The Red Sox "red sock" conspiracy

VespaGuy · 26th April 2007, 10:24 AM

For those of you unfamiliar with the "Bloody sock" story...

In 2004 the Boston Red Sox finally won the World Series. Although there were many subplots to the season, one of the most popular images was that of Curt Schilling on the mound in Game 2, only days after having ankle surgery. At several points in the game, the cameras zoomed in to show the blood soaking through his sock as the stiches twisted and pulled with every pitch. It was a great subplot to the series, painting Shilling as a warrior who fought through the pain to help his team acheive something that had escaped them for decades.

During last night's game (Sox/Orioles), Gary Thorne, a play-by-play announcer, decided to put forth the rumor that the "bloody sock" was, in fact, faked.

http://www.aolsportsblog.com/2007/04...ck-was-a-hoax/

pgwenthold · 26th April 2007, 10:33 AM

ESPN radio were constantly going on about this this morning.

Unfortunately, they couldn't grasp the fact that most people (including most baseball fans) JUST DON'T CARE! Someone even sent them an email that said, WE DON'T CARE! Their response? Are you kidding? No, not kidding.

Apparently this is a big issue in Boston. For a Twins fan in the midwest? No.

VespaGuy · 26th April 2007, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by pgwenthold

ESPN radio were constantly going on about this this morning.

Unfortunately, they couldn't grasp the fact that most people (including most baseball fans) JUST DON'T CARE! Someone even sent them an email that said, WE DON'T CARE! Their response? Are you kidding? No, not kidding.

Apparently this is a big issue in Boston. For a Twins fan in the midwest? No.

Well, I'm a New Englander (and a Sox/Pats fan), so obviously it grabbed my attention when I heard it. Is it a big deal around here? Not really. Local sports radio has been talking about it a bit, but mostly in a "what the hell?" kind of way. It's such a bizare claim to make. It's just plain silly. But I thought it fit in with the whole ridiculousness of other conspiracy theories, so I figured I'd post it here.

What I'm still trying to figure out is why someone would think that someone would actually hoax this? What possible reasoning would there be to fake a bloodstain?

Brainster · 26th April 2007, 10:59 AM

It was certainly one of the more memorable moments in recent baseball history, so I can't imagine a true baseball fan saying, "Who cares?" However, reading the transcript, it seems more likely that Thorn has something against Schilling personally.

BTW, the source for the story is this blog. I noticed he had a link on the side to "my 9-11 Blog"; he's an infrequent poster at 9-11 Blogger. I'd guess he's also "Red Sock" at DU.

So maybe this is a "false-sock" attack?

Stellafane · 26th April 2007, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by VespaGuy

For those of you unfamiliar with the "Bloody sock" story...

In 2004 the Boston Red Sox finally won the World Series. Although there were many subplots to the season, one of the most popular images was that of Curt Schilling on the mound in Game 2, only days after having ankle surgery. At several points in the game, the cameras zoomed in to show the blood soaking through his sock as the stiches twisted and pulled with every pitch. It was a great subplot to the series, painting Shilling as a warrior who fought through the pain to help his team acheive something that had escaped them for decades.

During last night's game (Sox/Orioles), Gary Thorne, a play-by-play announcer, decided to put forth the rumor that the "bloody sock" was, in fact, faked.

http://www.aolsportsblog.com/2007/04...ck-was-a-hoax/

Lifelong Red Sox fan here. Although Schilling did indeed pitch in Game 2 of the 2004 WS, the real Bloody Sox game was #6 in the ALCS series against the NY Yankees, the one where the Yanks famously endured The Biggest Choke of All Time, unprecedently blowing a seemingly insurmountable 3-0 series lead before humiliatingly losing in seven games.

Sorry, gotta give me a moment here -- the memory is still wonderful...

Where was I? Oh yeah, the Bloody Sock. In Game 6, Schilling was scheduled to pitch in Yankee Stadium. But no one thought he could do it, thanks to a damaged Achilles' tendon. But Boston doctors pulled off a novel new procedure (performed only once, on a cadaver) that used staples to hold Schilling's tendon in place. During the game, the blood stain on his sock became obvious, and the cameras kept zeroing in on it. Whether or not it was real blood or just a prop is anyone's guess. (I personally think it was real, but wouldn't put it past Schilling to put a red smudge there as a psych-op.) In any case, the Yanks couldn't touch Schilling that night. And in game 7 they were so spooked after blowing the 3-0 lead that they got demolished, losing badly to a no-name pitcher throwing on 2 days' rest.

