Soxbadger

I guess you didnt read the arguement very carefully. This was in response to those who are saying that Springer did it on purpose to send a message. If you believe that Springer did not intentionally hit Bonds that is a completely different argument, and one that I was not even addressing. I guess its possible it was an accident, but how many MLB pitchers miss inside that bad 5 times on accident?

Its not even being a cub fan. There are just certain people in the world you can set your moral compass with. As for Cuck, I know if he says it, I must disagree with it.

Kalapse, Im fine with a player getting caught. Albert specifically differentiates between stories where the media has "proof". If you catch a player, print it and sell all the stories you want. Its the guilty first attitude that just pisses me off.

Balta, Im sure if the articles said "Cuba has bad records and not even the players know their own age" no one would mind. But the articles imply that the players are purposefully deceiving their owners and the public, trying to make them out to be the bad guys.

How does anyone deserve their life being put in danger, when they have never been caught doing anything wrong? The only evidence against Bonds is illegally obtained grand jury records. Do you think that the person who leaked the grand jury records should be hit by a fastball in the head?

Good for Pujols. The media tries to destroy half of these players careers just to sell a story. And while it might not mean much to you, Im sure it means a lot to Albert when people demean his accomplishments with no proof. Just like it probably annoys Contreras and others when people constantly accuse them of lieing about their age.

What message was Springer sending? 1) Your last at bat I pegged you, so therefore Ill peg you again. 2) 2 ab's ago you hit a HR, so therefore Ill peg you again. 3) Barry Bonds said something demeaning about Springer ala Vizquel and Mesa. 4) Barry Bonds is a cheater, therefore Ill peg him. 5) Barry Bonds is closing in on a record, I have given up a HR in the past, I dont want to be the name people remember. The reason this is indefendable is because unlike the majority of arguments in this thread, Springer hit Bonds for reason 5. Not any of the other reasons, because if this was true the Astros would peg every caught cheater. And they just do not do it. Also if it was true, the Astros would not have waited to peg Bonds once the game got out of hand, they pegged him then because they knew he was going to be looking for a pitch to drive. Its fine not to want to be a guy that gives up the record, but it is not fine that he tried to intentionally hurt some one to prevent it. No morality here, just Springer knowing that Bonds is the better player.

The Cubs were one of the original teams that baseball was investigating for throwing games. The reason why the Sox became the focus was mainly, Comiskey. Here is a website with some of the stunts the "Old Roman" pulled. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...omiskeybio.html

I really dont care that much. I just think its silly to promote vigilantism. Therefore baseball has to suspend Springer, and most likely Garner. You cant just let players take enforcing the rules into their own hands. Otherwise it becomes open season on any player who disliked in a certain area, regardless of their "qualities". Dont forget good ole Jim was booed in Philly, Im sure a few of their fans would like to see him get nailed in the head. I guess that makes it right.

Whitesoxfan, Do you have any proof Bonds is the biggest cheater? Do you have any stats of how many games Bonds cheated in versus other players who notoriously cheated? How many games did Gaylord Perry cheat in? How many games did Big Mac cheat in? Or are you completely pulling things from the air? So far Bonds has: 1) Never been caught cheating by MLB. 2) Never been caught by a drug test. And your statement about a White Sox fan does not make sense. Who cares about how long it occurred, cheating is cheating. If you are so hellbent against cheating, then you should be consistent. Just because it happened 87 years ago does not dilute the crime. Also so what that other teams threw games. I bet more people used steriods than threw games in baseball. Does that make steriods better? No, the amount of people has nothing to do with the crime. Throwing a baseball game is far worse than steriods. In one, you completely devalue the game, you are not even trying to win, you are purposefully losing. With steriods, atleast Bonds was trying to be better, trying to win. However you slice it, Bonds is not the first, nor last person to cheat in Baseball. Either you have to treat all cheaters as the worst thing ever, or you have to treat them all with forgiveness and understanding. You cant just draw the line because you personally dislike Bonds. Well you can, just dont expect to be taken seriously by people.

Bonds has cheated less than many players that have been on the Sox. That you can take to the bank. So if your going to get on some crucifix, go do it with another team. The White Sox threw World Series games a crime far worse than trying to improve your performance. Yet you still come here as a Sox fan, not even from Chicago. Im so sick of hearing this s***, its as if people act like Bonds is the first player to have ever cheated. Note that is past tense, as there is absolutely no proof Bonds is cheating this year.

Is there any part in the rule book that says "mean players get treated differently". Or do the same rules apply if instead of Bonds it was Thome being thrown at. If you dont care about players being thrown at, that is fine. But my guess is that most of the same people who think its okay, would be the first ones screaming if it happened to a Sox player.

I havent read the book, I have spent numerous hours watching/researching Merovingian Dynasty etc, and it is all interesting stuff. Basically the work is fiction. From all accounts the older history Dan Brown talks about in his book is more compelling then the newer stuff. IE Roslin Cathedral is not on the Rose line as he claims, and the tomb of the "Knight Templar" was moved there from another location. But in the end, the movie should be as entertaining as "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" another movie about the quest for the holy grail that involves solving ancient riddles and puzzles. And quite remarkably in the end, who has the cup, none other than a knight, who very well been a representation of a Templar Knight as from what I remember he had the classic white mantle with red cross, the Templar's symbol.

