On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 09:54:03 -0500, "Deborah Terreson"
 wrote:

>In article  , Grizzlie 
>Antagonist   wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 00:26:50 -0500, "Deborah Terreson"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>>I mentioned that Canseco is going to go testify to a house
committee and Bob
>>>just came in and says he has an idea... That every time Barry
Bonds goes up
>>>to bat, the pitchers should walk him until he comes clean!!
>>
>>
>> Well, tell Bob that Bonds would hardly notice the difference.  And
>> then ask him, suppose Bonds "came clean".  Would the pitchers then
>> agree to STOP walking him?
>>
>> On the other hand, what if Bonds came up in the bottom of the ninth
>> inning with the score tied and the bases loaded?
>>
>> Walking him intentionally under those circumstances would probably be
>> carrying the principle of forcing him to "come clean"
just a little
>> too far - wouldn't it?
>
>*LOL* (your reply actually got him out of bed!! Good one, G.A, you can get
>him to rise, while I cannot.. )


Ha, ha.  What a choice of word.

I certainly hope that I can't get Bob to rise.  I wouldn't want to be
near him under those circumstances.

If you can't get him to rise, maybe the two of you should seek
counseling.  I'd certainly never gathered in anything you'd written
before this that you had the slightest difficulty in getting Bob to
rise - heh heh heh.

I'm just kidding, of course.  But what a choice of word!


> Bob says well DuH! They'd of course use
>common sense in a game!!


Ah, but he didn't say so.  Or at least, that wasn't what you
communicated to me.

The original suggestion was that the pitchers walk Bonds "every time"
until he "comes clean".

Common sense wasn't included in the original suggestion.


>>>I think he's
>>>getting disgusted, he just huffed out that he's seen Brooks
Robinson, Pete
>>>Rose and Hank Aaron and he doesn't need this shit!!
>>
>>
>> I can't find that story, but he is always getting disgusted.
>> Personally, I think that he should give the press his middle finger.
>> He never cared before what they wrote about him.  He never cared
>> whether the fans booed or cheered.  Why should he give a shit now?
>
>Well, he doesn't particularly seem to give a shit about his team either.
>(Deb aside: I did not know this - is he really not a team player?)


I don't think it's true.  It's largely an individual game anyway - a
series of individual performances, though obviously there's SOME
teamwork involved, as anyone who has watched a perfectly executed
double-play knows.  

But the players obviously don't work together in the same way that
football and basketball teams work together.

At least, his teammates seem to readily come to his defense every time
he stirs up controversy.

Some people say that he's not a team player because he doesn't hustle.
But he explains that he is conserving his energies; at his age and in
his physical condition, he would burn out much more quickly if he
played the game like Pete Rose (Charlie Hustle) played it.



>> Actually, as long as the investigation of BALCO is still in the hands
>> of a grand jury, his attorney is undoubtedly telling him not to talk
>> publicly about it, and he should probably be following his attorney's
>> advice.
>
>Okay.
>>
>>
>>>Babe Ruth did it on bourbon and hot dogs.
>>
>>
>> As did Mickey Mantle.
>>
>> Paul Waner - "Big Poison" to his peers (his little
brother Lloyd was
>> "Little Poison") - was another Hall of Famer who enjoyed
looking at
>> the wine when it was red - though he was more of a singles-and-doubles
>> hitter than a home run hitter.
>>
>> But most of his 3152 hits (3000 is pretty much of an automatic Hall of
>> Fame qualifier) were achieved with a warm happy glow inside of him.
>
>Along with Doc Ellis throwing a perfect game on acid!! (When did this
>happen??)


In the 1970's, I think.

It wasn't a perfect game either; it was a no-hitter, which means that
SOMEONE reached base, just not on a base hit.  A perfect game means
that no one reaches base in any manner whatsoever.

It's still a remarkable story.  I think that Ellis has said that he
remembers nothing about that game.


>> The worst season of his big league career was apparently the one that
>> he spent on the wagon.  He explained his success as a hitter thusly:
>> I used to see three baseballs, and I hit the middle one.
>
>*LOL!* Let's go back to the beer and whiskey league! Get a sip when you get
>to third!!


Some of us would remain teetotalers then, if that was what was
necessary to get a sip :).



>> I recently saw an old movie, "Witness for the
Prosecution", in which
>> Charles Laughton played a brilliant English barrister defending a
>> client charged with murder.
>>
>> His character frequently sipped brandy stored in his cane while in
>> court, and the more drunk he got, the better his command of the law
>> and of the facts of his case and the more brilliant and witty his
>> legal arguments became.
>>
>> I wish that I knew where to find brandy like that.
>
>I suppose you could read alot of Oscar Wilde and drink?
>
>Deb.


Or more likely, recast myself as a fictitious character.

Only on the silver screen does one find witty debonair drunkards.

------------------------------------
grizzlieantagonist{at}yahoo.com

"Ladies and gentlemen - let's have a round of applause for tonight's
player of the game - FRAN-CIS-CO SAN-N-N-N-TOS!
    - Brian Anthony (P.A. announcer at Grizzlie Stadium), June 11, 2004


"Populus me sibilat, at mihi plaudo."(The people
hiss at me, but I am well satisfied with myself).

    - Horace, the Roman poet


Logical positivism, dominant in American and
British universities, is suicidally bent upon
establishing the impossibility of knowing any-
thing.  (As Wyndham Lewis suggested in "Self
Condemned", the neo-positivist pedant reduces
himself to a mosquito, able to wound, nearly
invulnerable to counter-assault - but only an
insect, not a man).

     - Russell Kirk, Enemies of the Permanent
       Things


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/5/05 12:57:05 AM ---