the penalty was supposed to be removal of the bat from the game, not the erasure of a two-run game winning homer (hence the appeal and continuance of the game later)That's totally false.
the reason pine tar was not allowed up on the hitting surface was so it wouldn't get on the balls and make them unsuitable for use, not because it conferred some sort of advantage.George Brett had it there for some reason.
Even if it was "cheating," the result was a an undeserved fucking-over.No, the undeserved fucking-over was the after-the-fact overruling of the actual correctly implemented rules of the game.
Followed by multiple examples of reasons you think he might have had it there.George Brett had it there for some reason.I don't see how you draw that conclusion
I look forward to your calm, collected reaction next time you are arrested for jaywalking and have the maximum legal penalty imposed.Nice straw man. George Brett wasn't sent to jail, wasn't charged a fine, and wasn't even in a legal situation in the first place. He was playing a game.
« Older Derailing for Dummies: A helpful tome for any time... | Silent conversation, a truly b... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by srboisvert at 6:55 AM on August 14, 2009 [1 favorite]