vandy125

Looks like they used the first picture that they could find on Kyle Kendrick for MLB Gameday

Thome at 1B today

39 pitches that inning...

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 04:15 PM) Can you find a better example? Uribe has always swung like he's climbed a tree and just stepped on a beehive... You know, I really can't think of one. It is always up to the players to follow the advice of the hitting coach. That is just an example of someone not doing it (I would bet). I sought to show 1) an example of giving advice, and 2) that the advice was not being taken. I think that I did that. Just because it is something that everyone can see, does not discredit it as an example. The point is that there are two possible points of failure. 1) the hitting coach and 2) the players. We don't know what is happening unless we are privy to the advice that is being given.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 03:15 PM) The more I read stuff like this the more I think: how is it that posters here can figure this out but Greg Walker can't? I would bet that a lot of this is much easier said than done. You call tell Uribe to hold off on the Slider low and away, but sometimes there is something about that pitch that makes his eyes big and he will still swing at it.

Any idea how long ago this was done? Is it still being done? If so, it needs to be stopped immediately. There were a lot of things done in the past that were not good (especially in regards to the environment). We need to look forward to prevention and cleanup (if that is possible) instead of pointing fingers at people. When we point fingers at the Army, Navy, or any large group that has been around for a long time in general, we may be doing it at people who were still in grade-school when this happened. I would be very upset if it was continuing.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 02:53 PM) Vandy (and anyone else who agrees with him), It's not about what you believe. In fact, it's not about you at all. Any person that is the head of anything deserves respect whether you believe in it or not. Just because I'm not the most religious Jew doesn't mean I won't call someone Rabbi or won't call a priest, Father. It's their title and they deserve the respect that comes with it. If you don't believe in it, that's fine. But when you are speaking to someone who does believe it and/or has earned a title, they DO deserve it. I am now looking at it from a different point of view after going through this chat with all of you. Instead of ascribing the attribute to the person that the title confers, I am now viewing it as what they should be and what they should live up to (sounds straight forward enough). Regardless of whether or not they can live up to that title, or whether or not they do live up to that title, they have it, and they are the ones that need to live up to it. I am also not the judge of that. So, I have no problem with calling them whatever name they want.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 01:05 PM) We'll make your pitcher look like Cy Young. That makes me think of something like: "Come see Cy Young every day!"

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 12:37 PM) Your personal viewpoint has no business in an official state visit. We recognize the Holy See as a sovereign nation and this was a visit to the Pope in the Vatican. As such, it is only respectful to follow the etiquette that is expected in the house you're visiting. This president is well known for correcting people for not referring to him as "Mr. President" as is the current standard of behavior in the White House. You'd think he'd do the same. That is a good point. However, I would hope that we allow our elected officials to have their own view point. They were elected with those view points. Someone else should get elected if the general population does not agree with them and views that opinion as too big of a problem. You may call this a straw argument, but I'm going to try and draw a correlation that does not involve religion. I'm sure someone else can come up with a better one. I am in no way correlating Catholicism to the oil industry. I am just making the point about calling someone a title that you do not personally believe. The point is an extreme one to make it obvious. If an elected official was visiting the heads of the oil industry and they expected everyone to call them "The Environmentalists", but the elected official did not believe that was true, should he still be required to call them that because of etiquette? Now, you may point out the difference between the heads of oil industry and that of a sovereign nation, but "His Holiness" is a religious title. It is not a title for the head of a nation.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 11:28 AM) But he is the Pope, and if I had an audience with him I would address him formally and reverently as “Your Holiness” even though we so not share the same belief system. I would similarly call the Dalai Lama “Your Holiness” ands I would call Sakya Trizin (leader of the Sakya Tibetan Buddhists) “Your Holiness”, and I would call the leaders of the various Eastern Orthodox churches “Your Holiness” as well. It has nothing to do with shared belief systems, merely an observance of the proper official manner of address. The President’s handlers should be capable of understanding that, even if President Bush himself does not. I’m not losing any sleep over the gaffe, like I said. I can care less if President Bush insists on remaining an embarrassment on multiple facets of the world stage. I merely foolishly expected that our leader would be capable of following simple protocols and decorum expected in situations like this. I doubt that Bush was thinking of things the way that I am about the title. It was probably a slip. However, no matter how much I respect the Pope, the Dalai Lama, or other leaders, I just can not reverently address someone with a title that I do not believe that they hold (unless I am able to understand the title in a way that I am not seeing that holds). Doing so would constitute a hypocritical stance. I would be believing one thing, but saying another. Again, I doubt that Bush was thinking this. I do not mean to offend any Catholics, but I just do not believe the title applies, and it is something that I would not be able to do. I'm sure that there are other titles that show proper respect to the Pope.

