(Insert quick wind lesson: if the win is in the 30 mph range and blowing "north-south" on the field - meaning the wind is with you completely in one direction and against you completely in the other - the chances of working a disc all the way up the field against the wind are extremely low. Really, the best chance of scoring an upwind point is if the other team turns it over close to their own endzone. So if you are going downwind - DON'T TURN IT OVER NEAR YOUR OWN ENDZONE! Don't even attempt tough short throws - when in doubt, punt! This is Ulti 101 type stuff, but tonight saw a lot of Sprawl players turfing the disc and giving the upwind team a ten yard field to play with. Just stupid, and inexcusable after the fifth time. Sheesh).
On top of the wind stupidity, I'd say there were about seven captains on the field at any given time. And I love organized Ultimate, people who really think through their strategy and teamwork-oriented practices. But this is a team that is currently meeting once a week, and having diatribes repeatedly launched from multiple sources, saying different things is not just counterproductive, it's absurd in light of the situation of the team at this moment and the fact that there are different people showing up each week. Jeff and Bryan, the actual captains, do a great job of explaining what they want to happen in a given practice and in a given situational scrimmage - but the second they stop talking, everyone else starts. It's overwhelming. And I don't think talking about Ultimate accomplishes as much as Ultimate players think it does - certainly stopping practice to speak in frisbee platitudes isn't the best use of practice time.
Alright, enough ranting; I do enjoy having a club team to play with. And there are some great players out there. One thing I enjoyed about Jackhammer up in Boston was the general respect that people gave each other; people assumed the other people knew what they were doing, and didn't need to be told every little thing. If differing strategic points came up, sure, you could talk, but there wasn't a running assumption that everyone needed to be informed in every moment what to do.
Okay, baseball times three: first we have props of the day to Matt Kemp of the LA Dodgers, who in today's game with the Pirates got caught in a rundown between 2nd and 3rd but rolled along the ground under the third basemen, stood up and sprinted to third, safe. He got out of a pickle! Outside of fourth grade, that doesn't happen. Nice work.
Second, Billy Butler, DH for the KC Royals, popped up to first base with a runner on first today. Butler did not hustle but rather walked three steps after hitting the ball. Super heads-up Angels first baseman Casey Kotchman let the pop-up drop in front of him - the runner on first had to go to second. So Kotchman tossed to the second baseman covering first, who in turn tossed it to the shortstop who tagged out the baserunner. A pop-up turned into a doubleplay! There's a rule in this general vein - the infield fly rule - that keeps players from turning pop-ups into double plays on the baserunners. But there's no rule for this situation, because all Butler had to do to prevent this from happening was JOG to first base. Que idiota! So new question - why don't more fielders let pop-ups drop like this? Even with the infield fly rule, surely baserunners would get confused and screw up on occasion, resulting in more outs, right? I mean, it's a little bit of a travesty if professional players drop pop-ups like morons routinely, but it's within the rules, yes?
(Speaking of - I love that the NHL changed a rule - okay, technically, they changed an interpretation of a rule - in the middle of the freaking playoffs. If you haven't heard, Steve Avery adopted some unusual strategy recently - instead of screening the goaltender with his back to the goal like a manly man, he faced the goalie up and waved his stick in the goaltender's face. It looked ridiculous - and it shouldn't be too hard to find video - but there was no rule against it, and hey, that sounds pretty damn distracting to me, so why not? The next morning the NHL declared such behavior "unsportsman-like conduct" that would incur a two minute penalty. So no one will likely ever do it again. The general sports media reaction has been one of making fun of Avery and essentially calling his actions "bush league." I personally think he discovered a way to antagonize the goalie *legally* and took the risk, mad himself look like an idiot, all with the purpose of helping his team win the game. Hmmm, a self-sacrifice that aims toward team success? Isn't that pretty much the cornerstone of team-play make them better men type athletics? So Steve, I'll join the consensus and say you looked stupid doing that, but I appreciate your intentions. Here's to doing everything you can to win and really meaning such sentiments when you speak them).
(My other favorite rule change - man on first, takes off to steal second, but the batter hits a foul ball. Man remains standing between first and second, but he's only one foot away from second base. Umpire says, "go back to first." Man says, "I am on first - I'm taking my lead." Ump consults rulebook, shrugs, says play ball - man steps on second. Stolen base! Major League Baseball immediately institutes a rule that says you have to retag the base after a dead ball. That story may be apocryphal, but the sentiment is the same - blazing loophole in the rules, and dude took advantage. No problem with that from my perspective).
