RibbieRubarb Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Check out these two articles by Suntimes' resident jerkoffs Toni Ginnetti and Greg Couch. Toni claims Sammy is turning down an invitation to be in the HR Derby because he didn't make the All Star Team. I'm sorry, I could be WAY wrong..but don't you have to be elected to te All Star team to participate in the HR derby?!? It's not like the Slam Dunk contest in the NBA All Star Game. Then WHAT THE f*** is she writing about? Why is she trying to save face for Sammy? http://www.suntimes.com/output/cubs/cst-spt-toni07.html Now Greg...well, his article about why Sammy NEEDS to be an All Star is hysterical...that is until you realize he isn't kidding. This piece of poorly written crap is worse than some of the asinine posts "below 80 IQ" Cub fans have written in years past on various other boards. Greg says WE owe it to Sammy because he saved baseball in '98, is hitting near .300, and hit his 500 hr this year. He claims a special consideration was made in the past for Cal Ripkin and Tony Gwynn in offensive off-years, and they should do the same for Sammy...he forgets to mention they were retiring in that year too. Sammy isn't. What a moron!!!This guy is a professional writer???? http://www.suntimes.com/output/couch/cst-spt-greg07.htmlPlease e-mail him and tell him your thoughts about this article too: [email protected] -RR out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Fainter Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 ......the product of a small mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Sure ... send Sammy to the ASG as a reward for cheating!!! The things that pass for intelligent journalism these days.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Sure ... send Sammy to the ASG as a reward for cheating!!! The things that pass for intelligent journalism these days.... Im STILL trying to figure out this cheating thing. Maybe someone can help me out here. Pete Rose is banned for LIFE for betting on baseball, which some could assume may have lead to fixed games. NO proof of this however. Sammy is PROVEN to be a cheater, and is suspended 7 games???????????????? Someone needs to help me out on this one............... Since when is betting on baseball worse than a proven cheater? Even if you argue that its worse, how is it banned for life versus a 7 game suspension???????????????????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Im STILL trying to figure out this cheating thing. Maybe someone can help me out here. Pete Rose is banned for LIFE for betting on baseball, which some could assume may have lead to fixed games. NO proof of this however. Sammy is PROVEN to be a cheater, and is suspended 7 games???????????????? Someone needs to help me out on this one............... Since when is betting on baseball worse than a proven cheater? Even if you argue that its worse, how is it banned for life versus a 7 game suspension???????????????????? Heh, betting on baseball is the #1 no-no for the sport. Like Artie Lang said, Sammy would have been better off if bags of cocaine had flown out of his bat instead of cork. It's really quite sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 If fans thought there was a chance that any games were fixed, baseball, or the majors as we know it, would die. After 1919 and Judge Landis, this was basically carved in stone. Cheating has always been a part of baseball, but (and here's the big difference) cheating has always been done to try and WIN. Look at the guys like Gaylord Perry and others. Spitters, scuffed baseballs, nailfiles, etc. So, on the big picture, what Sammy did compared to what Rose did is small potatoes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Heh, betting on baseball is the #1 no-no for the sport. Like Artie Lang said, Sammy would have been better off if bags of cocaine had flown out of his bat instead of cork. It's really quite sad. I see why betting on baseball is a no-no. But havent you done this? I have. However, cant say that ive ever cheated at work to get ahead. I dunno maybe its late and im just tired........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 I see why betting on baseball is a no-no. But havent you done this? I have. However, cant say that ive ever cheated at work to get ahead. I dunno maybe its late and im just tired........ You may or may not have cheated at work to get ahead, but that's a lot different than betting. Say your a CEO, and you bet the CFO that employee X doesn't get a promotion. Well, you're the one that decides whether he gets that promotion or not. So, in other words, he won't be getting it. Now, is that OK? Is that a fair bet? No. You have decisions to make that will play into that promotion or not. Now, I'm not saying that Pete Rose bet on his team to lose, but, as Manager, he made decisions as to if his team had a better chance to win. If he had a bet on that particular game, that's wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Im STILL trying to figure out this cheating thing. Maybe someone can help me out here. Pete Rose is banned for LIFE for betting on baseball, which some could assume may have lead to fixed games. NO proof of this however. Sammy is PROVEN to be a cheater, and is