RibbieRubarb Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 This guy has been bashing the Sox and their fans left and right this summer. Now I can take it, we have our flaws. We are critical here too. But his articles about us are never truthful, based on insulting, biased opinion and often hypocritical. Here are a few examples: WINDY CITy BLOWING LOTS OF HOT AIR http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/s...ski/6466757.htm ONE PLAY SAYS IT ALL ABOUT THE ROYALS http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/s...ski/6437074.htm ROYLAS TRULY THE REAL DEAL, SOON TO BE DIVISION CHAMPS http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/s...ski/6308951.htm And my fave: WHITE SOX TRYING TO SPEND THEIR WAY TO THE TOP http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/s...ski/6222806.htm This is from the KC Star Website: To reach Joe Posnanski, columnist for The Star, call (816) 234-4361 or send e-mail to [email protected] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Monday night, after the Royals beat Chicago, White Sox manager Jerry Manuel — fully recovered from the apparent coma that inspired him to let closer Tom Gordon throw 46 pitches in a lost game — guaranteed that the White Sox would win the next two. When was the last time you heard anyone guarantee two victories. and well damn, JM was right - the Sox did win the next two! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wsc425 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 He's an asshole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 What a f***ing dick! The Royals are the "Real Deal"! HAHAHAHAAHA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Heres the e-mail I sent him: Hey, Im a hardcore White Sox fan and I dont appreciate the s*** you write about KC being the real deal. That is pure Bulls***! The Sox are now 1 game behind and you guys have about the easiest schedule in the Major Leagues. Your a dickface who doesnt know crap about baseball and was hired by the KCStar to write bulls*** about the Royals. Guess what, the Royals arent that good! The White Sox are "The Real Deal"! Have a bad day! b****. Thoughts? Too explicit? not explicit enough? Anything I should add? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Be Good Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Heres the e-mail I sent him: Thoughts? Too explicit? not explicit enough? Anything I should add? ITS solid all around Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 I never knew someone could get paid for sucking dick through writing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 The White Sox last won a postseason series during World War I, when they were managed by Pants Rowland. It was so long ago, they still called people “Pants.” So, I assume that when the Sox won the pennant in 1959, all the other teams died and the Sox won by forfeit, which doesn't really "count" as a win. Blowhard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox1422 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Highlights to my email to the pudwack: Also, there is a reason why you write for a KC paper and not a Chicago paper. Have fun covering your Hockey and Basketball teams this winter! Kansas City is a joke! :fyou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Here's something I shot off: You sir, are a moron I don't know if I can but it any more bluntly than that. Here in Chicago, Sox fans have to deal with the sultan of bandwagoning journalists, Jay Mariotti. Never did I believe that someone could outdo Jay, but congratulations, you have one-upped the master. I've been following sports ever since I can remember, and you are easily the biggest garbage writer I have ever seen. The Royals can do no wrong, and even your stated "facts" are wrong. Here's an example: The White Sox last won a postseason series during World War I, when they were managed by Pants Rowland. It was so long ago, they still called people “Pants.” History lesson for morons: The White Sox won the pennant in 1959. They went to the World Series. Could you explain to me how the White Sox won the pennant without winning a single series? Did every other team just forfeit, or did I miss something? As a writer for FutureSox.com, I am almost embarrased to be in the same profession as you. You lay down and praise your home team as much as possible without thinking, while I actually have to spend time making sure my facts are correct. I write on a volunteer basis, you get paid. Mind if we switch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 The White Sox last won a postseason series during World War I, when they were managed by Pants Rowland. It was so long ago, they still called people “Pants.” So, I assume that when the Sox won the pennant in 1959, all the other teams died and the Sox won by forfeit, which doesn't really "count" as a win. Blowhard. Plus they didn't give Belle $13 mil, The Orioles did. The Sox gave him $11 mil. Loiaza a luckier pick up than Lima? Give me a f***ing break? Who couldn't cut it for the Tigers and who was a front of the rotation starter in the AL East? I love the downplaying of the attendance too. They sold 18,040 IN ONE DAY. The TOTAL attendance was a touch under 45K. Oh but I guess the Royals are drawing sellouts every night... Plus the mention of Carl Everett as a clubhouse problem. What do they think Lima was when he was in Detroit? And wasn't this the same team that had traded for Juan Gonalez? (only to have Gonzalez reject them later) Reading this guy is like listening to Rush Limbaugh, fact challenged and one sided... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafacosta Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 I will send something in portuguese... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 The White Sox last won a postseason series during World War I, when they were managed by Pants Rowland. It was so long ago, they still called people “Pants.” So, I assume that when the Sox won the pennant in 1959, all the other teams died and the Sox won by forfeit, which doesn't really "count" as a win. Blowhard. Plus they didn't give Belle $13 mil, The Orioles did. The Sox gave him $11 mil. Loiaza a luckier pick up than Lima? Give me a f***ing break? Who couldn't cut it for the Tigers and who was a front of the rotation starter in the AL East? I love the downplaying of the attendance too. They sold 18,040 IN ONE DAY. The TOTAL attendance was a touch under 45K. Oh but I guess the Royals are drawing sellouts every night... Plus the mention of Carl Everett as a clubhouse problem. What do they think Lima was when he was in Detroit? And wasn't this the same team that had traded for Juan Gonalez? (only to have Gonzalez reject them later) Reading this guy is like listening to Rush Limbaugh, fact challenged and one sided... Yeah that attendance thing was intentionally misleading. I noticed at the time that he didn't mention the total number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Heres the e-mail I sent him: Thoughts? Too explicit? not explicit enough? Anything I should add? I'm sure that will enhance the Sox fans' reputation as being full of class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Right near that he uses the team "cellularsky park" Weak, real weak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Actually, the Sox haven't won a post game series since that guy Pants was running the team. In 1959 there were no divisions, whoever came in first was the AL champion. This guy referred to the Sox going out of business sale, aka white flag trades, yearly and how its nice we won't have to see that this year. Why doesn't he mentioned how nice it was that the Royals won't be trading their top players at the deadline. Dye, Damon, Appier were all recent deadline trades. They almost traded Beltran this year while they were in first place.KC is a cowtown with cowtown sportswriters. This guy needs some space in the Streetwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moochpuppy Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 I love the downplaying of the attendance too. They sold 18,040 IN ONE DAY. The TOTAL attendance was a touch under 45K. Oh but I guess the Royals are drawing sellouts every night... If I remember correctly, during the three game Sox sweep in KC, the attendance at Kauffman was never over 25,000. :finger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 OK The more I read of this guys BS, the more it pissed me off. Here is my reply. I hope that someone has pointed out a couple of the mistakes and innaccuracies of these stories before I have, but just in case here goes. #1. The White Sox didn't last win a pennant during World War I. They won a World Series during WWI. They made the World Series in 1959, winning the AL pennant. #2 The White Sox did not pay Albert Belle $13 million. They gave him a 5 year $55 million dollar deal (averages to $11 million) which he voided after two years to take a 5 year $65 million deal from the Baltimore Orioles, for an average of $13 million that was quoted in your story. #3 When you used the example of how many teams have blown a 7 game lead at the all star break, I didn't see another fact that you neglected to mention. ZERO teams have lost 100 teams one year, and won their division the next year. In other words, what are better odds, 2 in 50, or never? #4 When noting the amount of payroll that the Sox have in their line up, there was no mention of the fact that the White Sox don't even have the biggest payroll in the AL Central. That distinction belongs to the Twins #5 One article pans the big money signings of players such as Chan Ho Park, Tom Glavine, Bobby Higgenson, etc, while applauding the find of Jose Lima for next to nothing. Yet in another article the Sox find of an established #2 or #3 pitcher in Esteban Loiaza is described as lucky. What is the difference between the signings and their results that makes KC's move so much more impressive versus lucky also? I am very disappointed that some at some of the factual errors that were published in a major midwestern newspaper. Is there a process in which you are double checked for such basic mistakes? If not there needs to be. After the fiasco at New York Times, you would think there would be extra steps taken to ensure that these easy to catch mistakes are not being printed. You intregity is at stake, as is the knowledge of your readers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RibbieRubarb Posted August 7, 2003 Author Share Posted August 7, 2003 OK The more I read of this guys BS, the more it pissed me off. Here is my reply. I hope that someone has pointed out a couple of the mistakes and innaccuracies of these stories before I have, but just in case here goes. #1. The White Sox didn't last win a pennant