Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Gattis, Freeman lead Braves past Twins 5-4 in 10th
(sports.yahoo.com)
The Braves have a problem: They can’t hold late inning leads because all their non-Kimbrel relievers keep getting hurt.
The Braves have a solution to their problem: More Evan Gattis pinch hit home runs.
Read More...Evan Gattis just keeps coming through for the Atlanta Braves.
The rookie hit a two-out, pinch-hit homer in the ninth to send the game to extra innings and Freddie Freeman won it in the 10th, sending the Braves to their fifth straight win, 5-4 over the slumping Minnesota Twins on Tuesday ...
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 3 pages
< 1 2 3 >Is this a serious comment? "I haven't seen it before, therefore it must be new." Because it's not a new logo. As I said before, they sold merchandise with this logo last year. This is only an issue because it is now on their batting practice hats.
Are you sure?
I pity the fool that doesn't like this logo.
Somehow, that look even worse. Probably the demonically reversed eye tones.
So if somebody white casually uses the word N*gg*r to refer to black people, other white people are not allowed to be offended?
If somebody rails against the Kikes running hollywood, gentiles need not mind it?
If somebody says the problem is that the damn spics refuse to learn English, anglos can take the day off?
If somebody tells racist jokes, we are obliged to put up with it, because we are not the ones being denigrated?
If you like. They're just words spoken by ignorant people, we all know it's not cool. If you want to chase down everyone who dares speak and un-PC word, go for it. I've got stuff to do, we've gotten past the point in this society where stuff like that actually makes any real difference. Whether or not we hold Michael Richards or that kid the Jays traded to the Mets or whomever's feet to the fire makes no real difference in anyone's life. It's just folks with too much time on their hands getting to feel self righteous.
Hilarious.
Likewise, and it struck me as odd. I can see a mascot being fierce, or stern, or concentrating like the Dickens, or looking tough and superior, but, laughing his head off? What was that about?
I agree. This has to be the most easily offended generation that ever walked the Earth.
The amount of thought I gave to Richards and the Jays kid was nil. The amount of thought I give to a national baseball franchise is, shockingly, not nil. Your comparison makes no sense.
BTW, the idea that people are "offended" oh lord, and fanning themselves is silly. It irritates me, and strikes me as stupid and making lives more difficult. The idea that trying to curtail that is worthy of animus because... well, I don't know the because. Because it forces you to think even remotely of others? Whatever.
We take a few seconds out of our day to say, "hey Noah Syndergaard, don't be a jackass", or "hey Washington Football Club, don't be jackasses". (The effect works more quickly on individuals than corporations.) People like Robert get far more worked up about these issues than anyone else.
Oddly enough, the 'Yo Is This Racist' podcast (summary: eh) was playing in the background as I saw this and the guest made a point that I think gets at Robert's/Ty's concern. Paraphrasing and tweaking: As soon as you signal yourself as someone who's thoughtful / willing to talk about / etc... these issues, you can then be pegged as someone who has to think about these things in a very specific way and be vigilant about it - which is odd, as it's not thoughtfulness that's the core problem, it's ignorance and/or a lack of basic human consideration.
I mean, just personally, if the worst direct side effect of people en masse recognizing the damages of tacit and overt institutional racism is that people get a little upset when they see a caricature of Native Americans whose name is a joke at the expense of how "weird" American Indian names are....well--that seems like the thing that's not particularly worth getting upset about. Not the quote/unquote attack on a vestige of the days when it was both okay to make jokes at the expense of others and also not hire others or let them date your daughter.
From sportscyclopedia.com:
Lone Star Dietz(half German, half Sioux) was a teammate of Jim Thorpe at Carlisle. Wikipaedia indicates that the name Redskins was chosen by George Preston Marshall to magnify the PR of the hire of Dietz, thought of as a star coach.
The Redksins won a law suit against them claiming that their trademarked name was an offensive word. I think they should keep the respectful logo and change their name to the Potomacs or some similar local Native American term.
Really? I would guess that in past generations actual violence and wars were started by verbal offenses and perceived slights between groups. And even now in other countries, wasn't there recently actual violence because of that movie making fun of Mohammed?
But you think a few people trying peacefully to get a logo changed is the most easily offended group of all time? Get a grip
Count me as a vote in favor. I might even watch a football game if the Rednecks were playing.
I think you know that nobody is saying that. I believe that it is just a question of a) what kind of characterizations are being made (e.g. nobody really knows what this Indian is supposed to depict) and b) what you think of your own place in society (e.g. whether you feel like it is your responsibility to be vigilant on behalf of/along side of those who may be being discriminated against).
Oh, and as for the Braves' batting practice cap, how about using the Indian head profile worn on the sleeve during their final few years in Boston and first few years in Milwaukee? Far less offensive.