So the real Bloody Sock game was in the ALCS, not the Series. I can't recall whether there was blood on Schilling's sock in the WS, but if so it probably didn't make much difference. (The Sox easily swept the Cards in four straight.) And even if Schlling faked the sock in the WS, it doesn't mean that the stain in the ALCS wasn't real.

Trust me, people from Boston don't care about this. NY fans, however, seem to be all over it, as if proving it was fake would detract from the Sox accomplishment somehow. Doesn't add up to much compared to a real controversy like steroids, though.

ryanebelhar · 26th April 2007, 11:35 AM

the ALCS that year was incredible. So was the 2003. Hell so was the NLCS in 2003. Great baseball.

VespaGuy · 26th April 2007, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by Stellafane

Lifelong Red Sox fan here. Although Schilling did indeed pitch in Game 2 of the 2004 WS, the real Bloody Sox game was #6 in the ALCS series against the NY Yankees, the one where the Yanks famously endured The Biggest Choke of All Time, unprecedently blowing a seemingly insurmountable 3-0 series lead before humiliatingly losing in seven games.

Sorry, gotta give me a moment here -- the memory is still wonderful...

Where was I? Oh yeah, the Bloody Sock. In Game 6, Schilling was scheduled to pitch in Yankee Stadium. But no one thought he could do it, thanks to a damaged Achilles' tendon. But Boston doctors pulled off a novel new procedure (performed only once, on a cadaver) that used staples to hold Schilling's tendon in place. During the game, the blood stain on his sock became obvious, and the cameras kept zeroing in on it. Whether or not it was real blood or just a prop is anyone's guess. (I personally think it was real, but wouldn't put it past Schilling to put a red smudge there as a psych-op.) In any case, the Yanks couldn't touch Schilling that night. And in game 7 they were so spooked after blowing the 3-0 lead that they got demolished, losing badly to a no-name pitcher throwing on 2 days' rest.

So the real Bloody Sock game was in the ALCS, not the Series. I can't recall whether there was blood on Schilling's sock in the WS, but if so it probably didn't make much difference. (The Sox easily swept the Cards in four straight.) And even if Schlling faked the sock in the WS, it doesn't mean that the stain in the ALCS wasn't real.

Trust me, people from Boston don't care about this. NY fans, however, seem to be all over it, as if proving it was fake would detract from the Sox accomplishment somehow. Doesn't add up to much compared to a real controversy like steroids, though.

You are absolutely correct about the "bloody sock" game. It was the ALCS, not the WS. (I'm going to go hang my head in shame now).

And you are also correct that Boston fans couldn't care less about the current sock 'conspiracy'. The sock itself is a reminder of the Red Sox World Series win, and their unbelievable sweep of the Yankees. It's so much a part of that banner year, that the following years, at New England Patriots games, they'd actually show a close-up picture of the bloody sock on the big screen to get the crowd to make noise (it worked real well).

Brainster · 26th April 2007, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by Stellafane

So the real Bloody Sock game was in the ALCS, not the Series. I can't recall whether there was blood on Schilling's sock in the WS, but if so it probably didn't make much difference. (The Sox easily swept the Cards in four straight.) And even if Schlling faked the sock in the WS, it doesn't mean that the stain in the ALCS wasn't real.

There was blood on his sock in WS Game 2; the sock was part of an exhibit at the Hall of Fame.

Minadin · 26th April 2007, 12:04 PM

Couple of things:

According to this ESPN article, the sock in question is the sock from game 6 of the ALCS. The sock sent to Cooperstown was the sock from Game 2 of the WS. But, the Hall of Fame website says it's the sock from Game 6. If he wore it in game 2 of the WS, and didn't wash it, that's disgusting.

On a side note, I had tickets to Game 5 of that particular series against the Cardinals.

njslim · 26th April 2007, 01:40 PM

They was also a total lunar eclipse during the series - figure this had
something to do with breaking the Boston losing spell (since 1918)....

