World’s Biggest Cockup

The latest injury news from Team USA: 

When it seemed as though the injury news could not get any worse for Team USA, manager Davey Johnson announced that Kevin Youkilis has left the team because of a sore left ankle on Wednesday.

Youkilis has returned to Fort Myers, where he is being examined by the Boston Red Sox. 

Johnson said the injury happened three or four days ago, and that Johnson noticed Youkilis was in pain during Team USA's 6-5 comeback win over Puerto Rico.

Teammate Brad Ziegler said Youkilis was in such pain that after the game he could barely walk through the training room. 

"He wasn't going to miss last night's game for the world," Johnson said. "We've been devastated by some key injuries."

Like so many off the ideas spawned during the miserable tenure of baseball Commissioner Bud Selig, the World Baseball Classic is a terrific concept poorly executed, particularly in timing. Others may rave about the quality of the games and the broadening of the sport to an international audience — qualities that I as a baseball fan appreciate and fully support — but I cringe every time a member of the team for whom I root (and that team is not an arbitrary collection of players generally two or three down the list of preferred representatives) plays a game as if it were meaningful a full three to four weeks before he will be fully ready for such activity.

This cropped up briefly with the injury to Dustin Pedroia, who sustained his minor abdominal injury while performing a task he would have been performing in Fort Myers anyway. The ultimately minor nature of the injury quickly defused talk of the relevance of the WBC and its very relevant effects on the real games.

Yet here is Kevin Youkilis, playing a game on an injured ankle that had been bothering him for the better part of a week — something he most assuredly would not have been doing in Fort Myers. So again we must have this discussion: Why is baseball allowing a series of exhibitions that encourages players to engage in behavior completely unproductive for the teams that actually pay their salaries?

Although Johnson, as manager of Team USA, is paid to worry about his team, the fact is the devastation by injuries to Team USA's roster is meaningless when compared to the cumulative effects of those injuries on Major League Baseball teams, which supply the majority of the players participating in the WBC. Obviously, we don't know whether these injuries would have occurred anyway. But that's not the point. The fact is they happened — are happening. And it's simply a matter of time before a player of Alex Rodriguez's caliber suffers a season-ending injury because he tried too much too soon (to paraphrase Pedroia after his injury) or decided he won't miss the next game "for the world."

The WBC concept is great. The timing is terrible. Play these games in November, when players will have three to four months to recover from any injuries they may incur. Playing in March was foolhardy three years ago. Doing it twice doesn't make it any smarter.

Title courtesy SF, who is much better at witty acronym bastardizations than I.

50 comments… add one

  • McAdam in the Herald says it’s been diagnosed as tendinitis. Speier at WEEI.com says the injury is not believed to be serious. We can only hope.

    Paul SF March 18, 2009, 9:17 pm
  • Fucknuts.

    Atheose March 18, 2009, 9:22 pm
  • Im sure he’s fine and the sox are being cautious (as they should be). Id be shocked if he isnt in the lineup come opening day.

    sam-YF March 18, 2009, 11:26 pm
  • i think you’re overreacting to the injury issue. players get injuries all the time. unless there’s some legit evidence that the wbc is especially dangerous, than the argument is not objective, and as far as i know there is NOTHING to suggest it is particularly harmful.
    there’s no good time to schedule it, so picking on selig for this is wrong. baseball’s done a good job with the tournament, by and large. putting the games in november, when players have already been extended by their teams, and are exhausted, and it’s getting cold, and there’s the nfl to compete with, is a just a nonstarter. so you either have it now or don’t have it. and i’m for having it.

    YF March 18, 2009, 11:39 pm
  • I’m with YF to an extent, but I’m for not having it.
    It’s not selling tickets, these games are empty and the TV ratings suck. What’s the point if nobody cares?
    It kills me because I love the spirit of it, but the global economy of the game simply can’t support it. I’m not just talking about the money either.
    It’s not Selig’s fault, it’s not anyone’s fault, it’s just not working.
    One giant exercise defending the use of the term “World Series” is not worth it. The international audience needs to get over it and accept that the best players in the world play in the USA. That’s not going to change any time soon, so deal with it.