suspended 7 games???????????????? Someone needs to help me out on this one............... Since when is betting on baseball worse than a proven cheater? Even if you argue that its worse, how is it banned for life versus a 7 game suspension???????????????????? Rose is banned for life because he AGREED to be banned for life. Don't agree with it, and don't think it's worse then what Sosa, or anyone else who was caught cheating did, but Rose made his bed. If I were him.. I would have started a fire with that deal and said "see you in court". Let them try to prove he fixed games. They obviously couldn't have which is why they offered the deal. I've read a lot of the reports from that investigation.. Rose would have been better off admitting the extent of the drugs and women then agreeing to the ban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grebeck Fan Club Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 You have to be in the All-Star game to be in the HR derby. If Frank gets in, is he going to be part of the HR derby? That's the only reason I'd watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Sammy has had a s***ty year, with plenty of other guys who DESERVE to go. :fyou Sammy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Rose is banned for life because he AGREED to be banned for life. Don't agree with it, and don't think it's worse then what Sosa, or anyone else who was caught cheating did, but Rose made his bed. If I were him.. I would have started a fire with that deal and said "see you in court". Let them try to prove he fixed games. They obviously couldn't have which is why they offered the deal. I've read a lot of the reports from that investigation.. Rose would have been better off admitting the extent of the drugs and women then agreeing to the ban. not to disagree with anyone here, especially people I like and admire a great deal... but... I believe they had the goods on Rose big time, very big time, which is why he agreed to the lifetime ban and on the advice of his well paid law team accepted the ban as the far and away least onerous penalty he would pay. His luck was that Bart Giamatti died because Giamatti wouldn't have let Rose run around with his whine baby act - and Rose would have been too chicken s*** to do it with Giamatti around. Remember that in the consent Rose signed legal admissions. Rose is guilty as all hell and he signed on to his admittance of guilt with a battery of lawyers at his side. Any lawyer would relish having gone to court to play the hero and get Rose off - that would be a guarenteed life time income after that. That all of his alwyers agreed that he foresake the courts and sign on to the ban - that is called plea bargaining, and they copped a plea outside of the legal system to avoid the legal system. Betting on baseball is the cardinal sin in base ball. Everyone here should know why and what the results of gambling and baseball to do to a team. Every clubhouse has signs posted about gambling. Every MLB employee knows the one rule that is beyond all other rules. Rose placed bets from the dugout. And - that was his place of work. The possibilities of corruption far exceed any one game in which a bet is made. And it undermines every confidence which we all have in the game. Betting on baseball by anyone in baseball cannot be allowed and must not to tolerated. Sosa, or Belle, or anyone, corking a bat is minor in comparison. It is wonderful that MLB has stuck by this ban for gambling despite the star status of the manager and player involved. Usually those with star status get off, or get lesser penalties, or overlooked. But then again, it also gets overlooked that Rose is a convicted felon. He has served his time for the crimes ofm which he was convicted, and get off easy on the betting on baseball thing - he is running all over making a ton of money marketing himself. His little booth at Cooperstown every year brings hiom more income in one day than some (most) of us will see in a year. He should live his life and be be well and prosperous. I also wish he and his apologists would shut the f*** up about how poor Petey was picked. He laid his bets on the table - let him play the hand that resulted, and let him play it like a man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Vince.. I agree with you 150%! Except that it's worse. Cheating is cheating is cheating. Also, I should have said that IF he thought he had a chance he should have tore up the deal. Of course he's guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Steff, I love the way you said, in another thread, the way you were voting - you are beautiful! and doable... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Steff, I love the way you said, in another thread, the way you were voting - you are beautiful! and doable... It took maybe 5 minutes away from my game experience. It's not that big if a deal. And I'm right there at the park anyway. Usually took them downstairs and did it while I waited anyway. The evil in me does want to ask the question of those here though... have you been voting all along.. or just since Frank got named as a possibility? BTW CW... you are maaaavvvaaaalous, baby Thank you for the compliments Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.