MG1962 · 26th April 2007, 02:02 PM

Quote:

So maybe this is a "false-sock" attack?

You are such a heel

Unsecured Coins · 26th April 2007, 06:20 PM

This one got nipped in the bud already

Basically Gary Thorne accused a Red Sox player of being a disinfo shill.
"It was painted," Thorne said. "Doug Mirabelli confessed up to it after. It was all for PR." Thorne backed off Thursday after talking to Mirabelli before the Red Sox played the Orioles. Thorne said Mirabelli had been joking.

What made him change his story so fast??

gumboot · 26th April 2007, 06:52 PM

What's really silly here is the whole sock story is only well known BECAUSE THEY WON.

Had they not won, I doubt it would even be a big issue.

And can you really seriously suggest a bloody sock had anything to do with the win?

-Gumboot

Unsecured Coins · 26th April 2007, 07:02 PM

you can if you are a practictioner of Voodoo.

Mr.D · 27th April 2007, 12:42 AM

Originally Posted by Unsecured Coins

What made him change his story so fast??

<lyte_trip>
They got to him obviously.
</lyte_trip>

Unsecured Coins · 27th April 2007, 05:30 AM

Originally Posted by Mr.D

<lyte_trip>
They got to him obviously.
</lyte_trip>

You're not talking about the Umpire's Union, are you?

Juustin · 27th April 2007, 07:14 AM

I'm withholding judgement on this matter until I see Rosie's official stance in her blog.

Brainster · 27th April 2007, 09:41 AM

Time to suggest that the really suspicious thing is the other sock?

Stellafane · 27th April 2007, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Time to suggest that the really suspicious thing is the other sock?

I thought suspicious socks were banned here??

NotJesus · 27th April 2007, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by gumboot

What's really silly here is the whole sock story is only well known BECAUSE THEY WON.

Had they not won, I doubt it would even be a big issue.

And can you really seriously suggest a bloody sock had anything to do with the win?

You're not grasping the significance of the bloody sock. It's not that the sock really had anything to do with winning. I doubt that many believe it had any significant psychological effect. It's all about painting Curt Schilling as a near-mythic, larger-than-life hero who had the almost superhuman will to pitch very well even though his ankle hurt.

The reason this is a story at all is that many people (mostly outside of Boston) believe that Schilling, while a very fine pitcher, is also a big-mouthed, self-aggrandizing fathead who might not be above a stunt like putting ketchup on his sock.

Not that I think anything like that, of course.

Stellafane · 27th April 2007, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by NotJesus

...The reason this is a story at all is that many people (mostly outside of Boston) believe that Schilling, while a very fine pitcher, is also a big-mouthed, self-aggrandizing fathead who might not be above a stunt like putting ketchup on his sock...

And a lot of them seem to be NY Yankee fans, who seem to have no problems rooting for such "class" acts as Giambi, Sheffield, and Boone. The "stunts' those guys pull are a lot more serious that a fake bloody sock.

NotJesus · 27th April 2007, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by Stellafane

And a lot of them seem to be NY Yankee fans, who seem to have no problems rooting for such "class" acts as Giambi, Sheffield, and Boone. The "stunts' those guys pull are a lot more serious that a fake bloody sock.

Thanks for the off-topic rant.

Stellafane · 27th April 2007, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by NotJesus

Thanks for the off-topic rant.

Not a problem -- happy to oblige.

Mr.D · 27th April 2007, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by Unsecured Coins

Originally Posted by Mr.D

Originally Posted by Unsecured Coins

What made him change his story so fast??

<lyte_trip>
They got to him obviously.
</lyte_trip>

You're not talking about the Umpire's Union, are you?

<lyte_trip>
I don't know who's behind it, that's why I'm calling for an investigation.

Besides, the really suspicious thing is that none of your witnesses specifically place the sock on the south-south-west side of the Shell Station.
</lyte_trip>

Checkmite · 27th April 2007, 05:43 PM

OK, I'm still all confused here. Let's approach this from a different angle.

What would the implications and/or consequences be if the sock turned out to not have blood on it?

