Sports knowledge
Like most men, I deeply impress myself with my knowledge of sports. I spend many hours in earnest philosophical debate with myself involving what-if scenarios and such. I recently decided to share these insights in an exchange of emails with one of the few people savvy enough to appreciate them, my colleague Tom Boswell, The Washington Post’s brilliant sports columnist whose work I sort of worship.
Me: Close game. One out, runner on third. Batter flies out to left field, deep enough to allow the runner to tag up and score. Knowing this, the fielder lets the ball hit his glove and bats it up in the air. Then he catches it. Runner will have sprinted for home when the ball first hit the glove and will be easily doubled off third. Great idea, right?
Boz: Wrong. This play was tried more than 70 years ago and is now specifically outlawed in the rule book. I even vaguely remember that one of the three outfielding DiMaggio brothers was a perpetrator. Catch up with the class, Weingarten.
Me: Fine. Ten seconds on the clock. Bears lead the Packers by one. Fourth and goal for the Packers on the Bears‚ 5-yard line. Obviously, they are going to kick a chip-shot field goal to win. So the Bears jump offside and clobber the long snapper. Tweet! They are penalized half the distance to the goal, which is meaningless. Then they do it again. And again. Finally, from the one-and-a-quarter-yard line, they back off, but the victim is so woozy he shanks the snap, and the Bears win. Isn’t that good strategy?
Boz: It’s a stupid strategy. This is against the unwritten rules, and everybody knows it. The first time you did it, every player on the field would have to be “separated.” The second time, there’d be the biggest brawl of the last 10 years and the revenge would be played out in future meetings until the end of time and at least one season-ending injury would be administered. These guys didn’t go to finishing school. They have their teammates‚ backs, and the more vulnerable the guy — defenseless QBs, snappers, kickers — the greater the payback.
Me: I think that Bryce Harper should call a news conference tomorrow to say life is not all about money, that he will forgo free agency to accept a long-term deal with the Washington Nationals for $100 million less than he would get in an open market, and that he is doing it as a gift to the fans, whom he loves and respects, in a city where many people have trouble making ends meet. I think that would make him a living God.
Boz: You are 180 degrees wrong. It would be a spectacularly selfish thing for Harper to do. Dear Bryce: There is a union. It has fought the bleeping owners on your behalf for 50 years. It has gone eight-for-eight in “winning” work stoppages for you.
The reason you have a chance to get this $400 million contract, not a $200,000-a-year contract, is 100 percent because of the union. The best players have a moral responsibility — to all the players who fought for them in the past and to all who will follow them in the future — to negotiate a salary that is in the vicinity of fair market value.
You can’t leave $100 million on the table, because you aren’t just giving away your own money, you are giving away EVERYBODY’S money in the future.
BTW, here’s what will happen if you screw every other player in the game with your pious BS. Hughie Jennings holds the MLB record for being hit by a pitch 287 times in his career. You will break it. Next year.
Me: Should a sportswriter be shot like a rabid dog if he writes that a player or a team that has been playing poorly is trying to “get untracked,” when he means “on track”? Boz: Yes. Me: You mean I got something right? Boz: Yes, and I never thought of it. Me: We’re gonna end right here.