I have had both Netflix and Blockbuster for over a year each (not at the same time.) I first had Netflix which was good, but I switched to Blockbuster for the added perks. Blockbuster is pretty good, the biggest difference is that with Blockbuster you get 4 coupons per month which can be used to rent any dvd or video game from your local blockbuster. This is a huge difference because if Netflix of Blockbuster online has "long wait" for a certain DVD, with Blockbuster you can just go down to the store and get the movie. After using them both, I have stayed with Blockbuster and feel it is the superior service.

Nuke, Please explain how they are going to: 1) Sue the stripper for slander. 2) Sue the DA for false arrest. Each of these crimes have very specific elements. Im just wondering how they are going to prove them. The problem is, if you go for 1, you can in no way go for 2. If you go for 2, you can in no way go for 1. Im not going to do the time to actually pull the case law, but my understanding for malicious prosecution and false arrest is that the police can not of acted upon a complaint by a person. The stripper in this case made a complaint, therefore it is the duty of the police and DA to investigate it. They went to a grand jury, and the grand jury indicted them. That means that a grand jury feels that the police and DA have enough to get into the court room. Rock, Im sorry but I have to disagree. The only reason that the media is acting this way is because it is impossible for a good amount of people to believe: "Rich white boys wanted to rape a poor black girl." If this was a case where a pretty rich white girl was raped by a black man, ala Kobe or any football player case, the court of public opinion would have them locked away. Luckily for us, trials are not decided by what the media says, they are decided by a court of law. The defendants will have their day in court, and they will have the great equalizer of the govt having the burden of proof. If the govt has no case, then there is no question they will walk. Reasonable doubt makes it very hard for the prosecution. It should be interesting, but Im going to sit back and let the trial happen. IMO you will have atleast 1 conviction (not sure whether they will get rape, assault, or something else, but atleast 1 defendant will get a conviction or plea). Then what will everyone say?

Tony + SS2k, I agree completely. Its as if some people think an underdog has never won a game before. Anything can happen, and I hope that the White Sox prepare for this series as if the Cubs are the best team in the NL.

Im going tailgating at my apartment. And dont be so overconfident, much better teams have lost to much worse teams. Im hoping for a sweep, but I wont complain about 2-1.

But if you are interested join the wait list, some times GM's become inactive and a team opens up.

Thats what I figured. Just wanted to share what I saw.

http://collegebasketball.rivals.com/content.asp?cid=542183 I was just going on Rivals to see football stuff, but I happened to see the article title so I thought I would look. I dont know how real this is, or if there is any merit. But it would be the worst scenario for Indiana if they have to fire Sampson.

Cool on posting the story. Im not sure what people expect when you say something is confidential. Clearly if you could of said your sources and how you knew, you would of. Some times people just want to prove that they know more and so something like this could not possibly happen, but you should always give a person a chance. It should be interesting as with Haeger they probably will let him stay in the game regardless of the score because he is a knuckle ball pitcher. Hope he does well, should be fun to watch.

Since 1991 that arrangement would have produced the following results: West Big 10 Champions: 1993 Wisconsin * 1995 NU 1996 NU* 1998 Wisconsin ** 1999 Wisconsin 2000 NU** 2000 Purdue** 2001 Illinios 2002 Iowa* 2004 Iowa* East Big 10 Champions: 1991 Michigan 1992 Michigan 1993 OSU* 1994 PSU 1996 OSU* 1997 Michigan* 1998 Michigan** 1998 OSU ** 2000 Purdue** 2000 Michigan** 2002 OSU * 2003 Michigan 2004 Michigan* 2005 PSU * 2005 OSU* West would have 3 outright champions, East has 4 West has a champion in 9 of the years, East has a champion in 12 of the years. Whichever conference was given Michigan would have a significant edge. Michigan alone accounted for 7 of them (including shared championships). Its hard to say the West would be much weaker, just it would not have the 2 most prolific and hyped teams. They would still get their fair share of champions and have the up and coming programs as compared to the old guard of the East. Yes OSU and Michigan have the best past history, but as of now Iowa and Wisconsin are 2 programs on the rise.

When I first saw FSU v. Wisconsin I thought they meant Football and I was completely shocked in an awesome way. ACC v. Big 10 is good, Id like to see Big 10 versus Big East also. My real question is how do they decide the match ups, some seem like they are trying to put the bigger programs against each other. Others just seem misplaced.

Wisconsin Football has committments from Al Toon's son, Nick Toon, and Josh Ogelsby one of the top OL in the nation. Both are in-state players so it's not that suprising Wisconsin got them. The real question will be about the RB Clay, who is supposedly the best RB the state of Wisconsin has ever produced. There is a lot of talk with ND and Michigan already getting big time QB prospects, that Wisconsin may benefit and get a guy that wanted to go to one of those schools.

What about deporting all of the immigrants who came over to the US in the last 200-300 years who now think they have some sort of entitlement? That would be a great plan.