🚀 go-pugleaf

CynicallyStill-A-CubFan wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> More questions..
>
> *** Asterisk's will abound.  Let us say Sammy and McGwire are tied at 66 or
> 67 HR's, and then Sammy hits a HR in the playoff game which counts for the
> regular season?
>
> Will there be two asterisk's next to his name since McGwire had one removed
> from Davidson famous umpire call in Milwaukee and then Sammy got an extra
> game??

Maybe you're forgetting Mac would already have had 163 opportunities
to play this season....they played a rained-out tie game, in which the
stats count.

No "*" for Davidson's call.  It's no different than an ejection, a bad
call at first, a called-third on an outside pitch, etc.  It's an ump's
judgment, and his call.  They might talk about it, but there'll be no
asterisk.

There's no asterisk next to Milt Pappas' "near perfect" game that
"could have been perfect" on that last borderline 3-2 pitch in '72.

That's baseball.

Eric J.

I dont care how it goes down I just want to see a one game playoff. Those
games kick ass!
>What do all of you think?
>
>More questions..
>
>*** Asterisk's will abound.  Let us say Sammy and McGwire are tied at 66 or
>67 HR's, and then Sammy hits a HR in the playoff game which counts for the
>regular season?
It is a regular season game. I believe Mac hit a homer in a game that was
postponed then cancelled but the homer counted. Correct me if I am wrong.
>
>Will there be two asterisk's next to his name since McGwire had one removed
>from Davidson famous umpire call in Milwaukee and then Sammy got an extra
>game??
>
>Questions abound.......
>
>Please let us all discuss among us!!
>
>

Go Mets...
If all else fails Go Giants

For the record, baseball will never, ever consider tainting their media
bonanza with an asterisk.  The original aterisk (actually a double listing
of the HR record, one for 154 game season one for 162) was the product of
the commisioner being a huge Ruth fan as well as a friend of the Babe's.
Where was the asterisk for steals in a season?  Or XBase hits?

Anyway, why would baseball asterisk this?  They have no reason to, it would
hurt their huge national exposure.

Eric J <jent@kdsi.net> wrote in article <360B08A4.5600@kdsi.net>...
> CynicallyStill-A-CubFan wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > More questions..
> >
> > *** Asterisk's will abound.  Let us say Sammy and McGwire are tied at
66 or
> > 67 HR's, and then Sammy hits a HR in the playoff game which counts for
the
> > regular season?
> >
> > Will there be two asterisk's next to his name since McGwire had one
removed
> > from Davidson famous umpire call in Milwaukee and then Sammy got an
extra
> > game??
>
> Maybe you're forgetting Mac would already have had 163 opportunities
> to play this season....they played a rained-out tie game, in which the
> stats count.
>
> No "*" for Davidson's call.  It's no different than an ejection, a bad
> call at first, a called-third on an outside pitch, etc.  It's an ump's
> judgment, and his call.  They might talk about it, but there'll be no
> asterisk.
>
> There's no asterisk next to Milt Pappas' "near perfect" game that
> "could have been perfect" on that last borderline 3-2 pitch in '72.
>
> That's baseball.
>
> Eric J.
>

Dave41 wrote:
>
> <snip> I believe Mac hit a homer in a game that was postponed then
> cancelled but the homer counted. Correct me if I am wrong.

I don't think he played in that game.  But the point was, that gave
him 163 "opportunities" to play.  It wasn't cancelled, either, it was
rescheduled.  I really never read too much importance into that (163
vs. 162), all teams are playing a different number of extra-inning
contests anyway.

Eric J.

Eric J wrote:
> There's no asterisk next to Milt Pappas' "near perfect" game that
> "could have been perfect" on that last borderline 3-2 pitch in '72.
>
> Eric J.

Yup. Perfect game goin', 2 outs in the ninth.

No matter how many years I watch ball, I'll still never get over Larry
Stahl of the Padres just taking those four "balls" ... and the umpire
for not calling them strikes!
Sigh.

STEVE

In article <01bde9e4$9aa594c0$1980adcf@julie-s-compute>, "Julie Nichols"
<jnichols@calweb.com> wrote:

> I beg to differ.  Why?  Three words:  Bud Selig, Commissioner.

Good call.  Two more words:  fox, henhouse.  :)

> D'oh!

Better call.

> - Julie
> (Who figures that baseball will still find a way to shoot itself in the
> foot, despite everything that's happened this year.)

Maybe we should start an office pool to guess what baseball will do to
reverse the "renaissance" it has enjoyed this year.

--
Tim Irvin, ziggy29@netgate.net  ::::: http://u1.netgate.net/~ziggy29

"Trouble no one about their religion; respect others in their view, and
demand that they respect yours...Abuse no one and nothing, for abuse
turns the wise ones to fools and robs the spirit of its vision."
                -- Tecumseh (1768-1813), Shawnee chief and statesman

Tim Irvin wrote in message ...
>In article <01bde9e4$9aa594c0$1980adcf@julie-s-compute>, "Julie Nichols"
><jnichols@calweb.com> wrote:
>
>> I beg to differ.  Why?  Three words:  Bud Selig, Commissioner.
>
>Good call.  Two more words:  fox, henhouse.  :)
>
>> D'oh!
>
>Better call.
>
>> - Julie
>> (Who figures that baseball will still find a way to shoot itself in the
>> foot, despite everything that's happened this year.)
>
>Maybe we should start an office pool to guess what baseball will do to
>reverse the "renaissance" it has enjoyed this year.
>
>--


Designated hitter, National League.

Dann

Kyle <nhlman@hotmail.SPAMICIDE.com> wrote in article
<6uh1r9$75i$0@208.134.200.42>...
> For the record, baseball will never, ever consider tainting their media
> bonanza with an asterisk.
<snip>
> Anyway, why would baseball asterisk this?  They have no reason to, it
would
> hurt their huge national exposure.

I beg to differ.  Why?  Three words:  Bud Selig, Commissioner.

D'oh!

- Julie
(Who figures that baseball will still find a way to shoot itself in the
foot, despite everything that's happened this year.)