https://sports.yahoo.com/ozzie-guillen-says-white-sox-234829736.html

Thanks jerk-off (Ozzie, obv.).  Put an asterisk on the one championship in my lifetime.  (and some dopes want this mf'er back on the bench ?)

2 minutes ago, Big Hurtin said:

Thanks jerk-off (Ozzie, obv.).  Put an asterisk on the one championship in my lifetime.  (and some dopes want this mf'er back on the bench ?)

Stealing signs is as old as this game… if we weren’t using technology, no asterisk needed.

Joe Nossek says hello...

stfu ozzie.

4 hours ago, Big Hurtin said:

Thanks jerk-off (Ozzie, obv.).  Put an asterisk on the one championship in my lifetime.  (and some dopes want this mf'er back on the bench ?)

He explicitly says they didn't use computers to steal signs. This isn't some secret. Sox were the most famous sign stealing team of that era.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-sullivan-big-hit-baseball-spt-0910-20170909-column.html

On Joe Nossek and Sox sign-stealing (2017 article)

 Chicago White Sox (1984–86; 1990–2003). He then became a scout for the Houston Astros.

 

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/ozzie-guillen-says-the-white-sox-had-the-astros-signs-in-2005-world-series/3114855/

Seems to be more a case of bragging the White Sox didn't need the Astros' later technological advantages (2017) to win with human intelligence back in the 2000's.

Edited April 8, 20233 yr by caulfield12

Hard Art Kusyner...Man Soo Lee and maybe Joey Cora would have been the three likeliest stealing signs that year.

Other problems:  Ozzie or Baines?  Walker? 

Or just another case of talking out of both sides of his mouth?

I have no problem with reading an opponents signs.  It’s been a part of the game for as long as they’ve been using signs.  What the Astros did was not that.  There is no comparison and to do so is an absurd false equivalency.  Even if the Sox had the Astros signs in 2005, it takes nothing away from their dominant series.

It also sounds like Ozzie is full of s%*# here and is desperately trying to be relevant in a game that has passed him by.  Something that he had a hand in but still refuses to do the work to get back into.  

 

2 hours ago, Tnetennba said:

I have no problem with reading an opponents signs.  It’s been a part of the game for as long as they’ve been using signs.  What the Astros did was not that.  There is no comparison and to do so is an absurd false equivalency.  Even if the Sox had the Astros signs in 2005, it takes nothing away from their dominant series.

It also sounds like Ozzie is full of s%*# here and is desperately trying to be relevant in a game that has passed him by.  Something that he had a hand in but still refuses to do the work to get back into.  

 

The game has not passed Ozzie by. 

Sox fans: We are depressed

Ozzie: f*** you, let me make it worse.

3 hours ago, Tnetennba said:

I have no problem with reading an opponents signs.  It’s been a part of the game for as long as they’ve been using signs.  What the Astros did was not that.  There is no comparison and to do so is an absurd false equivalency.  Even if the Sox had the Astros signs in 2005, it takes nothing away from their dominant series.

It also sounds like Ozzie is full of s%*# here and is desperately trying to be relevant in a game that has passed him by.  Something that he had a hand in but still refuses to do the work to get back into.  

 

Is anyone capable of reading the article or watching what he says? He literally credits his coaching staff for getting the signs and the Astros having to change them. He takes a shot at them by saying they didn't need computers. Taking a shot at the Astros is not someone "trying to stay relevant" but instead should be done every opportunity.

Edited April 8, 20233 yr by Buehrle>Wood

38 minutes ago, Buehrle>Wood said:

Is anyone capable of reading the article or watching what he says? He literally credits his coaching staff for getting the signs and the Astros having to change them. He takes a shot at them by saying they didn't need computers. Taking a shot at the Astros is not someone "trying to stay relevant" but instead should be done every opportunity.

Meh.  Ozzie taking shots at the Astros now sure seems like trying to stay relevant to me.  To each their own though.

17 minutes ago, Tnetennba said:

Meh.  Ozzie taking shots at the Astros now sure seems like trying to stay relevant to me.  To each their own though.

You're blinded because you hate Ozzie 

38 minutes ago, Tnetennba said:

Meh.  Ozzie taking shots at the Astros now sure seems like trying to stay relevant to me.  To each their own though.

Still trying to distract from the Sox players' struggles even from the broadcast booth/studio.

1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

Still trying to distract from the Sox players' struggles even from the broadcast booth/studio.

Bingo

Knew their signs and still only managed 1 run in Game 4? Wouldn't be bragging about that.

On 4/8/2023 at 3:35 PM, ron883 said:

The game has not passed Ozzie by. 

What's it been, ten years since he's been employed working in a dugout? That's a lot of time to make up. I don't think we want to try that experiment again. 

3 hours ago, CentralChamps21 said:

Knew their signs and still only managed 1 run in Game 4? Wouldn't be bragging about that.

And helped Geoff Blum with his "WS hero" broadcasting career in the process...

Sounds like it's the classic sign stealing where you spend enough time looking at the coaches giving signs and waiting for the results that you learn the pattern. Probably wasn't all that useful unless they were signing in every pitch and the Sox had a more clever system to tell the hitters what was up than the Astros did.

On 4/8/2023 at 3:35 PM, ron883 said:

The game has not passed Ozzie by. 

Not only has it passed Ozzie by, he's down 10 laps. 

On 4/7/2023 at 11:08 PM, hi8is said:

Stealing signs is as old as this game… if we weren’t using technology, no asterisk needed.

The Cubs did it a long time ago by putting a camera in the vines.  They got swept in a DH and the games were not close.