YASNY

QUOTE(lvjeremylv @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 07:29 AM) Well he's the easy target since he gave up the winning runs, but that happens. Unfortunately for him, it happened at a very bad time - on opening day against a division rival after we mounted a huge comeback. But I think the momentum completely changed once we weren't able to push the go-ahead run across the plate when we had the sacks packed with Sox and noooooooobody out. That will almost always come back to bite you in the a$$ - especially on the road versus a good offensive team. Buehrle, I think, has to get the "goat of the game" award for that one. If he could have just put up a mediocre game, we probably end up winning. Instead, he got completely shelled and put our bullpen at great risk. Just imagine if Masset hadn't been so stellar. We could conceivably have used everyone in the pen on opening day. Definitely would not have been a good omen. I'm sure Mark Buehrle would agree with you.

I've been debating whether or not I should say something here. But I'm going to. Knightni, I understand the spirit behind your thread title. They are the Cleveland Indians, and we don't like these guys. I got it. But, considering what smallpox laden blankets did the native American population, this thread title does not meet the standards that I've come to expect here at Soxtalk. I really think the Soxtalk powers that be should give this some thought. Okay, I'm done. I've had my say.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 10:50 PM) Well, it's more of an acceptance that there is nothing you can do about it if that's how they are going to call it. But when they begin calling plays like that at other bases, and you are not accustomed to it, it is extremely frustrating. Yes. The 'phantom tag' at second base is an accepted part of the game. Everybody knows about it, is familiar with it and everyone does it. A 'phantom tag' at the other bases is not considered the same way. You can argue about what should be or shouldn't be, but we are talking about what actually 'is'.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 02:19 PM) I was thinking the same thing. MOST people slide hands first and flare out the feet. He did the opposite. Different look, same result. Well I'll be damned. We actually agree on something!

I read this thread before I saw the play. I'm stating that for the perspective that I was aware of the contraversy and disagreement this play caused. That being said, here's the way I saw it. Cabrera went in with his feet to bag and his arms toward the fielder. If he would have done the reverse, this call would not have been made. So, my question is, in the grand scheme of things, what the is the difference how he went into the bag? A spike to thigh, a hand to the thigh. After seeing the play, I thought is was a BS call.

What a great idea and what a thrill it will be for those young players, from all 4 teams. Awesome. I hope this starts a trend.

Royals just take a 4-3 lead on the Tigers after 6 and a half

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 31, 2008 -> 08:40 AM) That's some classy s*** right there. Classy s*** doesn't happen much around here.

Cabrera makes his presence in the AL Central felt. Solo homers to give the Tiggers a 3-0 lead over the Royals

Well, I knew it had to happen eventually. Because I question the character of black man that is a 20 year member of a church whose pastor is on record with hateful and racial opinion, and because that raises a red flag with me when the said black man is running for highest office in the land, then marks me as a racist. Well you people just go ahead and vote your ignorance. I get criticized for linking to and quoting one, mind you "1" column that offers an opinion that you disagree with and you dismiss it as irrelevent and meaningless, yet Athomeboy, whatever his handle is, has for months been posting leftist rhetoric links and not a peep. You know what, I'm just gonna say this ... to hell with you all. You don't want discourse and discussion. You want .... screw it .... it's not worth it. Enjoy the campaign people. I'll stay out of the 'Buster till it's over.

QUOTE(bmags @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 01:26 PM) I can't believe a Beast post contains self-righteous condescending language. Then again, he could just be taking a moral stance.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 10:16 AM) I think that might be Tex and YAS in that picture. . . No comment

QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 10:42 AM) I like how Obama said if Wright hadn't retired (I am pretty sure Obama's camp made him retire in the first place anyway), he wouldn't have felt comfortable at the church and would have left... what about the previous 20 some years Mr. Obama? I find it hard to believe anything Obama says, because quite frankly none of it adds up. Wright's never apologized, but Obama says he has? Like yasny said, Obama is a world class bulls***er. I don't know about anyone else, but I am truly afraid for this great country if Obama does get the nomination and does become president. I don't trust him, I don't trust his wife, and I don't trust his whole camp. ^^^^^^^ That too!

