This makes me wonder: Is tech available that would enable an NFL team to count the opponent's players automatically and alert a coach every time it happens?
I just always assumed there was a person responsible for that exact thing. Someone in the booth perhaps?
posted by BoKnows at 02:07 PM on September 11
That's the baseball fan equivalent of texting while crossing a busy street.
Gotta disagree with this. Moving to your seat does not require traffic to stop, nor are you crossing the direct path of the speeding object. The net failed, simple as that.
The NHL has done a much better job over the years of keeping fans safe-r, especially behind the goals. Baseball could take a lesson or two and start to understand that an extra row of seat revenue isn't worth the safety of the fans. That or just tighten up the nets, move the nets off the wall away from the fans a little more, or install fencing - at least to the height of a person standing.
There are many solutions to this. Blaming the fan seems like the foolish one of them all.
posted by BoKnows at 09:04 PM on April 21
posted by BoKnows at 10:19 PM on March 16
posted by BoKnows at 10:18 PM on March 16
For me: Minnie + Chicago = This
Now that will be in my head all day.
posted by BoKnows at 01:13 PM on March 01
That was like the end of a b-boy competition.
posted by BoKnows at 10:49 PM on October 18
posted by BoKnows at 03:12 PM on October 11
When you went on a tear about not turning baseball into a "dumbed-down, fast-track version" lacking int.....
I suggested that trimming a 2014 game down by minutes would be the "fast-track" version. Trying to press rewind will not work when the goal is the future.
1984 was 1984. They were bitching about integrity lost from the 50's, ain't that how it works?
Nope. I sourced it in a comment and it was about games 30 years ago.
There may be a disagreement? (Over minutes, ironically.)
Where did I ever suggest otherwise?
It's in the way you look at me now. The way you just shuffle past me on the upper level concourse. They way you scoff at the guy with all the peanut shells. It's just not the same anymore. Not sense last year's ESPN NHL fantasy hockey playoffs. I just want your love back rcade. And justgary too. A little fraze is good, plus that fatma chick. It's just not the way it was anymore, let's cut out the comment section from sportsfilter in order to protect future users from all that recreation time wasted so they can recreate twice as many times!
posted by BoKnows at 06:58 PM on October 06
I appreciate your attempt to find drama in the IBB, but my personal preference is to see how the automatic IBB feels in play as the experiment is attempted. I don't think the four soft tosses would be missed.
I'm not attempting to find drama. That's how I see baseball. I can have a preference too, yes? I detailed the scenario to explain what it was that I found exciting about those four pitches - per your requests.
Did you think the game was a "dumbed-down, fast track version" that lacked integrity 30 years ago?
Really? How did you extrapolate that? C'mon man.
I think the 2hr 35min games date back to the 60's, not the 80's.
I'll bet it takes you a little longer to get things done vs. 30 years ago, yes? Well, no matter how hard you try, you'll never reach that benchmark from those little rcade days. Should we then start to cut things off of you?
Agree to disagree is where I am. But I do hope the old white guys in charge learn to check their egos at the door, and stop trying to do what's best for the kids. (read: bank accounts)
posted by BoKnows at 06:32 PM on October 06
What nuances? Have you ever in a lifetime of watching MLB seen something exciting happen during those four balls being thrown? Ball to the backstop advancing runners? Player swinging at a pitch and hitting it? Pigeon knocked unconcious by the ball? Attractive fan leave seats behind home plate? Anything?
Along with the multiple links posted in this thread and others that I have sought out...yes, sure I have. I follow all of MLB pretty closely each year so I'm probably an above average test. Although, I don't think I've seen those examples live in-person. Except the attractive fan, I don't miss many of those....But just because things are rare, doesn't make them boring to me.
The things you call exciting about an IBB involve the strategy of walking someone intentionally, which would be identical whether the IBB is four actual pitches or a manager's command.
Nope. An automatic IBB does not allow the on-deck hitter to stand there and stew about the fact the he is considered the easy out. An automatic IBB does not allow the mishandling of a ball by either the pitcher or the catcher - and I have seen some of those come real close to bouncing away or being overthrown. It does not allow for a potential balk, which could change the AB all together. It does not allow for a batter to take a hack at a close pitch. It does not allow for the fans to get involved and boo that visiting pitcher that's walking your guy.
