Buehrle>Wood

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 10:05 PM) http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...ic=38687&st=147 Good call on my part.

78 guests are currently on. Unusual number?

QUOTE(MeanMrMustard @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 09:43 PM) Why was Soxtalk not umm... told this was going to put in there? That's what I thought. When I didn't see it posted yet, I assumed Jason just wanted to cover it up or something. I guess not.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 09:38 PM) I need to see that. Can anyone tell me what issue, I'd like to go purchase it. Bradley cover. Came out today.

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 09:37 PM) Can you paraphrase? Basically it talks about how last summer there was a Steroid rumor started here by a random poster. It quotes his post on what he said. They then talk about how this post fueled other message board posts and eventually made the radio ariwaves in Chicago and the newspapers in LA and NY. They then quote YASNY and his response on how Soxtalk could be held with legal action now.

QUOTE(q\/\/3r+y @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 09:30 PM) What page is it on...? Somewhere in the article about online sports columnists(The Bradley cover one). There's a huge subarticle on Soxtalk. You can't miss it.

Has this been posted yet? It talks about how the Clemens and Damon rumors started here. It's a whole half-page article. Not the best thing to make news for, but whatever.

So, now that the inaugural event has passed, what do you see that can or needs to be improved? I've compiled a short list: 1. Switch around the brackets a little. The first rounds were fine, however, I would change the 2nd and championship round up. I'd take the 1st place teams from Pool A and D with the 2nd place teams from B and C. And then opposite for the opposite pool. For the championship, I would again switch it up. I'd have the first place team from pool 1 play the 2nd place team from pool 2. This avoids teams having to play each other two or three times in the tournament and makes for some more interesting baseball. 2. Change the pitch-count rules. They either need to be abolished or raised significantly. 3. Play some more games out of the country. This was clearly more cared about internationally, yet almost all the games were in the US. 4. Although I don't think it is needed as much as people say, a change of time-frame would not be hurt. 5. Play it next year. I know this idea is kind of out-there, but it can't hurt. The plans right now are every three years and eventually go every four. However, I would still like to see one next year. It took a while for evryone in the world to realize what was going on, so interest didn't really pick up until late in the tournament. By next year, MLB can work all the kinks out and make this a huge success. Then the 4 year plan can come into effect.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 21, 2006 -> 02:08 PM) Maybe Bobby Valentine wasn't so crazy when he proposed the World Series Champs play the Japanese champs? I believe he said his Japanese team, not the Japenese All-Star team. In this case, it wouldn't be close.

Doesn't every pitcher we aquire tip their pitches?

I disagree. It was only about one year ago when everyone on here was calling for his head.

QUOTE(klaus kinski @ Mar 21, 2006 -> 02:45 AM) How do you say Ozzie Ball in Japanese? How do you say Japanese baseball in Ozzie?

4-0. Japan pulling away with this one.

Cuba does not have great pitching. They already pulled their starter in the first inning and the bases are still loaded as Japan has scored twice.

QUOTE(klaus kinski @ Mar 21, 2006 -> 02:33 AM) What do you mean? There's never any basketball on TV The championship game was delayed on TV because of the NIT game on ESPN that was scheduled right before it.

Well this sucks. Being delayed by a stupid NIT game.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 20, 2006 -> 06:57 PM) Every teenager? What study are you looking at? These studies are actually hilarious. I had to fill one out last week. It was a joke. "How many times have you done Crack Cocaine in the last year?" I put 40+. Basically they were similiar questions throughtout, and I, like everyone else, put the funniest answer.

Meh. I would not have done this deal.

I think it's safe to say this was kind of an unexpected match-up. More so on the part of the Cubans though.

QUOTE(Felix @ Mar 19, 2006 -> 11:46 PM) Its *not* a situation. You are making something out of nothing. Of course it is a situation. The reffing in NCAA basketball is terrible and needs to be improved. No way should anyone disagree with this.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 19, 2006 -> 10:37 PM) When do you think you'll give it up? Just wondering. I mean at some point I hope you come to terms that the game is over and there is nothing you can accomplish by arguing over this. They are not going to go back and change anything that happened so my advice would be to just enjoy the rest of the dance and chill out. Because ignoring the situation and letting the NCAA get away with things like this is much better.

That is my point fathom. Something needs to be done about it, but nothing will happen. The NCAA will continue to sit on its hands and do nothing about it.

Fix or no fix, the NCAA and their stance on reffing is still an atrocity. Can anyone explain why Shows was placed on this specific game?

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 19, 2006 -> 04:41 PM) Mike Davis: "I thought it was a great officiated game. We just shot a lot of three's. They went inside and we fouled them. I was really pleased with the officiating." And?

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 19, 2006 -> 02:44 PM) What does this accomplish? Oh, I don't know. Maybe finally gettting the NCAA to notice that their reffing program needs a definite overhaul in all aspects of the game. But no, I guess we should all just sit back and continually let games decided by referees.