during World War I. They won a World Series during WWI. They made the World Series in 1959, winning the AL pennant. #2 The White Sox did not pay Albert Belle $13 million. They gave him a 5 year $55 million dollar deal (averages to $11 million) which he voided after two years to take a 5 year $65 million deal from the Baltimore Orioles, for an average of $13 million that was quoted in your story. #3 When you used the example of how many teams have blown a 7 game lead at the all star break, I didn't see another fact that you neglected to mention. ZERO teams have lost 100 teams one year, and won their division the next year. In other words, what are better odds, 2 in 50, or never? #4 When noting the amount of payroll that the Sox have in their line up, there was no mention of the fact that the White Sox don't even have the biggest payroll in the AL Central. That distinction belongs to the Twins #5 One article pans the big money signings of players such as Chan Ho Park, Tom Glavine, Bobby Higgenson, etc, while applauding the find of Jose Lima for next to nothing. Yet in another article the Sox find of an established #2 or #3 pitcher in Esteban Loiaza is described as lucky. What is the difference between the signings and their results that makes KC's move so much more impressive versus lucky also? I am very disappointed that some at some of the factual errors that were published in a major midwestern newspaper. Is there a process in which you are double checked for such basic mistakes? If not there needs to be. After the fiasco at New York Times, you would think there would be extra steps taken to ensure that these easy to catch mistakes are not being printed. You intregity is at stake, as is the knowledge of your readers Now THATS a reply! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 OK The more I read of this guys BS, the more it pissed me off. Here is my reply. I hope that someone has pointed out a couple of the mistakes and innaccuracies of these stories before I have, but just in case here goes. #1. The White Sox didn't last win a pennant during World War I. They won a World Series during WWI. They made the World Series in 1959, winning the AL pennant. #2 The White Sox did not pay Albert Belle $13 million. They gave him a 5 year $55 million dollar deal (averages to $11 million) which he voided after two years to take a 5 year $65 million deal from the Baltimore Orioles, for an average of $13 million that was quoted in your story. #3 When you used the example of how many teams have blown a 7 game lead at the all star break, I didn't see another fact that you neglected to mention. ZERO teams have lost 100 teams one year, and won their division the next year. In other words, what are better odds, 2 in 50, or never? #4 When noting the amount of payroll that the Sox have in their line up, there was no mention of the fact that the White Sox don't even have the biggest payroll in the AL Central. That distinction belongs to the Twins #5 One article pans the big money signings of players such as Chan Ho Park, Tom Glavine, Bobby Higgenson, etc, while applauding the find of Jose Lima for next to nothing. Yet in another article the Sox find of an established #2 or #3 pitcher in Esteban Loiaza is described as lucky. What is the difference between the signings and their results that makes KC's move so much more impressive versus lucky also? I am very disappointed that some at some of the factual errors that were published in a major midwestern newspaper. Is there a process in which you are double checked for such basic mistakes? If not there needs to be. After the fiasco at New York Times, you would think there would be extra steps taken to ensure that these easy to catch mistakes are not being printed. You intregity is at stake, as is the knowledge of your readers Absolutely solid I'm interested to here a reply (if he does) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Absolutely solid I'm interested to here a reply (if he does) IF he replies, I will be sure to share it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Aw hell, I just noticed that I forgot to say anything about the attendance crap. Oh well, I guess if he has the balls to give me anykind of a reply, I can hammer him on that also. I can't believe clowns like him have jobs at major newspapers like that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxplosion Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 This guy gives way too much attention to great plays in losing causes. "Michael Tucker sprinted to first and we tied it up. But then Sandy Alomar doubled and we lost the game. It was still beautiful." Give it up with the almosts. Almost only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades. I dont care if you tied it up. We won! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 This guy gives way too much attention to great plays in losing causes. "Michael Tucker sprinted to first and we tied it up. But then Sandy Alomar doubled and we lost the game. It was still beautiful." Give it up with the almosts. Almost only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades. I dont care if you tied it up. We won! correction: horseshoes, hand gernades, and s***fights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 This about made me :puke http://boards.espn.go.com/cgi/mlb/request....b_chw&id=237600 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.