- 09:51 PM
- 11/21/09
| Name: | Eric Young |
|---|---|
| Location: | Columbus, OH |
| Gender: | Male |
| Member since: | September 19, 2005 |
| Last visit: | November 18, 2009 |
littleLebowski has posted 4 links and 224 comments to SportsFilter and 1 link and 7 comments to the Locker Room.
What are SpoFites' favorite books?: "I get no respect. I was crossing the street. I got hit by a mobile library. I was lying there in pain, screaming. The guy looked at me. He went, 'Shhhh.'" (Rodney Dangerfield)
posted by littleLebowski to navel gazing at 10:50 PM on April 24 - 104 comments
Lions' Roy Williams says "score means nothing": ... even though those wacky NFL rules suggest otherwise.
posted by littleLebowski to football at 02:02 PM on September 18 - 34 comments
The Decline of Civilization - Bambino #3? ... Ease up: I don't read this columnist consistently enough to have a global opinion of his work, but I thought this was a very well-written article on a piece of this topic that gets irresponsibly blown up (as in the case of the LSU professor) but not often talked about from what I've seen on SpoFi.
posted by littleLebowski to baseball at 07:57 AM on April 13 - 58 comments
Would you rather run laps or ... ?: Nottingham Forest manager Gary Megson came up with a novel way of punishing his under-performing soccer players over the weekend when he made them face disgruntled fans in the changing rooms.
posted by littleLebowski to general at 03:11 PM on October 26 - 11 comments
Is Daly back?! Hopefully, for the game's sake, but his putter and Tiger weigh in - : In the midst of mediocre football and incredible baseball, the two most arguably polarizing PGA pros provided high drama. Plus, interested in agreement or disgust with the notion that Tirico, Faldo, Azinger make the most genuine, insightful, and quality golf broadcast team in recent memory.
posted by littleLebowski to golf at 12:27 PM on October 10 - 10 comments
Gorman also was involved in another close call, the double play that ended the bottom of the seventh ... The umpires reviewed the video on that play and said they got it right.
That's scary (and a surprise that NY paper just let that slide). Here I was joining the complaints about the call against Utley - but to my eye, the Howard "line drive" was even more of a blown call. For 6 umps to stand behind it, still after replay? Wow. These jokers are making me rethink my stance against instant replay.
posted by littleLebowski at 01:22 PM on October 30
The jury agreed with them, and now the entire bat industry has to assess whether it's doing enough to avoid similar litigation.
And, Alfred Dreyfus wept again.
posted by littleLebowski at 01:14 PM on October 30
fair enough, rcade As I said in my original post, I'm not sure which set of folks I was more angry with, the plaintiff or the jury. The jury is up there. It shouldn't take a lawsuit for this kind of safety assessment to take place - should've happened before now or, at minimum, immediately after this kid's death before even the threat of a lawsuit. Regardless, I still contend that the ends don't justify the means here - there was no legal wrongdoing by the batmaker, so punishing them to hopefully enact review at an industry level is still "misguided" in my book.
cripes, can we give the McDonalds thing a rest? I'm truly sorry I brought it up. Delete it, please! It was NOT a "debate strategy". It was mild, admittedly slightly questionable, but recognizable lead-in to a much more important conversation. Man, sometimes, this site (myself included) has the ability, equivalent to my 18-month old, to focus on the bigger picture.
posted by littleLebowski at 01:03 PM on October 30
and when I say I'm surprised that someone has a different opinion ... I'm simply truly surprised about this one ... that's NOT me passing judgement on what anyone should believe or their level of intelligence
posted by littleLebowski at 12:31 PM on October 30
You're referencing the same McDonalds-related link I gave you credit for in my first post. I referenced the McDonalds case because right or wrong and irrespective of your personal opinion and conclusion of the facts presented in your article - the McDonalds case is often held up as the epitomy of frivolous lawsuits.
The topic of aluminum bat safety is absolutely NOT frivolous ... but a lawsuit (and judgement) against a single bat manufacturer are, at least in my opinion. From the information at hand, the batmaker did nothing illegal, outside of published standards and did not participate in any kind of cover-up regarding misdeeds, misinformation or the issues in play. I definitely don't question the validity and need for review of aluminum bats at every level of play. But, the quote by the mother "We just hoped we could get the truth out for more people to see." got my blood particularly boiling. Your boy is playing ball at the Legion level, so presumably for pushing 10 years and you're justifying a lawsuit against a single bat manufacturer by claiming that folks don't know that balls are hit hard sometimes? This just comes across as a horribly-enabled ploy of (at best) "well, somebody should pay for my boy bein' dead".