    LocklandSF March 19, 2009, 12:00 am
  • The ticket sales have been uneven — remember that they packed 40,000 Canadians in for the U.S.-Canada game. And I bet that the semifinals and finals will do well.
    The WBC is all about increasing the international attraction to the game. I guarantee baseball is more popular in the Netherlands than it was last month.

    academic-SF March 19, 2009, 12:10 am
  • The Netherlands has less people than NYC.
    We need to focus on more creative and influential programs that help expand the game.
    I’m also not entirely impartial, most of my co-workers are from Central Asia or Europe, so I get a lot of crap for the “World” part of our professional sports titles.

    LocklandSF March 19, 2009, 12:21 am
  • Surviving Grady put it VERY well.
    “At this point the WBC is bringing us about as much luck as that tiki idol Greg Brady found when the family went to Hawaii. And we know how that shit turned out.”

    LocklandSF March 19, 2009, 12:26 am
  • What about having it for a week in the middle of the season? No days off and the tourney gets done in 7 days and then back to work for all major league players.

    Nick-YF March 19, 2009, 6:36 am
  • players get injuries all the time
    This is a statement that seems almost willfully ignorant of Paul’s post. Youkilis played a full game at full intensity on a hurt ankle. It’s not that the injury happened, it’s that the injury, which was known, instead of being given rest and treatment, was subjected to a nearly playoff-level intensity for a full game. That’s the point, and it is a legitimate one.

    SF March 19, 2009, 6:38 am
  • Bud Selig is a genious in France.

    I'mBillMcNeal March 19, 2009, 8:20 am
  • Or … He’s a saint with children and a genious with food additives.

    I'mBillMcNeal March 19, 2009, 8:22 am
  • unless there’s some legit evidence that the wbc is especially dangerous, than the argument is not objective, and as far as i know there is NOTHING to suggest it is particularly harmful.
    This strikes me as a strawman argument. I’m not saying the WBC is bad because it has caused injuries per se; I’m saying it’s bad because it does two things that cannot do anything BUT lead to more injuries.
    It encourages players to reach a game-ready state faster than usual, and it encourages playing through seemingly minor injuries. In no way do either of those two decrease the likelihood of getting hurt, and as we have a first-hand example of with Kevin Youkilis, there actually is evidence that they cause or worsen injuries.
    Can many players — perhaps most — do both these things and be fine? Of course. But then we must ask: What level of additional injury risk is acceptable to put on an exhibition that has zero bearing on the reason why baseball is so popular in the first place?

    Paul SF March 19, 2009, 8:54 am
  • Supporting my point is this excerpt from Sean McAdam’s story this morning:
    A total of five Team USA players have gone down with injuries in the past week – Youkilis, Pedroia, Chipper Jones (oblique), Ryan Braun (oblique) and Matt Lindstrom (shoulder).
    While commissioner Bud Selig, [Davey] Johnson and others continue to emphasize that the injuries all are relatively minor and no different than ones incurred in spring training camps across Arizona and Florida, both Pedroia and Braun said their problems likely were the result of playing at a higher intensity level than usual inmid-March.
    Moreover, Lindstrom and Youkilis continued to play in games after they were first injured, something they surely wouldn’t have done in a normal spring training setting.

    That’s four out of the five injuries suffered on just one team of the WBC that arguably were caused by or exacerbated by the tournament itself or a player’s efforts to prepare for the tournament.

    Paul SF March 19, 2009, 10:24 am
  • obviously, the owners themselves have decided the risk is worth it, and the players as well. the obsessiveness about getting into shape too quickly, i think, is silly, and there’s no reason to believe youkilis is seriously hurt just yet.
    “an exhibition that has zero bearing on the reason why baseball is so popular in the first place?”–i have absolutely no idea what this means.
    attendance is going to be a bit spotty, but the teams are playing in pretty big venues, and my understanding is that the tv coverage is huge outside of the usa, so what’s in the stands isn’t representative. spreading the game abroad is important for the league, for a variety of reasons. just take a look at the nba if you want to know why.