Imagine this: Bottom 9, 2 out, runners on 1st and 2nd, down by 3, #4 hitter at the plate. An IBB is apparent and is signaled. The catcher stands up and holds out his palm to the outside of the box. During those four pitches, the home fans have started a chant, the wave, booing the pitcher, cheering for the batter, they stand up, wave their rally towels, and put on their rally caps. The home manager puts in the pinch runner to increase speed on the bases. The decibels increase as the four pitches are thrown, all in anticipation of a possible grand slam to win, or a double to tie. To me, that is exciting. It's not 2 minutes wasted... in fact, a whole lot has happened! I certainly have not witnessed 35,000 fans disgruntled, bored, or falling asleep during this time-consuming boring baseball play. Have you?
For me, it's about the mental game as much as the physical. We are human and we fuck up sometimes. I like the human element in baseball - without it, I'd absolutely then get bored.
I am unsure that we will find a relative measure of excitement surrounding IBBs.
And really, the issue was brought forth by MLB to satisfy time concerns, not boring-ness. That's the reason I compared it to the PAT. At least the NFL is trying to increase the level of difficulty to then increase excitement, rather than removing it altogether. Still, if the goal is to reduce game time, IBBs are hardly the issue. If MLB is truly concerned about what 10 year olds will be consuming in the future, I think preserving the game and being able to offer a product with integrity would be at the top of the list, not some dumbed-down, fast-track version that only supports todays loss of attention span.
A more efficient game is not necessarily a more entertaining one.
posted by BoKnows at 06:02 PM on October 05
I was looking for an example of one in which something exciting happened as the balls were being thrown.
I don't know what you qualify as exciting. I've tried my best to describe my version.
An automatic IBB would have the same decisions, strategy and so on.
But not the same human element that would otherwise be forced to throw the ball four times. I like the nuance possibilities. Should we just make a TD worth 7 points since the extra point conversion rate is 99+%? That could save time too, probably 3-5 minutes of kick time plus commercials. In baseball you're only talking about 1-2 minutes maybe each game. That's not too much of an impact from the Pace of Game committee. Maybe they are getting paid by minutes saved?
...and for stat purposes four balls could be put on the pitcher automatically as well.
Me no like this. I just threw up a little.
I find that national broadcasts have become insufferable.
Well, that pesky game keeps interrupting their entertainment show.
If so, how do you explain the long drop in World Series ratings, and why is that not a problem?
Geography. If the WS this year is StL vs. KC, will the coasts tune in for the annual FOX show a with a little baseball in the background?
But I think your question is valid. My answer is that during the playoffs and WS, it's not the game that changes - it's the broadcast that turns what would be a 3 hour game into 4+. And that's when people tune out. The PoG committee needs to focus on the problem, "What's the problem?"
Looks like FOX got involved and eventually took over the broadcasts around 1996, and ratings have been stagnant since then, aside from 2004,...maybe it's not the game?
posted by BoKnows at 02:29 PM on October 05
I like IBBs. As I described above in my first post, I enjoy the build up and decisions involved. I also like that the opposing pitcher has to give up a base only to put a chip on the shoulder of the on-deck hitter.
posted by BoKnows at 01:32 AM on October 04
I still enjoy baseball. But I don't see my sons' generation taking to the game the way I did, and I think slow play is a factor
I don't see that here (where I live). The youth involvement in athletics astounds me. School teams, select teams, tournaments, etc... Certainly a regional thing, as is obesity, alcoholism, and being a Red Sox fan. (yep, I said it)
The NYT article you posted above suggests that MLB is simply organizing preventative measures, whether those measures are actually needed is my question. Quotes like:
"But we have to figure out ways to make it relevant to that 12-year-old."
But those smiling faces, owners fear, are disappearing
Mark Attanasio, the owner of the Milwaukee Brewers, said a brisker pace of games, better use of social media and more participation on the field would be crucial to engaging younger fans
"The best time to get some stuff done is when you're out front."
"I think a challenge in the commissioner's office is to make sure that we find a way to engage young people and I'm not talking about bells and whistles,"
It's all guesswork. MLB has no real reason to think that kids are becoming disinterested. They think they might. Maybe it could happen. Near the end of the article is the real intent:
More children playing baseball means more future customers for M.L.B.