So, the family of someone who tragically dies when a ball hit from a wood bat hits their child has the right to sue because 1) a ball hit off of a wood bat is significantly more dangerous than a ball hit off a Nerf bat and 2) we actually didn't know that, so someone from the wood bat company should've been at the field passing out fliers or should've put a label on the bat.
I'm not minimizing the tragedy here or the need for review of safety standards, but a lawsuit is supposed to penalize someone of wrongdoing. I'm honestly shocked any regular member of this site sees the legitimacy of this lawsuit. But, we've all got our opinions.
posted by littleLebowski at 12:26 PM on October 30
I'm with you, rcade. I liked how they replayed the Howard short-hop about 15 times and the Utley-out-at-first once ... on their way to commercial. I thought he was safe, also - but it was an infinitely tighter call than Howard's scoop.
posted by littleLebowski at 12:02 PM on October 30
Awesome. This is way better than the McDonalds coffee lawsuit (that I think rcade shared some interesting insight into a couple weeks ago).
I find myself in a situation where, if I had known about this kid's tragic death, I would've had extreme sorrow for his family ... until they brought the suit against the bat company. Being a semi-recent first-time dad, I don't like spending even 1 second thinking about what life would be after losing a child, but this is vindictive, frivolous, misguided, evil profitization (ugh, totally blanking on the word I want to use "to unnecessarily take advantage of misfortune)
If they would've proven that the bat was outside of standards and the bat company was either knowledgeable or negligent about that, then I'd have a different opinion and would commend them on their legal victory. But, I'm currently deciding which/who is worse - the initiation of the lawsuit, the 8-12 numbskulls that awarded this, or a legal system that could allow such a joke to even make it to a courtroom (the latter is hard to hold blame but ... well, again, UGH)
(if I typed faster, I wouldn't have simply been repeating what lab said, oh well ... but I'll be damned if I'm deleting it now!)
posted by littleLebowski at 11:50 AM on October 30
This opens the door to a topic I consider interesting. If this belongs in the lockerroom (or not on the site at all), please forgive me.
But personally, I think that critique of a comment (or of the poster making the comment) should incorporate the member's overall body of work within SpoFi. Not that anyone needs the almighty littleLebowski's support, but I've said that in other threads about BoK, our estranged Crafty Sousepaw, and now THX (only because he's an obvious part of this thread). I consider THX a quality contributor to the site - with consistently effective humor while also being topical and blunt. Therefore, if THX says the same thing (that may be mildly lockerroomish but not blatantly over the line) as a newbie or a longtime rabble-rouser, then I think THX deserves some latitude, considering his overall quality contributions. In general, am I off-base in that member and their specific comments can/should be evaluated differently?
More on topic - I've chatted briefly with Mrs. Lebowski about this issue. She doesn't know Phillips from a hill o' beans but agrees that the "level of attractiveness" of the fling-ee is otherwise topical. There are much more serious aspects to this, but it's within reason to look at the psyche of this ... a seemingly decent-looking guy messing around with an ordinary-looking woman, while he already has (from all accounts I've heard) an very good-looking wife. Physical attraction likely played a part in bringing Steve and the missus together in the first place, so how did that same "emotion" play into the affair? Anyway, my sympathies go out to Phillips' wife and family - no sympathies at all to Steve or the fling-ee. I'm not going to call her names, but I think her looks are reasonably part of the discussion, and she absolutely doesn't strike me as a victim here. I think we're allowed to ask "what was he thinking?" without being considered neanderthals. On the flip-side, do all of us think less of our significant others if they making an otherwise innocent observation that someone else is attractive?
posted by littleLebowski at 03:04 PM on October 22
As for computerized balls and strikes, I want nothing to do with it. (EnglishSpin put it pretty much perfectly) Similarly, why not implant sensors into the hands of offensive linemen in football (USA) - if they clench their hands too tightly, then computer chips in the sensors can detect that the linemen must be holding their opponent. Then, lights embedded into the player's helmet send a beam of yellow light streaming into the sky from his head, the equivalent of a yellow flag being thrown at the player. Then, magnets inside the ball and under the turf yank the ball out of whatever player happens to be holding it, drag the ball to 10 yards back from the spot of the foul and the clock is automatically restarted.
Wait ... crap ... this is starting to sound kinda groovy ... Anyway, NO to this computerized stuff. There are things in nearly every sport that are just never going to be fail-safe, unless we go to ridiculous extremes, and I think balls-and-strikes and determining whether a player was absolutely, 100%, definitely tagged before his foot/hand touched the base are a couple instances that fall into that. We can improve the quality of the umpiring and try to strive for consistency in strike zones, but slight variances are part of the sport (and to preempt a typical counter-argument ... unlike racial segregation or safety measures, this "part of the sport" is something I'm convinced is fine as-is).