    YF March 19, 2009, 10:28 am
  • YF, you aren’t responding to the issue raised by Paul’s post, which is whether or not the WBC places players at risk of injury for reasons beyond the simplistic response, i.e. “players get hurt during spring training anyhow”.
    I am ambivalent about the WBC. But I do see a problem with players (who ALWAYS want to take the field, hurt or not) being run out by managers when they have a pre-existing condition that their employer may not know of while their interim manager might. I don’t imagine the owners would be happy with a player or their WBC manager keeping information from them just because they ‘wouldn’t miss a game for the world’. To me, this is the big issue: who gets the disclosure? What is the protocol for this, in all seriousness? During the WBC who do players and managers report to?

    SF March 19, 2009, 10:42 am
  • why respond to a hypothetical? no one’s been seriously injured, and there’s no scientific reason that i’m aware of to believe there’s any substantial risk above normal. team’s can deny permission to players if they like. players need not play. it’s voluntary. so if a bunch of fans and press are somehow worried about their precious property breaking that’s just too bad. i assume ownership/mlb front office/and the pa can work out whose job it is–and probably have–to create proper hierarchies, and i assume they have.

    YF March 19, 2009, 10:58 am
  • why respond to a hypothetical?
    “Bin Laden determined to strike in US”.
    Kidding. Sort of. Honestly, why can’t you respond to the legitimate question at hand? Seems like you are just completely pliant on this, willing to accept that all is well, just because nobody has suffered an horrific injury yet. Again, I am neither a booster nor a denigrator of the WBC, I see the allure and also see some risk. Why the resistance to addressing a real issue: how players report their injuries, to whom, and how is this dealt with? That the owners may have agreed to take a hands-off approach doesn’t mean they have made a wise decision. Amazing that there is this lack of critical awareness from a critic such as yourself. Baaaaa.

    SF March 19, 2009, 11:12 am
  • obviously, the owners themselves have decided the risk is worth it, and the players as well. … so if a bunch of fans and press are somehow worried about their precious property breaking that’s just too bad.
    So is the argument that if the owners themselves decide something is OK, it must then be OK? And that the complaints of fans and media is largely irrelevant as long as the owners and players are happy?
    I for one am not so eager to simply trust the wisdom of the baseball owners or the players. Both groups have a long list of transgressions to their names. Just because they’re willing to have the WBC doesn’t mean the WBC is worth having.

    Paul SF March 19, 2009, 11:20 am
  • paul, here’s another one of the rare times i have to agree with you…players are going to extend themselves more in these games than they normally would at this time in spring training, whether it’s out of patriotism, or they bought the hype of the concept, or because they believe that these games are more important than the regular meaningless spring training games…that’s just a fact that they will push themselves more…mlb’s risk assessment should weigh the potential for injuries that will impact the course of it’s own regular season against what benefits are gleaned from having these exhibitions…i don’t think there is a good time to play the games, so i don’t need to tell you what i think should be the fate of this tournament…i should respectfully defer to yf, since he is a historian of the game, and i am not, about the effects of these exhibitions on baseball’s global popularity, but i don’t necessarily agree that this tournament is what makes that happen…he offered up the nba as an example, to which i’ll counter with soccer, and the nfl…don’t discount the intense olympic coverage of basketball, as well as the genius marketing of jordan, as an important element in the nba’s global popularity, particularly in europe…yet, much of that success seems to be because of the import of european stars to the nba, and not because of a presence the nba has established outside of this country, in much the same way baseball imports many of its stars…our “you should like this because we do” attitude is probably annoying to other cultures…they’ll be ready for baseball when they’re ready for it…the wbc isn’t going to do the trick, i don’t think

    dc March 19, 2009, 11:25 am
  • So is the argument that if the owners themselves decide something is OK, it must then be OK? And that the complaints of fans and media is largely irrelevant as long as the owners and players are happy?
    Yeah, I don’t get this at all from YF. I mean, do the owners have a track record that is so strong vis-a-vis player performance issues (wink wink) that we should just say “everything’s great, they must know what they are doing”?