They last played in Milwaukee in 1988 at County Stadium.
The Redskins have played the Packers in Milwaukee a handful of times over the years, some at State Fair Park.
Teaching people how to behave presumes that the "teacher" knows how to behave and has some higher morality. It has not been my experience that people who criticize non-politically correct speech are any less bigoted or know how to behave any better than people who either do not criticize such speech or even those who engage in such speech. All these "teachers" are doing is "teaching" other people to be more like themselves.....and that's usually not any better.
If by higher morality you mean don't be disrespectful of other people, take their feelings into account, don't be a jackass regarding racial stereotypes and such then yeah in this instance the teacher does have moral high ground over the "Washington Football Team" and others.
The first game in "modern" (division era) NFL history was the Boston Redskins at Green Bay in 1933, which was also the first game in Redskins history. And as you correctly say, they also played in Milwaukee several times over the years.
Can you provide an example? (not a gotcha -- I'm genuinely curious)
No, it just means that you have to recognize when somebody is doing something wrong. It doesn't take any 'higher morality' to do that (fortunately).
The use of "non politically-correct" here is a dead giveaway because it's never applied to socially-disapproved-of language that conservatives don't like.
What the hell does this even mean? Say, "chink"? If I criticize or try and correct my teenage niece if I hear this, I'm some kind of... what?
Scout's Alley has been renamed Trail of Tears. (They're greasy tears.)
Like former Washington NFL Team coach Earl "Greasy" Neale? See how I brought that full circle?
Too bad that Neale coached Washington & Jefferson college and the Philadelphia Eagles, but not the Washington Redskins. But it's close enough for BTF horseshoes.
Maybe "whiny" is a better word for it. No harm in being offended about, you know, really important stuff. For people to contend this hat is prima facie an act of horrible racism on the part of the Atlanta Braves organization is rather ridiculous.
I don't think this generation is the most easily offended because of the Braves cap, so you can go grip yourself. It's a much broader statement I'm making, obviously. But this isn't a bad example of people getting their panties in a wad over something relatively trivial - even if it were offensive, which is certainly debatable.
As a spokesperson for the AGPA (American Gray People Association) I demand an immediate apology. Your blatant racism and anti-gray comments have no place in a civilized society. You are history's greatest monster. There are many other posters here who also need to make public apologies and go through a mandatory six month sensitivity training course for their vicious and disempowering comments, particularly Sam and his insensitive although funny Smallpox Blanket Giveaway comment.
You just erroneously told an Eagles fan that Greasy Neale coached a rival team. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I'm excited to see the "How Fast Can You Pitch" boot under the grandstands turned into the new "Scalpin' Station." That should be fun for all the kids.
A friend of my gf's did that. He neglected to tell them he had recently been drafted. He threw 93.
Thank you....I was wondering when our voice would be heard!
Not sure how we're measuring, and it's restricting it to a class, but 17th century French nobility seemed pretty easily offended judging by how many duels they fought.
OK I'll put this even more bluntly so you can understand. If I do not respect your opinion on what is or is not "disrespectful of other people" or being a "jackass regarding racial stereotypes", then you look like a dense hypocrite to me when you pretend that you actually know anything about that topic, and I do not care to be "taught" anything by you, and I also find it irritating when you try to "teach" in a public forum. Basically, unless you have some track record of fighting for an unpopular cause in the realm of "respecting other people", you have no credibility to teach anyone anything on this topic. Anything you say is just some guy on the street voicing an opinion which should be ignored as a default response.
It means that you presume to know what is right or wrong, and that other people should care about your opinion. Nobody who doesn't already respect you has any reason to care about your opinion on this matter.
I have no idea what this refers to, but what I meant by "non-politically correct" is words and images that were not disapproved of at one time and then subsequently became disapproved of. The meaning of the words and images has not changed, rather only how popular it makes the purveyor of the words and images has changed. I have no idea what you mean by "conservatives", and at this point, don't particularly care.
So you are saying there is no such thing as right or wrong, it's all just opinion and relative?
And yet you seem to care about people's opinions here quite a lot.
The meaning of words and images changes all the time. Look at the swastika. But in fact what has changed in a lot of these disputes is not the meaning of words and images (there was no time in the past when 'redskins' was not an offensive term), but the social and political power of those whom the words and images were directed against. In the past, insulting other groups was so de rigeur people often did it without thinking about it, now we are much more aware of the effects on other people, and respectful of their feelings on the matter.
I guess I get what the "this is a horrible racist name" people are saying, but I have yet to meet an American Indian who actually cares.
To busy making a spicy curry, I suppose.
Page 2 of 3 pages
< 1 2 3 >You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.