Okay, back on track, third: oh, STUPID, STUPID Alfonso Soriano. If you've ever talked Cubs with me, you know that I am not thrilled about Soriano's employment by the northsiders - he's a good player, don't get me wrong: you can check his stats here, and among other things he has a career .840 OPS, which is not bad at all, and he has a couple of 30-30 seasons and one 40-40 season. But we pay him GREAT player money - 136 million over 8 years, or $17 million / year - and he just isn't worth it. His greater sins: he has an OBP around .330 (meaning he gets on base about a third of the time), but insists on batting first in the lineup (where you ideally have someone with more like a .380 OBP). He swings from his heels constantly, tries to crush the ball all the time, and consequently strikes out a TON. He plays left field like an absolute non-athlete. AND he has this great little habit of "bunny-hopping" when he catches fly balls.
That's right: the Cubs leftfielder, a professional athlete, "bunny hops" when he catches the baseball. And hey, guess what - though he and the manager and others deny it, it certainly looked like Soriano strained a calf doing his seventh grade dance the other day and is now on the 15 day DL. ML seasons are approximately 180 days, so 15 days is roughly 1/12th of a season, and 1/12th of 17 million = 1.4 million dollars. ARGH!!! In related news, [insert hokey pokey / chicken dance costing 2 million here].
And a little bonus baseball, though not actual baseball: I forgot to mention that at the game the other night, the Dbacks put a marine up on the gigantor HD scoreboard and identified him to the crowd as a marine who had been wounded in combat in Iraq. They then asked the crowd to recognize this hero. And a standing ovation ensued. So while the crowd is standedly ovating, this guy is sitting there, awkwardly smiling into a camera. For a protracted length of time. Strange.
Now, I don't want to come down on this guy, because he fought and suffered for what I'm sure he perceived to be the great value of defending his country. I appreciate his views and his service towards those views. That's not what strikes me about this little mini-event between innings at a baseball game. What strikes me is the following (in list form!):
Is baseball inevitably tied to the American jingoistic value system?Again, I'm not attacking this troop or troops in general; I'm really questioning the implications of the ritual. I don't necessarily believe that being wounded in Iraq qualifies as "defending our country," though I am certainly not expert enough on foreign politics to delineate what would and what would not constitute that. But I think the question is obviously in the air, and so such a forced show of "this is how we think around here" demands some skeptical contemplation.
In such an overtly politicized war, are the DBacks as an institution making a comment as to their position via this act?
If they are, is this an act that plays particularly well to the local conservative atmosphere, or is it just the above mentioned baseball-Americana connection?
Is a baseball game really the appropriate place to make such commentary?
OR, are the DBacks not so much making commentary on the war, but more commentary on themselves, a sort of "hey look at us, we are the type of organization that supports troops"?
Is the jumbotron, on which we just watched a bunch of racing hot dogs, really the appropriate context for such a tribute?
Was this done impromptu or as a planned mid-inning event?
Does it matter that we receive no information of this man's actions, other than that he was "wounded in combat?" Does employing the "troop wounded in combat" narrative grant a sanctity that transcends the particulars?
Does one participate in standing ovations as genuine recognition, or does mob mentality and/or the desire to not look like someone who doesn't support troops render any kind of genuine statement impossible?
But beyond all of that - WHY, oh, oh, WHY did they play Born in the U.S.A.? Please, someone, just READ the LYRICS. Or spend two seconds looking at what the people at songfacts have to say about the meaning of the song. Unless the DBacks were making a hyper-ironic statement there ("Hey, we're not above using this soldier to improve our own PR, HA - that's almost as bad as the US treated its Vietnam vets, just like in this here Springsteen ditty!"), this is just typical idiot-minded use of an anthemic chorus. This complaint is so old its hardly worth making - didn't Reagan unintelligently use this as a campaign song in the 1980s? So DBacks, get with the program! Step into the now! "Born in the U.S.A." = not a patriotic song!
Of course, the decision by your music director to play "Killing in the Name of" by Rage Against the Machine during a pitching change = AWESOME. It's just nice to hear, at this family fun event, a song that repeats the screamed lyric "FUCK YOU I WON'T DO WHAT YOU TELL ME!" some SIXTEEN TIMES at its end. Of course you didn't play that part; you played the part about "those who burn crosses." Hmmmm... regardless, I'm glad that you put FYIWDWYTM in my head; I had an easy response ready every time your PA system boomed "Everybody clap your hands!"
And finally, this just in from the You Can Awesome Dept.: after Pope Benedict concluded his speech on the White House lawn today, President Bush, his voice picked up by microphones, said, "Thanks, pope, that was an awesome speech." Dude buddy bro, indeed.
----------------
Now playing: Violent Femmes - American Music
No comments:
Post a Comment