    SF March 19, 2009, 11:34 am
  • i think you’re making a contentious argument for the sake of making a contentious argument, and needlessly hyperbolic. world’s biggest cockup? really? because a couple of red sox players may lose a day or two of spring training?, nevermind the overwhelmingly popularity and excitement for the tournament overseas, and for the most part here as well–the naysayers are a distinct minority.
    the conflation of the steroids issue here is silly. the problem there was contention between owners and players PRECLUDING agreement between the parties. here, everyone is on the same page. it’s no guarantee that it’s the right page, but there’s no good reason to suggest it’s not, and the two parties with the most at stake are for it, as is the majority of the public, and the press.

    YF March 19, 2009, 11:47 am
  • the problem there was contention between owners and players PRECLUDING agreement between the parties.
    That was the second problem.
    The first problem was that both sides were absolutely on the same page — happy to ignore the problem altogether for an unknown number of years.
    This argument, incidentally, is not because two Sox players have been injured. I’ve been opposed to the WBC since its inception because of the timing and how that affects injuries, even while recognizing the positives it can bring for baseball as a whole.
    The fact that injuries have become an increasing concern as this process has continued should not be surprising, and the fact that Youkilis clearly exacerbated his injury doing something he would never have done in spring training finally provides clear evidence that the connection is not merely the fabrication of nervous fans (or media).
    A sincere question, since you seem to imply that I only feel this way because it affects the Red Sox: Would you be as sanguine if Mark Teixeira and Robinson Cano were shelved with injuries of any severity while playing in the WBC?

    Paul SF March 19, 2009, 12:14 pm
  • i think you’re making a contentious argument for the sake of making a contentious argumen
    Oh, this is bullshit. Paul made a reasonable and more dedicated post and used a punny title that I had, minutes later and without knowledge of Paul’s post, used in a cross-posted news item with a simple link to the Youkilis story. We agreed that it seemed more provocative than the original title Paul had used, which was simply “Enough”, you can see his in the original URL in the toolbar.
    But to the point: this is a legitimate issue for discussion, and you STILL haven’t addressed the central issue being raised, which is whether or not players are being put at risk beyond the normal pre-season exposure. In the face of Davey Johnson’s comment and the FACT that Youkilis went through an entire game on an injury of unknown magnitude you still want to assert that all is well because the players and owners say it is. This is ridiculous, not to mention evasive.
    And the fact that you make it into something about the Sox, as if that is the motivation, is deplorable, frankly, and I thought beneath you.

    SF March 19, 2009, 12:15 pm
  • ok, i’ll rephrase my question…outside of the u.s., who really cares about baseball?…if the answer is: ‘well, nobody really’, then i say why bother and risk regular season changing injuries to mlb stars…if the answer is: ‘well, the tournament itself is “wildly” popular overseas, then i say why bother if the popularity is not lingering long after the tournament is over…but, if the popularity is lingering, again why bother…what is the point of the tournament then?…seems like needless risk taking with the guys that butter the mlb’s regular season bread…

    dc March 19, 2009, 12:20 pm
  • The risk for injury is worth it. I heart the WBC.

    Devine March 19, 2009, 12:22 pm
  • worth what though devine?

    dc March 19, 2009, 12:23 pm
  • why respond to a hypothetical? no one’s been seriously injured, and there’s no scientific reason that i’m aware of to believe there’s any substantial risk above normal.
    Sounds like YF is completely ignoring the fact that players are having their injuries become more serious due to the WBC. Four out of the five players that are injured played through their injuries because of the intensity level of the WBC. What part of this don’t you understand?
    The issue isn’t the severity of the injuries, but rather the fact that the injuries are being needlessly exacerbated.
    Would you be as sanguine if Mark Teixeira and Robinson Cano were shelved with injuries of any severity while playing in the WBC?
    Paul said exactly what I wanted to say there.