When the end result of change is designed to increase revenue for the future, then I don't buy the "it's for the kids" argument. Nor do I hold Joe Torre or Doug Glanville as representatives for today's young people.
....but I don't regard a four-pitch intentional walk as something with any excitement potential.
Except when it is.
Shouldn't we solve the DH thing before moving on to mound visits? And let Pete Rose back in. Enough is enough. Did Mark MacGwire ever admit to steroid use?
posted by BoKnows at 09:42 PM on October 02
Too bad she didn't run on the field. But I'll bet she was there too....
posted by BoKnows at 10:05 PM on October 01
TV ratings, fan support, youth participation and cultural prominence.
Well I guess that's pretty much everyone. Haha. Is this factual? Looks to me that attendance is way up from 30 years ago despite the 20% increase of game length. Has there been any evidence that a 25-30 minute shorter game would actually increase the things you mentioned? I suspect it would be a less than significant result and terribly hard to measure. But I guess if there is a Pace of Play committee, then they gotta do something. I usually wait until something is broken before I go fiddling with it.
I'm not bored during games. Even the long ones in April. Some are short, some are not. I'm not going to watch the first 7 innings of a game then get upset because I missed MASH.
"Thirty years ago, the average time of a game was 2 hours 35 minutes. This season, through last Sunday's games, it was 3 hours 2 minutes 47 seconds, which would be the longest on record." -- New York Times
I just don't see how shortening a game will increase youth participation, but I guess Joe Torre knows today's youth better than I do.
posted by BoKnows at 09:16 PM on October 01
(In keeping with yeraftmas format....)
1. Yep, I like that one too. Although I'll manage to contradict this somehow.
2. Hate it. If the the decision is to intentionally walk my big, dangerous hitter, then I want that pitcher to throw that ball 4 times. Lobs or not, those are 4 more pitches that could result in a positive for me. Yerfatma showed that IBBs aren't often enough to affect the speed of the game, but it seems when they do happen, the game could very well be on the line.
3. Love it. I don't know how accurate I am on this, but the best way to speed up the game, is probably to speed up the things that are holding up the game from being played, not the game itself. So this rule seems to most affect the broadcast advertising sold,... or we just won't see the first few pitches. The increase is related to several factors not directly correlated with the game, notably increased time between innings for TV and radio commercials.
4. Hopefully there is a stipulation provided for unexpected injuries? It's tough to get a guy going that fast if he's relieving in the 2nd inning.
5. What's the penalty for this? Ball? Ejection?
6. 12 seconds with the bases empty! Gees. I'll probably being timing everything in 12 second increments for a while. This one I don't like at all. I hope it never makes it out of the AFL. I enjoy the late inning stare downs, challenges, barking, aspects of the game. I like the big, national broadcast games that add the extra pressure, make the players second guess, and gives pitchers the yips. I also like the furious pitcher who is set on the rubber immediately after catching the ball. I like it when the home fans are enough to cause a batter to step out, or an opposing catcher to have to go to the mound to calm his pitcher. I understand it all as forms of intimidation or trying to psych out your opponent. Gamesmanship. We need more of it. This seems to just make the game robotic.
All in all, I say leave the game alone. I don't need a 2:30 hour game. If I go to the stadium, I'm all for the 3+ hour event. If I'm at home, I can get a lot done while listening to a game. I'm in no rush. Life's to short to speed everything up. Savor something. Honestly, we're only talking about 25 minutes difference between what was and what is, isn't there some thing else to concentrate on?
Baseball needs to be sped up. The game will fade without faster play.
Fade from who? To whom are these changes intended to benefit?
posted by BoKnows at 08:39 PM on October 01
posted by BoKnows at 11:04 PM on September 28
Stephen Tulloch tore his ACL celebrating a sack yesterday and is lost for the season
These things happen every so often, and I always wonder if the ligament was going to tear on the next play, had there been no celebration. It's an injury I would suffer, and would go well with my 'foot in mouth' disease.
posted by BoKnows at 08:06 PM on September 22
.....said owners, coaches and team executives "must be held to a higher standard than players."
Not hard, considering the bar has been set so low at times.
posted by BoKnows at 10:40 PM on September 04
I guess that depends on the measure of 'ordinary activities'. But I get what you're saying.
