YASNY

Sizemore singles and steals 2nd on the 1st pitch. Down 1-0 on a 2 bagger by Belliard.

Casey Blake K's!

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 01:28 PM) Not close. Although, the ball was thrown into CF...so that helps. He had the base stolen, regardless of the throw.

After Iguchi steals 2nd, Konerko K's

Everett pops up to short CF

Iguchi walks

Scotty Pod pops out.

QUOTE(TheBlackSox8 @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 01:19 PM) as is the day....and the attendance. Ugly day all around. :puke The attendance is typical. Early April weekday game.

Got out of it. Ugly ugly inning by Garcia.

Ball 4 ... Bags packed.

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 01:16 PM) How'd they get on board? 1 out base hit and a walk

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 01:15 PM) What's going on? Runners on 2nd and 3rd with 2 outs.

Freddie's not hitting his spots.

QUOTE(EvilJester99 @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 12:36 PM) First off they just need the past to be in the past and move the hell on and stop trying to justify anything. Just play ball and let it die already...they almost sound like the Scrubs of last season with this BS.... It ain't the Sox ... it's the damn media.

QUOTE(mreye @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 12:22 PM) That doesn't make it right! Sure it does. It's for the overall good of baseball and getting as much exposer for all teams as possible. Consider that the Yanks and BoSox opened Sunday night. If they would have played Monday afternoon, ESPN would have focused on those bastards again. At least the Sox, and the other teams that played on Monady did not have to put up with that. Then the openers on Tuesday, did not have to compete against all these other teams playing there second game. It's a way of sharing the spotlight.

QUOTE(TheBlackSox8 @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 12:20 PM) duh... :banghead I meant monday..... You're welcome.

QUOTE(EvilJester99 @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 12:19 PM) They didnt play yesterday... off day already... which IMO is the dumbest f***ing thing... MLB does that so more "opening days" can get the exposure. It works for them to spread out the openers without having a bunch of games to create a clutter of games. They always do it this way.

QUOTE(TheBlackSox8 @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 12:17 PM) yeah....was it 1:00 or 1:30?? i had to work so i never knew.....i did know it was on at approximately that time. You are getting your days confused. The Sox played Monday, not yesterday.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 12:11 PM) damn you.... now I ruined the joke

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 12:04 PM) You said after what I wrote 95% of the posters put me on ignore, so therefor if I post in other parts of the board, they wouldnt see what I wrote... thats why I said what I said.. man you killed the joke Yas "Huh?" was an extension of that joke.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 11:59 AM) He would be great for the UN. The nightmare scenario for a GOP President would have Clinton as head of the UN and the UN at odds with the US (Like Iraq) Clinton is all the things you mentioned and a PR battle between Clinton as head of the United Nations and a sitting President would not be good. Which is why I doubt a GOP President would ever nominate him. Who would understand the importance of the office of the POTUS than a former president, and the need for the appearance of a united front. They may disagree on things behind closed doors, but I cannot imagine Clinton demeaning the office in the eyes of the worlds.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 11:45 AM) I agree, but doesn't it seem that Human Rights picked Carter? I've come to believe that Clinton is intellectually deep but shallow of character. You may be right. But I believe in most cases that when a man is faced with his own mortality, that tends to lead to some character adjustments. He is intellectually deep and very charismatic (Wait! He's from Arkansas?) and I really think any president would be smart to put Clinton into a position like the UN Ambassador.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 11:28 AM) Yes I understand that, but there are some people who just dont want to see any of it all together.. TMar told me he turned off the avatars, thats what I was saying.. I wasnt sure if you could turn off sigs too.. I know there are some people who dont want to see any of the stuff.. Im at school right now and the pages go so slow because of the video avatar/sigs which really pisses me off.. but I get what your saying, I think my post was missunderstood No problem.

George did it.

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 6, 2005 -> 11:19 AM) Cant you go to your options and turn off Sigs and Avatars so you dont have to view them?? If people dont like it, why dont they just do that.. They wouldnt have to mess with it at all then.. I dont know, but I think you can do avatars.. not sure about sigs Straight answer here for you. People are selective about how the ID themselves on here and want to be "seen". Other's use the sigs and avs to quickly ID other posters. New posters learn to associate sigs with handles as they are learning who is who on the board. To have people "choose" to turn all that info off because someone is eating up board space and causing the to S C R O L L repeatedly, is not really fair. This is a compromise that allows people to both use and see sigs without clutter.