    Atheose March 19, 2009, 12:27 pm
  • And you know the big thing being left out of the discussion?
    The WBC pitchers who then get injured the same year. Last time it was an issue and it will be again later this season. Just watch.
    I’ve always thought they should run the WBC during the off-days of the playoffs (with players on playoff teams ineligible until their teams are eliminated). I stand by that. Then how great would it be to have the Series champ play the WBC champ? They could keep international interest high into November and players would have the entire off-season to rest. The other benefit is teams would have a much harder time holding their players out.

    Rob March 19, 2009, 12:35 pm
  • I agree with Paul – and there’s also the argument that players would be more susceptible to injury at WBC, as they are just getting back into playing shape after a few months off. In normal ST, they’re playing a much less strenuous couple of innings every day as they round back into shape.

    Mark - YF March 19, 2009, 12:47 pm
  • -“injuries have become an increasing concern”
    to whom, exactly? you? certain diehard fans? should that matter?
    i don’t know what i’m evading. the argument seems to me “it’s dangerous and it’s only a matter of time until someone gets hurt” and my response is, well, there’s no serious evidence that it is any worse than normal play, despite “increasing concern,” and that the primary parties involved seem to be okay with the risks. if the ultimate cost is that a player goes down, then that’s part of the cost of the event.
    for the record, cano did come back dinged up and so did marte. whatever. if you’d like to suggest there should be some super-duper early conditioning program for the wbc participants–who, for the record, are pretty well babied–than that’s one thing. but why call the whole thing a cockup when it’s so obviously not.
    dc: there is a huge audience for baseball outside the usa. check the makeup of an MLB roster if you’re unsure of that. and spreading the game to places where it might take off is important. it’s a long term growth and promotional strategy. suggestions that it’s not working because some of the early-round games don’t sell out, i think, is foolish.

    YF March 19, 2009, 12:57 pm
  • there’s no serious evidence that it is any worse than normal play
    Wait, so a significant player (forget the uniform) playing on an injury he might not have played on in the regular season (much less ST) is now an unworrying scenario to you, conceptually? This is the crux of Paul’s post, and my comments, and your evasion (yes, you are still evading this matter). Youkilis was playing at an intensity on an unknown injury. This is fact. That he wasn’t more badly hurt is just good fortune. The scenario, however, is what is questionable, not his good or bad fortune.

    SF March 19, 2009, 1:27 pm
  • the argument seems to me “it’s dangerous and it’s only a matter of time until someone gets hurt” and my response is, well, there’s no serious evidence that it is any worse than normal play
    You’re completely ignoring the evidence presented by everyone. Four of the five injured players on the USA team exacerbated their injuries by playing through them during the WBC, which ABSOLUTELY would not have happened at Spring Training. I don’t understand how this is so easy to ignore. If Jeets injured his quad and said “Well it was bothering me already, but I didn’t want to sit out of the game against Puerto Rico” then I’m sure you’d feel differently.

    Atheose March 19, 2009, 1:34 pm
  • Analogy for the sake of analogies:
    Person 1: “This drunk driver hit me on the interstate and totaled my car. I cracked a few ribs when the airbag went off. The penalties for drunk driving should be higher. I could have been killed!”
    Person 2: “So what? You only cracked a rib, you didn’t die. Stop blaming the drunk driver for some hypothetical scenario that you’re imagining.”

    Atheose March 19, 2009, 1:43 pm
  • “…dc: there is a huge audience for baseball outside the usa. check the makeup of an MLB roster if you’re unsure of that. and spreading the game to places where it might take off is important. it’s a long term growth and promotional strategy….”
    maybe inadvertent on your part yf, but you missed my earlier point: “…the nba’s global popularity, particularly in europe…yet, much of that success seems to be because of the import of european stars to the nba, and not because of a presence the nba has established outside of this country, in much the same way baseball imports many of its stars…”
    further, you just proved my other point: “…but, if the popularity is lingering, again why bother…what is the point of the tournament then?…seems like needless risk taking with the guys that butter the mlb’s regular season bread…”
    of course i realize that baseball is popular outside the u.s. [see japan, latin america], but does anyone know why?…i’d offer that it was popular in those countries before we started importing players…what you haven’t been clear about is what’s the real objective of the tournament?…the suggestion that: “it’s a long term growth and promotional strategy”, suggests to me that it’s another money grab by mlb, or the mlb plans to use countries like the netherlands as a kind of global farm system [blue jays just signed a netherlands pitcher]…i guess that’s ok being that it’s a business and all, but it’s a hell of a presumption that those country’s want the mlb forced upon them, beyond these few simple games, or to pretend that this isn’t just a simple business strategy to make money and farm players…any goodwill and improved popularity it generates is a pleasant by-product…our ignorance of other cultures is what makes us so unpopular…
    that’s why i suggested that the tournament is pointless…just like attempts to make soccer [which i love by the way] more popular in the u.s., and the nfl popular in europe…not gonna happen…