I wonder if she fully understands that the potential damage to her arm may restrict movement as it applies to her favorite sport - basketball. LLWS dominance or future WNBA? Can a 13-year-old make that decision?
Or, she was convinced everything would be okay, because her coach really wants to win.
posted by BoKnows at 06:50 PM on August 11
To those that don't think Ward should have been out of the car, this is what they do in a caution. And they also call out the clown that put him in the wall. That's racing.
I think Ward should've stayed in the car. And now I think more drivers will choose to do just that. Fight in the pits, or the infield, or the trailer lot. Whatever. But fighting and/or posturing on the track during a race just sounds like a terrible idea overall.
Plus, culture of the sport to point at the car or no, Ward should not have been walking into oncoming traffic and bears at least some responsibility in his own death.
If it is in fact the culture, then it was only a matter of time before two egos caused an incident like this. Hopefully the governing body of the sport will change the 'culture', and make racing about racing, and not about getting out of your car and pointing/yelling at other drivers on the track.
posted by BoKnows at 01:43 PM on August 11
dyams, if that's what happened, I agree completely, he should be held as accountable as possible.
The question that I keep trying to answer is: Why was he in this race at all? I'm not a NASCAR fan at all, so there may be a simple answer I'm just not aware of. But to an outsider it seems that he has no real need to prove himself on that track. Is this the equivalent of Kobe Bryant showing up at some streetball court just for shits?
posted by BoKnows at 05:12 PM on August 10
Huh. Seems to me there was a little extra throttle right before impact. And also a little fishtail. Could it be that Tony either A) didn't see Ward until it was too late, and tried to maneuver the car as best as he could to avoid the collision, or B) he saw Ward and tried to 'show-off' his driving skills and miscalculated?
All that said, Ward getting out of the car was a terrible idea and is a no-no for this very reason.
posted by BoKnows at 03:06 PM on August 10
Colorado in 6
St. Louis in 7
Anaheim in 5 +1
LA in 6 +1
Boston in 6 +1
TB in 6
Pittsburgh in 6 +2
New York in 5 +1
Total: 6 points
posted by BoKnows at 05:04 PM on April 16
posted by BoKnows at 04:48 PM on April 14
I was denied a spot in our Fantasy Hockey playoffs last night when Dallas' Jordie Benn stopped an empty net point-blank shot by Winnipeg's Andrew Ladd late in the third. I didn't even need a goal. A single shot on goal would have sufficed.
I'm in the fantasy playoffs! Sheesh. That was close. Man am I lucky! I'm never going to quit sports ever!
Beat the next closest guy with a win % of .517 to .514. Sure do feel bad for whoever that is.
posted by BoKnows at 07:23 PM on March 17
posted by BoKnows at 09:55 PM on February 08
I saw her on another video when Batista won the Royal Rumble.
posted by BoKnows at 06:38 PM on February 05
So I missed the game. Anyone know the score?
posted by BoKnows at 09:03 PM on February 03
At least he didn't do anything stupid, like spill a drink.
posted by BoKnows at 05:02 PM on November 29
What a crazy series. An obstruction call to win a game. A game ending pick off. Ortiz hitting everything. The Cardinals abandoning their offensive approach to winning games. Really, really good pitching all around. Ortiz hitting everything. Beltran robbing a grand slam. Pedroia's stab on the obstruction play. Wacha dominant until game 6 of WS. Gomes 3-run shot. Ortiz. Gold Glovers, Waino and Yadi letting a ball drop between them.
While the officiating was complex at times, I thought the series was called fairly and most importantly - correctly.
I was hoping for more Molina v. Baserunner matchups. I think it's time to shave. I would've stopped pitching to Ortiz in game 3. Having 3 games in the NL prevents Napoli from batting next and you can roll the dice on the walk. It's the World Series - fuck pitch counts. I <3 AL managers in NL parks. I watched the series on BT Sports - I hope I never have to hear Rick Sutcliffe ever again. But I guess that's what I said about McCarver last year.
All in all, a great ending to the season. This to me was a classic World Series pairing which I want to see again and again. But next time, I want to change the ending a little.
posted by BoKnows at 01:20 AM on October 31
And how many times do you see that called?
Rarely. No question. But based on the unavoidable (pun intended) offseason discussion, we may see it called much more. Or not at all.
