports as ESPN seemed to do.

 

They must be heartbroken in Bristol over this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(RockRaines @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 01:36 PM)
So obvious that you never said or thought something until now?

:unsure:

 

Why would I care to? Obviously im not positive its fake but it did seem a little bit of bulls*** to me during the game. But, it didnt involve the whitesox in any which way and unless im sure about something why speak out? Honestly after the game I just let it go and focused on the fact the redsox making the greatest comeback in mlb history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thorne has 0 reason to lie....schilling planned it. ....and yes i detest that f***face

Edited by daa84

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't even think twice about the thing, cause I didn't care enough to. I would admit, it'd be pretty funny if it was indeed fake, cause I can't stand Schilling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On ESPN Radio this morning they talked about it. They said Schilling's family brought it to Cooperstown weeks after the WS, which adds to the speculation.

 

It doesn't really matter because the sock was more of a symbol than anything. The blood part just added to the lore.

 

I bet it was paint that ended up on there inadvertently, then once they realized everyone thought it was blood, they just went with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a Schilling fan by any means, but what on earth does his sock have to do with anything? The guy had surgery and hours later he was on the mound pitching.

 

If Mark Buehrle did the same thing and led the White Sox to another World Series crown, he'd be a hero in Chicago.

 

Give the guy some respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 02:03 PM)
He doesn't deserve any.

 

He's certainly an attention whore, but as far as his performance that day and throughout his career on the mound, I respect him immensely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 02:49 PM)
I didn't even think twice about the thing, cause I didn't care enough to. I would admit, it'd be pretty funny if it was indeed fake, cause I can't stand Schilling.

Exactly how I feel. Schilling is a douche and deserves the negative attention. That said, it gives ESPN another opportunity to suck up to him, which is a shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I think Schilling is a world-class a$$hole, but I don't believe that he faked the bloody sock.

 

Of course, if there's evidence to support it, it just reinforces my opinion of Schilling....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statement by MASN Announcer Gary Thorne on his Conversation with Doug Mirabelli:

 

During last night's game broadcast I made reference to a years-old conversation with Red Sox catcher Doug Mirabelli. In the aftermath of Doug's post-game comments, I felt it was important to talk to him directly and called him this afternoon.

 

Doug and I discussed the fact that we had spoken some time after the 2004 World Series while I was covering a game in Boston. We recalled at the end of that conversation, I asked Doug a question about media speculation regarding the appearance of the sock. Doug's response - about the significant publicity the matter had generated - led me to believe he was saying it had been painted for public relations purposes.

 

After speaking with Doug this afternoon, it is apparent that what he intended to say to me and what I inferred from that conversation were honestly different. He said, in the jocular and often sarcastic atmosphere of a clubhouse, where players needle one another routinely, this may be understandable.

 

In deference to Doug, I certainly accept his position. Doug and I have clarified our misunderstanding, and we feel that there is nothing more to add to this matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×