Stellafane · 27th April 2007, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by Joshua Korosi

OK, I'm still all confused here. Let's approach this from a different angle.

What would the implications and/or consequences be if the sock turned out to not have blood on it?

In some people's minds, it might detract somewhat from the "heroic" nature of Schilling's accomplishment (as if putting your whole career on the line and pitching with your Achilles' tendon stapled in place was some trivial thing, unless blood got shed in the bargain). But overall, it wouldn't change much. And of course, outside baseball it's completely irrelevant.

26th April 2007, 10:24 AM	#1
VespaGuy Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,035	The Red Sox "red sock" conspiracy For those of you unfamiliar with the "Bloody sock" story... In 2004 the Boston Red Sox finally won the World Series. Although there were many subplots to the season, one of the most popular images was that of Curt Schilling on the mound in Game 2, only days after having ankle surgery. At several points in the game, the cameras zoomed in to show the blood soaking through his sock as the stiches twisted and pulled with every pitch. It was a great subplot to the series, painting Shilling as a warrior who fought through the pain to help his team acheive something that had escaped them for decades. During last night's game (Sox/Orioles), Gary Thorne, a play-by-play announcer, decided to put forth the rumor that the "bloody sock" was, in fact, faked. http://www.aolsportsblog.com/2007/04...ck-was-a-hoax/
	__________________ "You are claiming it wasn't one. That is a positive claim." - Russell Pickering

26th April 2007, 10:33 AM	#2
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 12,066	ESPN radio were constantly going on about this this morning. Unfortunately, they couldn't grasp the fact that most people (including most baseball fans) JUST DON'T CARE! Someone even sent them an email that said, WE DON'T CARE! Their response? Are you kidding? No, not kidding. Apparently this is a big issue in Boston. For a Twins fan in the midwest? No.
	__________________ "Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay." (Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)

26th April 2007, 10:44 AM	#3
VespaGuy Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,035	Originally Posted by pgwenthold ESPN radio were constantly going on about this this morning. Unfortunately, they couldn't grasp the fact that most people (including most baseball fans) JUST DON'T CARE! Someone even sent them an email that said, WE DON'T CARE! Their response? Are you kidding? No, not kidding. Apparently this is a big issue in Boston. For a Twins fan in the midwest? No. Well, I'm a New Englander (and a Sox/Pats fan), so obviously it grabbed my attention when I heard it. Is it a big deal around here? Not really. Local sports radio has been talking about it a bit, but mostly in a "what the hell?" kind of way. It's such a bizare claim to make. It's just plain silly. But I thought it fit in with the whole ridiculousness of other conspiracy theories, so I figured I'd post it here. What I'm still trying to figure out is why someone would think that someone would actually hoax this? What possible reasoning would there be to fake a bloodstain?
	__________________ "You are claiming it wasn't one. That is a positive claim." - Russell Pickering

26th April 2007, 10:59 AM	#4
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,408	It was certainly one of the more memorable moments in recent baseball history, so I can't imagine a true baseball fan saying, "Who cares?" However, reading the transcript, it seems more likely that Thorn has something against Schilling personally. BTW, the source for the story is this blog. I noticed he had a link on the side to "my 9-11 Blog"; he's an infrequent poster at 9-11 Blogger. I'd guess he's also "Red Sock" at DU. So maybe this is a "false-sock" attack?
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

