Random Thoughts and Observations

Latest Sign that People Are Officially Out of Ideas

Kelly Clarkson's new song is entitled, without apparent irony, "My Life Would Suck Without You."

*********************************

Happiness

Yesterday was another good baseball day for the Solipsist: Mets won, and the Yankees lost to Boston 16-11.  This particular defeat included the loss of a 6-run lead.

*********************************

Homers

Today wasn't as rewarding, though.  The Mets lost to the Washington Nationals, 8-1.  Disappointing.  But the Solipsist would like to make an observation about Bob Carpenter and Rob Dibble, the on-air "talent" for the Nationals.  The Solipsist subscribes to one of these MLB TV packages, where you get to see games from all over the country (in case you were wondering how YNSHC gets to watch the Mets despite living in Northern California).  You never know, though, whose video feed you're going to see.  Sometimes it's the Mets', sometimes it's the other teams'.

Now, in the world of sports broadcasting, some announcers are known as "homers," i.e., people who are unabashedly partisan about the home team.  Phil Rizzuto, who used to do local broadcasts for the Yankees, was a great example.  He made no secret of his loyalties: If the Yankees won, he was happy, and when the other team scored, he was upset.  Rizzuto, however, was a throwback.  He was an older announcer, and for his generation, this sort of "homerism" was expected.  Plus, he PLAYED for the Yankees in the 1940s and 1950s--did anyone think he was going to root against them?  Or, seriously, remain neutral.

Still, "homers" are a bit out of fashion these days.  Broadcasters have a more "journalistic" image these days: They should strive for general impartiality.

Which brings us to Carpenter and Dibble.

They are homers--RABID homers, which seems a bit extreme, considering that Dibble, a former relief pitcher, never played for the Nationals or their previous incarnation, the Montreal Expos.  As for Carpenter, he IS a professional broadcaster.  To go back to Rizzuto for a moment, even during his wildest pro-Yankee ramblings, he had the calming influence of Bill White to bring him back to earth.  Carpenter, on the other hand, is an enabler.

Here's the kind of thing we're talking about: In the first inning today, the Nationals' pitcher, Jordan Zimmerman, had two strikes on the Mets' Jose Reyes.  Reyes checked his swing on a ball in the dirt.  The catcher appealed to the third-base umpire to see if Reyes had swung.  The umpire said he had not.  After viewing the replay, Dibble and Carpenter concluded that Reyes HAD swung and were indignant that their young pitcher wasn't getting a call.  Later in that inning, the same thing happened with Carlos Delgado at the plate.  Again, an appeal to third; again, the umpire said no swing; again Carpenter and Dibble fumed.

Now, checked swings occur numerous times every game, and numerous times the pitcher and/or catcher will appeal a "no-swing" call to the first or third base umpire.  Most of the time, the umpire will uphold the no-swing call.  And, frankly, most of the time the replay looks like the player swung.  Indeed, the Solipsist will even agree that Delgado went around.

But Dibble and Carpenter kept going on and on and on about the umpire's ineptness in "blowing" the swing/no-swing call.  They were still talking about it in, like, the 4th inning, by which point the Nationals were AHEAD 4-1!

Guys, it's a Sunday afternoon game three weeks into the season.  We're not talking Game 7 of the World Series, here.  Relax!  These things have a way of evening out over the course of a season.  (Not that the Washington Nationals are going to the World Series.  They're 3-11.  A third-base umpire's non-call on a borderline play is the least of their worries.)