....unless the SS appeared to make a special effort after the slide to delay the runner
But that's exactly not the rule. Intent and/or special effort does not matter. And I think that's the hard part to understand. Why don't we see this rule called more often? Because it rarely happens. But that doesn't make it less than a rule.
Anyway, it was only GM3. Lots more to be played. Good luck to all, fans of both teams. I believe these are the two teams that deserve to be in this series. Win or lose, I freaking love this game.
posted by BoKnows at 07:25 PM on October 27
The other point I think that needs to be thrown in: When this play occurs at 2nd base - because of a baserunner stealing from 1st, and a shortstop trying to apply a tag (that went into center) - would this still be such a discussion? Or would it just be acknowledged that the runner moves to 3rd?
If not, then I don't see how a rule change is needed. If the anger or question of the rule only occurs by fans in big games (read: WS GM3), then it's just sour grapes.
posted by BoKnows at 06:41 PM on October 27
To me, it looked like Craig stepped toward 2nd just to get his feet arranged in the right position to run or get back to 3rd, depending on where the ball ended up. Had he stayed near the chalk, he had an open path to the plate, would have been out by 10 feet instead of the 15 by which he should have been out without obstruction, would have won the bonehead of the game for trying to score on the play (had Boston come back), and in general had the St. Louis fans yelling about the obstruction.
I guess I don't understand this sentence. If there was no obstruction, Craig would've been safe by 15 feet. The obstruction was the reason it became a bang bang play.
posted by BoKnows at 06:33 PM on October 27
And really, aside from all of that, it was a pretty flipping good baseball game.
posted by BoKnows at 01:37 PM on October 27
Dude, you can use my name. I'm not sure if you're saying I'm a hypocrite, but I stand by those words. And everything I've written in multiple places said that the Red Sox made mistakes that cost them the game.
I didn't use your name because I didn't think it mattered. Those are some good words (bold) that can be applied all over the sports world in times of controversy.
And no, I didn't miss your other comments at all - I think you have a very solid understanding of why the call was made the way it was. Like it or not, it was the right call. I think you've also done a great job of pointing out the other factors that contributed to the gaffe.
And I'm not comparing those two exact plays - I'm suggesting that better play, by both teams in their respective flubs, would significantly reduce the bullshit little league baseball we've seen during this series.
I think Farrell mismanaged the game. I think Salty made a bad decision. I think Middlebrooks 1st priority was the ball - he seemed to be glued to the bag.
Unfortunately for the BoSox, all those things put WMB in a position that he could do nothing to prevent.
posted by BoKnows at 01:29 PM on October 27
Funny, the simplest solution would've been for Middlebanks to just catch the ball. Especially after gm2, you'd think the coaching staff would've stressed the idea of 'catching/blocking the ball first, apply tag second'.
That said, Farrell did not have his best defense on the field, and the result proved that.
It was a tough call, but it was the right call.
Quoted from a Red Sox fan regarding GM1 fubs by the Cardinals: "I understand being upset, but from what I've read they almost seem to insinuate it shouldn't have been overturned. This wasn't a borderline call. And though it's disappointing, I can't imagine anyone not believing getting the call right is more important.
The cardinals should forget about the corrected call and the mystery substance and just play better. They're a good team. I'm sure we'll see that before the series is over."
The cardinals should forget about the corrected call and the mystery substance and just play better. They're a good team. I'm sure we'll see that before the series is over."
The Red Sox should just play better.
posted by BoKnows at 12:30 PM on October 27
It's like MLB quickly wrote that in and said "Here, look!"
posted by BoKnows at 12:32 AM on October 27
Ok, maybe a little for Pujols and a little for rcade's bitter brew, but that's all. What do you think I'm some kind of jerk or something?
posted by BoKnows at 09:31 PM on October 19
If they were my own, there's no doubt karma would strike sooner, rather than later. I think the idea behind that sentence was acknowledging the young age of the club and the potentials that are ahead. But I'm realistic and understand that the Cards have quite a battle left in front of them. I don't see them as a lock in the WS at all. I do however, see them as a contender in the Central Division and NL for the short, foreseeable future. The Reds and Pirates are definite contenders as well.
posted by BoKnows at 05:35 PM on October 19
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say the hate is for people who think they are the only team with a passionate fanbase?
I agree with that. I personally can appreciate one's individual love for their team - as I have my own. I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that the Card's fans are the only passionate fanbase in baseball. I didn't hear that while growing up in StL, and not since I've moved. But having those other fanbases complain because StL loves it's team so, so much, is silly. I love my team and hate yours, but I don't hate your team because of it's fans. There are plenty of other reasons for that. :)
posted by BoKnows at 04:55 PM on October 19
Ok, maybe a little for Pujols. But that's it.
posted by BoKnows at 04:34 PM on October 19
I hope the Cardinals kick some AL ass so everyone can continue to hate the Cardinals for things like:
Having passionate fans and embracing the franchises history and all that mean, terrible stuff that people seem so pissed about. Guess the new fad here is to couple on to your favorite deadspin writer and pretend its a song you've been singing all along. But the fancy music and words aren't fooling anyone, really. It just boils down to "your team sucks and I hope they lose, because my team isn't playing anymore this season". Funny thing is, the reason for this new found irritation seemingly has very little to do with the actual game of baseball, and more with how the flyover state conducts it's business. Huh. Whatever. I promise if I get to celebrate a 12 th WS in a couple weeks, I won't be considering your feelings at all. It's fucking baseball.
posted by BoKnows at 12:31 PM on October 19
Chuck Norris would survive. Barely.
posted by BoKnows at 01:07 PM on October 17
.....(but I suspect otherwise).
Really? C'mon man.
posted by BoKnows at 01:49 PM on October 12
I'm in. Thanks for the invite!
posted by BoKnows at 02:34 PM on September 14
Pitt in 6
Chi in 6
posted by BoKnows at 12:42 PM on June 01
PITT in 6
BOS in 7
CHI in 6
LA in 5
posted by BoKnows at 01:26 PM on May 14
Pitt in 6
Mont in 5
NYR in 7
Bos in 6
Chi in 5
Ana in 6
SJ in 6
STL in 7
posted by BoKnows at 01:00 PM on April 30
Great story, thanks for posting.
I'd like to think that Justin's actions would be the norm, rather than the exception. But either way, good for him, he made someone's day. I wish that happened more.
(Did anyone else see the story of the dad and son that mocked the little girl at the bus stop? Disgusting and sad.)
posted by BoKnows at 11:01 PM on December 05
Should we do a poll or something?
posted by BoKnows at 04:17 PM on November 29
Incredible streak of 24 straight seasons with at least one brother on Minn. football team comes to an end.
posted by BoKnows at 11:18 PM on October 26
San Fran in 6
I really have no idea with this pick. As was with the last round as well, apparently.
posted by BoKnows at 12:27 AM on October 24
2012 MLB Postseason Infographic
posted by BoKnows at 09:17 PM on October 13
"Miraculous." - Adam Wainwright
posted by BoKnows at 08:56 PM on October 13
Yanks in 6
Cards in 7
posted by BoKnows at 08:52 PM on October 13
Detroit in 5
Baltimore in 5
St. Louis in 4
San Francisco in 5
posted by BoKnows at 02:02 PM on October 06
St. Louis by 6
Baltimore by 1
posted by BoKnows at 03:53 PM on October 05
Imagine if you were a Red Sox fan.
posted by BoKnows at 10:40 PM on October 04
In my teens and twenties, I found it very easy to spring for a game - NHL, NFL, MLB, whatever. Dropping $150 wasn't too detrimental to my budget. But now, as a married man and father of two, that $150 easily gets to $250, at least. And I don't buy programs or souvenirs. We have to limit the food purchase choices and usually bring our own whenever we can. We sit in the upper decks and look for nights that do promotional giveaways or discounted tickets.
To me, it's far from easy for a family of four on a budget to afford that, often. Once or twice, maybe.
The at-home experience works great for us. There's not parking issues, no bathroom lines, no overpriced food or paraphernalia. No need for binoculars or trying to restrain an 18 month old confined to a shared seat. No worry of said 18 month old throwing popcorn in a stranger's hair! No drunks, no fights, no profanity (Well, maybe).
Don't get me wrong though, I love a live event. I'm a big Blues fan and have spent a lot of time at the old barn. If I could go, I would. And if the product that was being presented to me made it more possible, again I would.
But it's not, so Best Buy, here I come.
posted by BoKnows at 02:57 PM on September 06
Copyright © 2016 SportsFilterAll posts and comments are © their original authors.