For some crazy reason, I think the Sox pull this one out. Everything is pointing to them losing. So, that is why I think they will win. Although, I cannot fathom how they will get it done.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 10:32 AM) This was mentioned on WSI. Mark Patrick and Buck Martinez were critiquing the Sox-Phillies contest on the Baseball This morning on XM. Mark Patrick believes the book is out on the sox hitters, and that pitchers know to keep the ball just off the plate because our hitters wont adjust and will continue to hack away. We are a bunch of free swingers. He used the example of how the whitesox fared against Clippard, and how the Pirates had no problems with him by taking pitches and driving up his pitch count. Yep, and since they keep on swinging at it, the ump starts calling it a strike later on in the game. So, they have to keep swinging at it. We need a patient approach at the very beginning of the game. Seems like it builds on itself.

Wait 'til next year!

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Jun 11, 2007 -> 12:46 PM) What's more disrespectful than this mistake (and that's what it was - although given that this isn't his first papal audience in the last seven years, you'd think he'd get it right by now) is his habit of doing joint press conferences with heads of state and referring to them by their first name instead of "prime minister xx" or "president xx" especially given that he hates the same treatment. I wouldn't call it a mistake if it was me. I am not Catholic, and I would not refer to any person as "His Holiness". Only God can be referred to as Holy. We have all done wrong during our lives, including the Pope. Right now, I bristle at the idea. Other titles are fine by me, and people should be called them when the situation warrants it. Maybe a Catholic can show me where the name came from, why the Pope has assumed such a name, and what it means to them.

C'mon Mack, 2 - out RBI!

Anyone hearing Sutcliffe talking about Javy tipping his location to the hitters?

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jun 11, 2007 -> 01:26 PM) Sure they suck but we don't even have anyone All-Star worthy. Not even close IMO. Jenks, Thome, Buehrle? That's about it.

Watching that last game reminded me exactly why I do not miss him on the team. He was always making mistakes like that, and driving me nuts.

How about a 2- out RBI Terrero!

Buehrle looking sharp so far. Hopefully the offense can actually score something.

QUOTE(South Side Fireworks Man @ Jun 10, 2007 -> 12:47 PM) I watch the games, not the stat sheets. I've seen Thome come up numerous times this year in key situations and fail. Yesterday was one of the few times I've seen him come through in the clutch, especially that late in the game. When was the last time he did that in the eighth or ninth inning of a close game? He may be the tallest midget in the Sox offense right now, but he along with Dye and Konerko are supposed to carry this offense. And why should I give a s*** what you take seriously or what you think about anything? Can't anyone just admit that they are wrong? Goodness. I cannot even fathom to understand how you would say that Thome has been bad. If you are looking for times when someone fails, you are going to find it. Especially in hitting a baseball. Stop looking at one or two situations that he may have failed and look at his whole body of work.

And I thought you were talking about the banner for the web site. I think that it's going to be a while, but I would love to see myself proved wrong.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Jun 8, 2007 -> 08:21 AM) That would be a long way off if ever. I dont think ever because in my opinion the "car of the future" isnt going to be an electric powered car. Probably true, but that won't stop me from thinking about it. People are always talking about flying cars, but I don't see that as a possibly in the near future either. QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jun 8, 2007 -> 09:12 AM) How will this technology affect us physically? Seems like added radiation permeating around. Maybe we'll see higher cancer rates. I am also curious about effects to pace makers and whatever else people have in them now.

Welcome to the White Sox Mr. Poreda. Now, run and hide because the scouts on this board know more about what should have been done and think your name should be Porcello. Seriously, how many of you guys who are constantly bashing things like this actually know anything? Hmmm, what should we listen to, people who actually have careers in scouting and analyzing, or some wannabes?

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Jun 8, 2007 -> 07:31 AM) Does this also maybe translate to wireless TV's, lights, everything else you have to plug in??? Maybe eventually, wireless cars...that would be sweet with a good infrastructure set up.