And ... I think the money involved took the romance out of baseball (and most sports at least in the US) a while back. Then, computerized or not, umpire mistakes or not, why are you watching the game or concerned about the topic?
posted by littleLebowski at 09:36 AM on October 20
Seriously, wtf?! I saw this a couple days ago and tried to ignore it, but what kind of jackass coach comes out and says he's "confident" with the situation. Even if he's 100% positive that he and the organization will be cleared of any wrongdoing, how can you dismiss this so flippantly? Davis (and Massaquoi) were about the only promising pieces (in terms of a future) of this team at this moment, something like this happens to the kid, and all you're worried about is that you don't think the NFL back office is going to be too pissed?! At what point, after how many years of misery, is OK for a fan to jump ship?
posted by littleLebowski at 12:23 PM on October 14
C'mon - back-to-back FPPs about the Browns? Enough with the Browns-bashing! They're a class organization, run by the most knowledgeable and uncontroversial staff. They make quality personnel decisions and draft picks year-in and year-out, and are always "this close" to a Super Bowl run.
/goes back to chugging the pain-go-bye-bye juice and daydreams of Brian Sipe and Sam Rutigliano.
posted by littleLebowski at 12:15 PM on October 14
Beautiful! Ask and ye shall receive (if I knew how to link to a specific post inside another thread, I would - ie, my post in yesterday's huddle).
I wish Edwards the best ... oh, who am I kidding - never liked 'im, never wanted 'im, and his one good season did nothing to change that. Ba-bye, knucklehead. I like what the Jets are doing, so good luck to them with regards to this, and he's obviously got skills, but I firmly believe Cleveland is a better team without him (of course, "better" is not hard to accomplish given their current state of affairs).
posted by littleLebowski at 09:58 AM on October 07
What does this have to do with Lebron anyway?
The key to the story, as in the article, is that the guy Braylon Edwards supposedly punched is a buddy of Lebron's. Lebron being in the story at all is the point of the post. His comments give the hint that there is more history between the two and makes this otherwise barely-a-news-story into something slightly bigger ... just surprised that one of the biggest stars on the planet goes out of his way to comment on someone from an entirely different sport who's star (whatever was there to begin with) is fading fast.
posted by littleLebowski at 12:47 PM on October 06
This is what happens when an Ohio football team drafts a college player from Michigan. As if the Browns don't have enough trouble in general and specifically with Braylon, his mouth, and his hands-of-stone. Friend of Lebron's or not, I wouldn't have expected such a harsh comment from him - makes me wonder if Edwards is an even bigger jackass than Browns fans even thought.
posted by littleLebowski at 12:18 PM on October 06
Aluminum Bat Maker Liable in Baseball Player's Death
What are the solutions to that problem, and how would the anti-lawsuit people achieve that solution?
Great question. Ideally, as I hinted at before, it's in the hands of the key parties involved :
BAT COMPANIES - collusion in this instance would be a good thing ... "look, ALL of our bats are dangerous, let's agree to scale them back" ... or even just have 1 bat company stand out and take this path - could be a gamble competitively, but could it possibly induce the public to "reward" that company with purchases and then other bat companies would be inclined to follow. But, there's obviously a marketplace competitiveness issue here.
LEAGUES - Creating stricter guidelines for what equipment can be used. But, if the league ends up being comparatively "dull" compared to a neighboring league, has the "moral" league just shot itself in the foot by losing members to other leagues?
(god forbid) GOVERNMENT - I agree that Congress can multitask and can take on more than just healthcare and wars. But, if a review of the BCS or steroids is justified, isn't this a worthy cause? Wouldn't a consistent set of guidelines at a higher level relieve the competitiveness concerns of companies and leagues?
But, that's an IDEAL state. Maybe a lawsuit ends up being the most direct route to a solution. But, I still think the target of the lawsuit is incorrect, here. And, maybe just the threat of a lawsuit could make one of the above "ideal" things get rolling?
bperk, I see your point about the potential for some lawsuits leading to us to be safer. And, I'm less surprised that there's disagreement on this issue than I was a few minutes ago (some interesting comments). But I think labels on bats or coffee cups have absolutely zero impact to the end result. Is a kind/parent buying a bat going to see the label on the first bat they pick up and say "Um, let's find a different bat." - then when they see the label on every bat thereafter - are they going to decide to play a different sport?
This still goes back to the fact that I believe a lawsuit should hold someone responsible for actual criminal wrongdoing. I think there's a fix to this without unfairly punishing a company that was following the rules (ie, go after the rulemakers).