    dc March 19, 2009, 1:54 pm
  • Simple questions: Is there any risk for players playing on already injured body parts in a pre-season tournament? Is there any issue if those body parts have an injury that has not necessarily been disclosed to their parent club? And is there a conflict of interest for the player who has to decide whether to disclose such injury to their manager in the WBC if they really want to play in the WBC despite such injuries? Lastly, what is the responsibility of the manager of any WBC club to disclose injuries to a parent ballclub, and does this disclosure involve a conflict-of-interest with regards to their own successes in the WBC?
    These are the direct questions I want YF to answer (he hasn’t yet), and the answer cannot involve accusations that this is a concerning issue due to uniform color or logo.

    SF March 19, 2009, 3:09 pm
  • Analogy for the sake of analogies:
    Person 1: “This drunk driver hit me on the interstate and totaled my car. I cracked a few ribs when the airbag went off. The penalties for drunk driving should be higher. I could have been killed!”
    Person 2: “So what? You only cracked a rib, you didn’t die. Stop blaming the drunk driver for some hypothetical scenario that you’re imagining.”

    What a terrible analogy, even as analogies go. The only way it would work is if, maybe, the WBC was akin to driving on a road where there was a really drunk driver, and if you tell someone about it you have to stop driving, and ST was akin to driving on a road where there was a slightly less-drunk driver, and also police cars, but the only way the police cars will notice the drunk driver is if you tell them. Or something.

    AndrewYF March 19, 2009, 3:25 pm
  • “Is there any risk for players playing on already injured body parts in a pre-season tournament?” yes.
    “Is there any issue if those body parts have an injury that has not necessarily been disclosed to their parent club?” “any issue” yes. there is SOME issue.
    “And is there a conflict of interest for the player who has to decide whether to disclose such injury to their manager in the WBC if they really want to play in the WBC despite such injuries?” yes. but if the players are that excited about it, this seems an argument FOR the WBC.
    “Lastly, what is the responsibility of the manager of any WBC club to disclose injuries to a parent ballclub, and does this disclosure involve a conflict-of-interest with regards to their own successes in the WBC?” i don’t give a shit. really i don’t give a shit about any of these questions. i’m not a lawyer defending the wbc. i think it’s a good idea, and i think reasonable systems can be established to reasonably adress these “questions” and my guess is that they probably have been. to the extent that they haven’t, i’m sure the parties can figure them out in the future, and there’s no reason to jetison the whole project for them. and, again, there is to my knowledge no serious injury that has resulted from wbc play (youkilis, i suspect will be fine, so this issue of what COULD have happened is moot), and no actual evidence to suggest that playing in the wbc is any worse than playing in s.t. the entire line of argument–that players ramp up to quickly and possibly play when they shouldn’t–is basically speculative. how much should players warm up? how much time do they need? players battling in camp, doing 2-a-days is not necessarily worse than the intensity of the WBC.

    YF March 19, 2009, 4:00 pm
  • What a terrible analogy, even as analogies go.
    It was an analogy towards YF’s argument, not towards the WBC situation itself. Big difference!
    i think it’s a good idea, and i think reasonable systems can be established to reasonably adress these “questions” and my guess is that they probably have been. to the extent that they haven’t, i’m sure the parties can figure them out in the future, and there’s no reason to jetison the whole project for them.
    I don’t want to put words in other peoples’ mouths, but I think most of us are arguing for the WBC being at a different time than Spring Training. I’m all for the WBC, I just don’t want players in such intense game situations during a time when they’re supposed to be slow acclimating their bodies to the stresses of a six-month season. The cases presented above demonstrate this.

