Guillermo Mota came in the bottom of the sixth inning, stopped a Padres rally, and pitched 1.2 perfect innings.

Mota has served a 50 game suspension for steroids.

Not a word from the hypocrite Plaschke about Mota shaming the game.

Mota got his ERA down to 3.93 after yesterday's game. It was at 9.00 even on May 17th when he gave up 4 runs on a grand slam.

How is this ####### possible?

A player was bigger than the game. A drug issue elicited more responses than the score.

And Bill Plaschke didn't contribute to this? I mean, really, these guys who write column after column about Manny's drug violation and then write columns lambasting the uproar that surrounds Manny when he plays...why isn't the contradiction apparent?

How is this ####### possible?

Yeah, one run allowed in his last 18 appearances (totalling 21.2 innings pitched) will do that. Ten hits allowed, 3 walks, and 17 ks during that time. I'll take it.

Here’s guessing he won’t be so beloved next month if he’s batting .220 or battling hamstring injuries.

Breaking news: Fans tend to cheer players who are performing well, and they tend not to cheer players who are performing poorly. Thank God Plaschke is here to solve this enduring mystery.

And is Manny keeping his eye on the sparrow?

How is it that a person who writes for a living doesn't understand the concept of paragraphs?

Mota pitched against Eliezer Alfonzo!

Oh the humanity!

And in the yard where Clay Hensley pitched to Barry Bonds!

Mr. Moorad, tear down this park!

All you Dodgers fans who secretly coveted Barry Bonds?

Secretly coveted Bonds? There was nothing secret about it. Right after the suspension there were Dodger fans buying tickets to the July 3 game ready to go down south to San Diego to see Manny's return. People were publicly excited for the big date.

sigh.

Don't 'sigh", but instead reply?:

bill.plaschke@latimes.com

You might do more by emailing the sports editor:

randy.harvey@latimes.com

Bill Plaschke's middle name is Homer.

[13] He should title an article "Manny's Odyssey"

Manny's odd, is he?

You might do more by emailing the sports editor:

randy.harvey@latimes.com

Randy Harvey was just promoted. No, seriously.

Go ahead and email the editor. He loves feedback that Plaschke's antics bring eyeballs to his site.

Go ahead and email the editor. He loves feedback that Plaschke's antics bring eyeballs to his site.

To me, this ranks up there with the world's most annoying arguments.

Ok. Click on the link, email the editor, and otherwise bring glory to Plaschke.

Manny's odd, is he?

His jersey number is anyway. 99=2k+1 for some integer k (specifically, k=49).

Here’s guessing he won’t be so beloved next month if he’s batting .220 or battling hamstring injuries.

Second game back, first inning: Boom.

The eyeballs argument is annoying, yeah, but does anybody doubt its validity?

I mean, sports is soft news. As long as a sportswriter doesn't libel anyone, the only criterion a paper would judge them by is readership. Five admiring, careful readers are nice; but two ######## and eight reasonable people who read and are outraged/bored are exactly twice as good.

the only criterion a paper would judge them by is readership.

But this isn't true. It is, perhaps, the most important criterion, but it isn't absolute. Writers aren't monkeys trained only to stir up controversy. They are supposed to produce quality journalism, which engenders brand-loyalty and strengthens credibility. And they are supposed to get people talking positively about their work, not negatively. If all of the angry emails to Plaschke's editor also included the line, "I will never again read your paper," do you think he's going to be stoked that there is going to be a miniscule uptick in revenue from GoogleAds?

If all of the angry emails to Plaschke's editor also included the line, "I will never again read your paper," do you think he's going to be stoked that there is going to be a miniscule uptick in revenue from GoogleAds?

Quite possibly, because he will (a) assume that for every person who e-mailed, there is a much larger group of people who didn't bother to write but who will come back tomorrow to see what that jerk Plaschke is saying now, and (b) assume that most of the "I will never again read your paper" crowd are lying.

They are supposed to produce quality journalism, which engenders brand-loyalty and strengthens credibility. And they are supposed to get people talking positively about their work, not negatively.

This is probably true with respect to news coverage, but I think it is much less true in the case of columnists (particularly in the sports section). In general, I expect newspapers strongly prefer controversial columnists who get attention over columnists who get ignored.

Plaschke is getting tiresome. He needs to up the ante by moving into a tub and switching to a diet of onions.

Plaschke is getting tiresome. He needs to up the ante by moving into a tub and switching to a diet of onions.

If anyone looks like they are already on this regimen, it is Plaschke.

Huh, Plaschke is an interesting name. It has a 'ch' right in between an 's' and a 'k'.