26th April 2007, 11:00 AM	#5
Stellafane Village Idiot. Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Green Mountains Posts: 6,265	Originally Posted by VespaGuy For those of you unfamiliar with the "Bloody sock" story... In 2004 the Boston Red Sox finally won the World Series. Although there were many subplots to the season, one of the most popular images was that of Curt Schilling on the mound in Game 2, only days after having ankle surgery. At several points in the game, the cameras zoomed in to show the blood soaking through his sock as the stiches twisted and pulled with every pitch. It was a great subplot to the series, painting Shilling as a warrior who fought through the pain to help his team acheive something that had escaped them for decades. During last night's game (Sox/Orioles), Gary Thorne, a play-by-play announcer, decided to put forth the rumor that the "bloody sock" was, in fact, faked. http://www.aolsportsblog.com/2007/04...ck-was-a-hoax/ Lifelong Red Sox fan here. Although Schilling did indeed pitch in Game 2 of the 2004 WS, the real Bloody Sox game was #6 in the ALCS series against the NY Yankees, the one where the Yanks famously endured The Biggest Choke of All Time, unprecedently blowing a seemingly insurmountable 3-0 series lead before humiliatingly losing in seven games. Sorry, gotta give me a moment here -- the memory is still wonderful... Where was I? Oh yeah, the Bloody Sock. In Game 6, Schilling was scheduled to pitch in Yankee Stadium. But no one thought he could do it, thanks to a damaged Achilles' tendon. But Boston doctors pulled off a novel new procedure (performed only once, on a cadaver) that used staples to hold Schilling's tendon in place. During the game, the blood stain on his sock became obvious, and the cameras kept zeroing in on it. Whether or not it was real blood or just a prop is anyone's guess. (I personally think it was real, but wouldn't put it past Schilling to put a red smudge there as a psych-op.) In any case, the Yanks couldn't touch Schilling that night. And in game 7 they were so spooked after blowing the 3-0 lead that they got demolished, losing badly to a no-name pitcher throwing on 2 days' rest. So the real Bloody Sock game was in the ALCS, not the Series. I can't recall whether there was blood on Schilling's sock in the WS, but if so it probably didn't make much difference. (The Sox easily swept the Cards in four straight.) And even if Schlling faked the sock in the WS, it doesn't mean that the stain in the ALCS wasn't real. Trust me, people from Boston don't care about this. NY fans, however, seem to be all over it, as if proving it was fake would detract from the Sox accomplishment somehow. Doesn't add up to much compared to a real controversy like steroids, though.
	__________________ Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com Last edited by Stellafane; 26th April 2007 at 11:05 AM.

26th April 2007, 11:35 AM	#6
ryanebelhar Thinker Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Lexington, KY Posts: 194	the ALCS that year was incredible. So was the 2003. Hell so was the NLCS in 2003. Great baseball.

26th April 2007, 11:44 AM	#7
VespaGuy Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,035	Originally Posted by Stellafane Lifelong Red Sox fan here. Although Schilling did indeed pitch in Game 2 of the 2004 WS, the real Bloody Sox game was #6 in the ALCS series against the NY Yankees, the one where the Yanks famously endured The Biggest Choke of All Time, unprecedently blowing a seemingly insurmountable 3-0 series lead before humiliatingly losing in seven games. Sorry, gotta give me a moment here -- the memory is still wonderful... Where was I? Oh yeah, the Bloody Sock. In Game 6, Schilling was scheduled to pitch in Yankee Stadium. But no one thought he could do it, thanks to a damaged Achilles' tendon. But Boston doctors pulled off a novel new procedure (performed only once, on a cadaver) that used staples to hold Schilling's tendon in place. During the game, the blood stain on his sock became obvious, and the cameras kept zeroing in on it. Whether or not it was real blood or just a prop is anyone's guess. (I personally think it was real, but wouldn't put it past Schilling to put a red smudge there as a psych-op.) In any case, the Yanks couldn't touch Schilling that night. And in game 7 they were so spooked after blowing the 3-0 lead that they got demolished, losing badly to a no-name pitcher throwing on 2 days' rest. So the real Bloody Sock game was in the ALCS, not the Series. I can't recall whether there was blood on Schilling's sock in the WS, but if so it probably didn't make much difference. (The Sox easily swept the Cards in four straight.) And even if Schlling faked the sock in the WS, it doesn't mean that the stain in the ALCS wasn't real. Trust me, people from Boston don't care about this. NY fans, however, seem to be all over it, as if proving it was fake would detract from the Sox accomplishment somehow. Doesn't add up to much compared to a real controversy like steroids, though. You are absolutely correct about the "bloody sock" game. It was the ALCS, not the WS. (I'm going to go hang my head in shame now). And you are also correct that Boston fans couldn't care less about the current sock 'conspiracy'. The sock itself is a reminder of the Red Sox World Series win, and their unbelievable sweep of the Yankees. It's so much a part of that banner year, that the following years, at New England Patriots games, they'd actually show a close-up picture of the bloody sock on the big screen to get the crowd to make noise (it worked real well).
	__________________ "You are claiming it wasn't one. That is a positive claim." - Russell Pickering

26th April 2007, 11:53 AM	#8
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,408	Originally Posted by Stellafane So the real Bloody Sock game was in the ALCS, not the Series. I can't recall whether there was blood on Schilling's sock in the WS, but if so it probably didn't make much difference. (The Sox easily swept the Cards in four straight.) And even if Schlling faked the sock in the WS, it doesn't mean that the stain in the ALCS wasn't real. There was blood on his sock in WS Game 2; the sock was part of an exhibit at the Hall of Fame.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

26th April 2007, 12:04 PM	#9
Minadin Hiding his Head in the Sane Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 2,473	Couple of things: According to this ESPN article, the sock in question is the sock from game 6 of the ALCS. The sock sent to Cooperstown was the sock from Game 2 of the WS. But, the Hall of Fame website says it's the sock from Game 6. If he wore it in game 2 of the WS, and didn't wash it, that's disgusting. On a side note, I had tickets to Game 5 of that particular series against the Cardinals.
	__________________ Do not seek the truth, only cease to cherish your opinions. If you understand, things are just as they are; if you do not understand, things are just as they are. Support the democratic freedom of the people of Iran.

26th April 2007, 01:40 PM	#10
njslim Muse Join Date: May 2006 Location: Jooisy - You got a problem with that? Posts: 967	They was also a total lunar eclipse during the series - figure this had something to do with breaking the Boston losing spell (since 1918)....

26th April 2007, 02:02 PM	#11
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Quote: So maybe this is a "false-sock" attack? You are such a heel

26th April 2007, 06:20 PM	#12
Unsecured Coins Hoku-maniac Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: in your macaronis. warming my feets Posts: 5,741	This one got nipped in the bud already Basically Gary Thorne accused a Red Sox player of being a disinfo shill. "It was painted," Thorne said. "Doug Mirabelli confessed up to it after. It was all for PR." Thorne backed off Thursday after talking to Mirabelli before the Red Sox played the Orioles. Thorne said Mirabelli had been joking. What made him change his story so fast??
	__________________ *http://kcbastards.com/* "If God wants 10% of my paycheck, he can get it himself. Or at least work for it -Kochanski "I may not be easy, but I am fast." - Hokulele "Oh CRAP... DQ!!" - Ol' Hokey, yet again

26th April 2007, 06:52 PM	#13
gumboot lorcutus.tolere Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: New Zealand Posts: 23,103	What's really silly here is the whole sock story is only well known BECAUSE THEY WON. Had they not won, I doubt it would even be a big issue. And can you really seriously suggest a bloody sock had anything to do with the win? -Gumboot
	__________________ O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi. A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.

26th April 2007, 07:02 PM	#14
Unsecured Coins Hoku-maniac Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: in your macaronis. warming my feets Posts: 5,741	you can if you are a practictioner of Voodoo.
	__________________ *http://kcbastards.com/* "If God wants 10% of my paycheck, he can get it himself. Or at least work for it -Kochanski "I may not be easy, but I am fast." - Hokulele "Oh CRAP... DQ!!" - Ol' Hokey, yet again

27th April 2007, 12:42 AM	#15
Mr.D Self Assessed Dunning-Kruger Expert Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: NWO Paradise Posts: 1,178	Originally Posted by Unsecured Coins What made him change his story so fast?? <lyte_trip> They got to him obviously. </lyte_trip>

27th April 2007, 05:30 AM	#16
Unsecured Coins Hoku-maniac Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: in your macaronis. warming my feets Posts: 5,741	Originally Posted by Mr.D <lyte_trip> They got to him obviously. </lyte_trip> You're not talking about the Umpire's Union, are you?
	__________________ *http://kcbastards.com/* "If God wants 10% of my paycheck, he can get it himself. Or at least work for it -Kochanski "I may not be easy, but I am fast." - Hokulele "Oh CRAP... DQ!!" - Ol' Hokey, yet again

27th April 2007, 07:14 AM	#17
Juustin Muse Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Schenectady, NY Posts: 503	I'm withholding judgement on this matter until I see Rosie's official stance in her blog.
	__________________ Science has all the answers. We just don't have all the science. - James Morrow

27th April 2007, 09:41 AM	#18
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,408	Time to suggest that the really suspicious thing is the other sock?
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

27th April 2007, 11:11 AM	#19
Stellafane Village Idiot. Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Green Mountains Posts: 6,265	Originally Posted by Brainster Time to suggest that the really suspicious thing is the other sock? I thought suspicious socks were banned here??
	__________________ Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com

27th April 2007, 11:28 AM	#20
NotJesus Unsaviory Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: LA Posts: 5,462	Originally Posted by gumboot What's really silly here is the whole sock story is only well known BECAUSE THEY WON. Had they not won, I doubt it would even be a big issue. And can you really seriously suggest a bloody sock had anything to do with the win? You're not grasping the significance of the bloody sock. It's not that the sock really had anything to do with winning. I doubt that many believe it had any significant psychological effect. It's all about painting Curt Schilling as a near-mythic, larger-than-life hero who had the almost superhuman will to pitch very well even though his ankle hurt. The reason this is a story at all is that many people (mostly outside of Boston) believe that Schilling, while a very fine pitcher, is also a big-mouthed, self-aggrandizing fathead who might not be above a stunt like putting ketchup on his sock. Not that I think anything like that, of course.
	__________________ I have now reread what I've just written, and I see that I'm much more intelligent than what I've written. How does it come about that what an intelligent man expresses is much stupider than what remains inside him? -Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Adolescent

27th April 2007, 12:17 PM	#21
Stellafane Village Idiot. Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Green Mountains Posts: 6,265	Originally Posted by NotJesus ...The reason this is a story at all is that many people (mostly outside of Boston) believe that Schilling, while a very fine pitcher, is also a big-mouthed, self-aggrandizing fathead who might not be above a stunt like putting ketchup on his sock... And a lot of them seem to be NY Yankee fans, who seem to have no problems rooting for such "class" acts as Giambi, Sheffield, and Boone. The "stunts' those guys pull are a lot more serious that a fake bloody sock.
	__________________ Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com

27th April 2007, 12:21 PM	#22
NotJesus Unsaviory Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: LA Posts: 5,462	Originally Posted by Stellafane And a lot of them seem to be NY Yankee fans, who seem to have no problems rooting for such "class" acts as Giambi, Sheffield, and Boone. The "stunts' those guys pull are a lot more serious that a fake bloody sock. Thanks for the off-topic rant.
	__________________ I have now reread what I've just written, and I see that I'm much more intelligent than what I've written. How does it come about that what an intelligent man expresses is much stupider than what remains inside him? -Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Adolescent

27th April 2007, 12:25 PM	#23
Stellafane Village Idiot. Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Green Mountains Posts: 6,265	Originally Posted by NotJesus Thanks for the off-topic rant. Not a problem -- happy to oblige.
	__________________ Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com

27th April 2007, 05:29 PM	#24
Mr.D Self Assessed Dunning-Kruger Expert Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: NWO Paradise Posts: 1,178	Originally Posted by Unsecured Coins Originally Posted by Mr.D Originally Posted by Unsecured Coins What made him change his story so fast?? <lyte_trip> They got to him obviously. </lyte_trip> You're not talking about the Umpire's Union, are you? <lyte_trip> I don't know who's behind it, that's why I'm calling for an investigation. Besides, the really suspicious thing is that none of your witnesses specifically place the sock on the south-south-west side of the Shell Station. </lyte_trip>

27th April 2007, 05:43 PM	#25
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,877	OK, I'm still all confused here. Let's approach this from a different angle. What would the implications and/or consequences be if the sock turned out to not have blood on it?
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

27th April 2007, 06:10 PM	#26
Stellafane Village Idiot. Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Green Mountains Posts: 6,265	Originally Posted by Joshua Korosi OK, I'm still all confused here. Let's approach this from a different angle. What would the implications and/or consequences be if the sock turned out to not have blood on it? In some people's minds, it might detract somewhat from the "heroic" nature of Schilling's accomplishment (as if putting your whole career on the line and pitching with your Achilles' tendon stapled in place was some trivial thing, unless blood got shed in the bargain). But overall, it wouldn't change much. And of course, outside baseball it's completely irrelevant.
	__________________ Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com