June 11, 2010

On Perfect Games ...

It's 3:30 in the morning, the birds outside my window won't shut the fuck up, and here's what just crossed my mind: While Jim Joyce certainly manned up to his heinous error in Detroit, and much respect to him for that, I don't think he calls that runner safe if it's Roy Halladay on the mound, in place of Armando Galarraga. And I mean that on a purely baseball level.

This saddens me.

A perfect game, lost.


Lee(tch) said...

Welcome back brother. We missed ya.

The fact that Bud Selig wouldn't change his mind and award the kid the perfect game the entire world knows he deserves is further proof that baseball is, and perhaps forever will be, a "purist" sport ran by one maniacal dictator and his small group of rich baseball traditionalists.

It continues to boggle my mind how MLB, a professional sport that has seen very little growth in the past decade, is SO RESISTANT on making simple changes to the game (ie. instant replay on special circumstances, realigned playoff format, etc...) that would probably garner much more interest.

The NFL has it right and MLB should definitely take a page out of their book. Every off-season they propose new rules that won't dramatically alter the style of the game but would most likely only improve on it. Fuck, even the NHL recognize whatever systems or rules they had in place wasn't working and made their changes. But MLB? Disgraceful.

For Selig to pretend that awarding him on this VERY RARE occasion the perfect game would be for the sport to lose integrity, that's bullshit to the ninth degree. I don't think I've ever heard Selig mention that Bonds, Sosa, or Clemens disgraced the sport and none of their accolades will ever be taken back despite knowing how much outside influence they had. Selig had a HUGE opportunity to redeem himself on this one.

Jim Joyce is lucky David Wells, Carlos Zambrano, or John Lackey wasn't pitching that game. Someone would have got their ass kicked.

William said...

I'm only a minor purist (don't think the NL should resist the DH for example), and think that it would set a bad precedent to change the outcome of the game. This wasn't a protested game and it would open the door to have every questionable outcome of a game called into his office.

eyebleaf said...

Kiener: Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I do agree with Bud Selig, though; he couldn't have reversed that call, as much as we all wanted him to. It just would have set way too much of a precedent. What about all the other calls? If anything good can come of this situation, it's that replay will be instituted for plays at first, second and third base. And they should take a page out of the NFL's book and give managers two challenges per game. Surely Leyland would have used one there, and Armando's got his perfect game. You're right, though. Anyone else but Galarraga, and things might get ugly. He's a bloody saint, that man.

@ William: Quickly, about the DH: I'm beginning to side with some of the National League folks I met on my trip; it keeps the league different, especially in the Wild Card era. And I agree with you about the outcome; if Selig reversed this call, he'd have to change them all. Something terrible happened, let's learn from it, make the necessary changes, and move on. Baseball remains beautiful.