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 09:44 AM) ok, he's an awful man. He is the worst person ever. What do you want us do? Should we arrest him? Should Obama have to quit the race, should he be arrested for supporting a terrorist? All these different things keep on being put out there, but no one is saying what we should do. I'm asking what would you like Obama and Rev. Wright to do? So we can end this and talk about things that actually effect our lives. How about Wright and Obama just go away? We don't need their type. Especially in the White House. He should have been taken to task on this issue instead of getting the free pass he has received from the media and his supporters. You are all being conned.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 09:35 AM) Wrong. You linked to one story which references an article in an extreme right-wing paper, and left the rest of us to chase link after link to find any hint of context. Now, time is finite, and if it's not worth your time to provide the full context, I don't see why I should spend mine on it. What, exactly, was the endorsement? Did he say that everything Hamas does and all the points in its charter are good? Or that this one article, which does not mention killing all Jews, is good? The "Declaration of Independence" bit is particularly misleading. The article is NOT arguing that the charter is exemplary, as we typically see the D of I to be; it's arguing that most foundational documents are in some sense morally questionable -- as the D of I was hypocritical in calling for equality while denying equality to slaves. The effect is in fact to dismiss the charter, to argue that Hamas should not be judged by it. The church is publishing an article, then, that contains an apology for and renunciation (however minor and unconvincing) of the charter which contains the words about killing Jews. Yet this is twisted by the article you quote into being supportive of the idea of murdering Jews. Ridiculous. If you want a reply next time you post something, post the ACTUAL TEXT you're talking about, or a link to it. Don't ask all of us to go on a goddam goose chase and then say that we're "strategically ignoring" you when we don't feel like wasting the next half-hour of our lives. I did post the actual text from the column, and the link to it.

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 09:05 AM) I read the article on Pastors Page. I didn't see snything written about murdering jews. It was a short article, barely two pages. I guess the fact that he supports Hamas is irrelevent.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 08:01 AM) It's something KW had to do to basically revitalize this team. I think everyone saw last season we had an "aging core". Thome, Konerko, Dye etc. all over 30, Contreras in the rotation etc. So we need some young guys who are on the up-swing, while those guys I mentioned before will be on the down-swing to balance things out. The Swisher acquisition for example. I guess for me, I'm just a little annoyed that we're not seeing Richar at 2nd, and Fields should argubly be playing 3rd (but he's not for other reasons). So the Sox could be getting even younger (and argubly getting better not worse, but they don't think that), and I think fans get a little dissappointed with those type of excuses. It is risky, but if the Sox want to jump up the standings, it's the type of thing they need to do. You want a 2B with a broken rib in the line up?

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 12:12 AM) There's a political joke in there somewhere. Both statements are true. You see, I'm learning from all the Democrats on here.

NL East - Mets NL Central - Brewers (Can't pick the Cubs - it's Un-American) NL West - D'Backs WC - Braves AL East - Blue Jays AL Central - Indians AL West - Mariners WC - Red Sox Mets over Indians in the Series. I know I'm crawling out on a limb with the Jays, but you have to be bold at times.

While Alexie has looked good in ST, I'm not sold on his ability to hit pitches with movement .... yet. He can hit a fastball, but he won't see many of those until he proves he can hit the offspeed and breaking pitches. I think he'll eventually be able to do so, but it may be ugly for a while.

QUOTE(AirScott @ Mar 29, 2008 -> 11:11 PM) Here's a funny one. I hated this at the time, but trading Keith Foulke for Billy Koch ended up with us getting Neal Cotts. So even though I hated that trade when KW did it (as Foulke would lead the AL in saves in 2003 and close for the 2004 Red Sox), we may not win the 2005 World Series without it. It's amazing how a championship affects the perception of a trade. Without that championship that trade would be considered a flop. But, winning it all is what it's all about, so it was a damn good trade from that point of view.

QUOTE(Felix @ Mar 29, 2008 -> 11:01 PM) no one else has posted :( my roommates and company are singing creed, so i'm in here listening to zappa because iti s absolutely horrible we hae already cashed the keg.. its much tioo early Watch out where the huskies go, and don't you eat that yellow snow.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Mar 29, 2008 -> 10:39 PM) No, I didn't. I was going comparing Lilly to other teams #2 starters in the NL. It can be argued who the true #2 is in New York. Well, I'm watching the Sox/Mets game as we speak ...DVR ... and they referenced Mayne as the #4 for the Mets. Santana, Pedro, Perez and then Mayne... though they did question Perez over Mayne for the #3 slot. But considering that mayne started this game, I'd say that defines him as the #4 starter. So Santana and Pedro are 1 and 2.

The last few posts have brought up some of the movies that don't immediately jump to mind. Good job guys.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Mar 29, 2008 -> 09:53 AM) LOL, Jay is catching a lot of flak for asking to have the comments section removed from his online column. Apparently he didnt appreciate the comments on his writing. Teddy Greenstein wrote about it: The guy just loves to rip people and hates to be ripped on. The comments in Couchs column are humorous That's just what I'd expect from this tool, and the Sun-Times.