    Atheose March 19, 2009, 5:59 pm
  • and no actual evidence to suggest that playing in the wbc is any worse than playing in s.t. the entire line of argument–that players ramp up to quickly and possibly play when they shouldn’t–is basically speculative.
    This is still dismissing the fact that Youkilis, well established at first base, played through his injury for the sake of competition. This would absolutely not have happened at spring training. It’s one thing for us fans to speculate, but when players and coaches themselves are talking about this then it certainly carries some weight.

    Atheose March 19, 2009, 6:02 pm
  • Youkilis today from Fort Myers, according to the Globe:
    “It was very disappointing for me to come home, but this was something that didn’t just start a couple days ago,” Youkilis said. “This was something that’s been going on for a couple weeks now. It was nothing. I’ve been hearing that this is the WBC’s fault, this is a stupid idea this thing. It’s not. It’s a great thing. We had fun. It was a blast. It was an honor to represent your country. The misconception is that I didn’t get hurt just playing in the WBC.”
    “Dog-piling and running around, having so much fun doing that, I think that was probably not the brightest idea,” Youkilis said. “But you know when you have your adrenaline up you can do a lot of things. Not a great decision on my part to participate in dog-piling, running around and jumping around. Probably didn’t help it at all. But like I said, it had nothing to do with all of that. Derek Jeter kind of grabbed at my ankle, and twisted it.”
    Jeter! I KNEW it!

    I'mBillMcNeal March 19, 2009, 6:09 pm
  • Just found my stub from this game:
    http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=240919110
    Damn, how much has changed since then!

    Rob March 19, 2009, 7:02 pm
  • And could Jeter, by chance, step on Pedroia?

    Rob March 19, 2009, 7:20 pm
  • Heh. On the one hand, Youkilis says the WBC didn’t cause this. On the other, he acknowledges the WBC exacerbated it.
    It sounds awfully close to the “actual evidence” of which YF says there is none.

    Paul SF March 19, 2009, 7:32 pm
  • It sounds awfully close to the “actual evidence” of which YF says there is none.
    And that speaks volumes given that’s he’s trying to be politically savvy.

    Rob March 19, 2009, 7:38 pm
  • There is only one obvious conclusion that can be drawn from this entire debate:
    It’s all A-Rod’s fault.

    SoxFan March 19, 2009, 8:19 pm
  • I think the lesson here is that Jeter works in mysterious ways.

    Nick-YF March 19, 2009, 8:35 pm
  • and i think reasonable systems can be established to reasonably adress these “questions” and my guess is that they probably have been.
    Uh, what? Seriously? On what basis? Because the owners and players are so trustworthy? They have such a good track record of figuring things like this out, so I guess your faith is completely well-placed.
    and no actual evidence to suggest that playing in the wbc is any worse than playing in s.t.
    AGAIN you go back to this straw man of an argument. This is NOT the point, and you seem completely stubborn in your continued use of this trope. Participating in the WBC, for me, is not the issue, and the tournament neither offends me nor worries me, at a first level of involvement. Rather, it’s the issue of continuance of play on an injury that is either undisclosed to a parent club or ignored by a conflicted WBC manager. Why should we just accept that the players and owners have “worked this out”? This seems like a comically naive position for a fan to take, particularly one as scholarly as yourself, who surely knows how this kind of blind faith in those who run the game has worked out.

    SF March 19, 2009, 9:02 pm
  • Jeter … Jesus. Very close resemblance.

    I'mBillMcNeal March 19, 2009, 9:02 pm
  • And could Jeter, by chance, step on Pedroia?
    Rob, ANYONE can step on Pedroia!

    Atheose March 20, 2009, 7:42 am

Leave a Comment

Next post:

Previous post: