"A New York Treasure" --Village Voice



CC Sabathia’s performance in the fifth and sixth inning last night–bend don’t break, son–was the season for me. That was an ace out there. And Alex Rodriguez’s home run was about as satisfying as it gets. I knew they didn’t want Scott Kazmir to face Rodriguez again, not after Rodriguez had a good hack in his first at bat, and hit a line drive up the middle the next time up. So they bring in a reliever who threw a good pitch, down and in, and Rodriguez jacked it over the fence in left.


Oh yeah, and Johnny Damon’s home run in the eighth was none too shabby either.

Still one very big win left. So I ain’t countin’ no chickens. And, dag, for such a compelling win, there sure was some ugliness–Mr. Posada and Mr. Cano, I’m looking at you. But in the end, yeah, that was the way to respond to a tough loss, wasn’t it?

Share: Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email %PRINT_TEXT


1 a.O   ~  Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

I think that about sums it up, Alex. Cannot say enough about CC. He took the best rally the Angels could muster and just shut it down. Hopefully the offensive outburst will loosen some guys up a little bit, and hopefully we will not have (m)any more mental mistakes.

2 bp1   ~  Oct 21, 2009 12:54 pm

Yep. CC and A-Rod removed the need for Girardi to do much managing, and their played helped make the mistakes of others moot. That game is just what the doctor ordered after Monday night. Things have been restored to their proper order.

Yeah - but

Cano, dude. Why you just standing there? If you're not standing on a base, shouldn't you be - like - moving or something? If you're not there - anywhere - shouldn't you be trying to get there?

Very odd moment. A pair of talented chuckleheads.

3 Diane Firstman   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:10 pm

Does anyone else see two eyes and a smile in the picture above?

4 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:15 pm

What loss? :)

Serious mancrush on CC.

[3] Immediately. Anyone know what kind of birds? We've been seeing egrets where we live. Pretty amazing.

5 Alex Belth   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:18 pm

Yup, that's why I picked it. A smile.

6 Diane Firstman   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:24 pm

I think CC and Forest Whitaker were separated at birth, and I luv Whitaker as an actor, so therefore I luv CC. :-)

7 Sliced Bread   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:25 pm

the smiling eyes look like a woman's nipples to me, coz I'm a glass is half-full kinda guy.

8 Diane Firstman   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:25 pm
9 Yankee Mama   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:31 pm

I agree about the 5th and 6th innings. While I always viewed CC as an ace, those two innings defined it for me. To overcome all that crowd noise, surging momentum, a homerun and a couple of base hits and work his way out of it, is silly impressive. How many pitchers can do that? Then, on top of that, to become lights out in the 7th and 8th innings when others would be tiring. Meanwhile he's pounding the strike zone with unhittable shit.

I'm a believer.

Plus he looks like a genuinely nice guy.

10 lordbyron   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:32 pm

Speaking of Posada, he certainly wasn't too focused on the game during a few plays last night - failing to score from second on Cano's double; the ensuing running snafu at third base and, of course, abandoning home plate with only two outs and Tori Hunter on third. I love the guy, but what he was thinking?

11 weeping for brunnhilde   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:34 pm

[9] Hear, hear.

12 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:39 pm

I guess the other thread is kind of done so I am re-posting here, even though I might ruin the positive vibes:

One other thing: The third base ump was out of position on the Swisher play. He could have and should have gotten up the third base line a bit so he could have both the runner and the fielder in view. We’ve seen this a thousand times.

I think he may have done it on purpose. To make up for the bad call at second, he needed to be in position to call Swisher out no matter what, which would be by necessity the incorrect position. Conspiracy?

Did anyone see the post-game press conference when he said he “thought in [his] heart” that Swisher was out?

13 Yankee Mama   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:47 pm

[12] Yes, I saw the press conference and yes, I also believe he made the call to negate Scott's bad call. McClelland wasn't even looking at Swish's feet. His gaze was squarely on Torii.

Of course, we will never know the truth unless he writes a tell-all when he retires.

14 Diane Firstman   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:48 pm

From Joe Sheehan (the last line is classic)

Minutes later, McClelland made an inexplicable decision, calling Robinson Cano "safe" after Mike Napoli tagged him while Cano was standing a foot away from third base. Cano made a bizarre choice himself, appearing to surrender third base so that Jorge Posada could reoccupy it, which is the kind of thing the slow eight-year-old does in tee ball. Napoli tagged both runners while neither was on a base, but McClelland called Cano safe. Perhaps he knew Cano was safe in his small intestine.

15 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:49 pm

[12] I also think it was a makeup call, which is why I would come down hard on McClelland, who other wise is a good umpire (but he has been slipping).

16 Yankee Mama   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:51 pm

[14] That's a good one. LOL

17 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 1:56 pm

Before, I was saying that though Posada ended the whole affair in inimitable Posada style by running to, then away from, third base, it was Cano who was the architect of the situation. However, after watching highlights again, I have to modify that and say that Posada at least laid the foundation by being caught between third and home on a ground ball like that. Cano definitely was doing the weirder thing, but Posada had no business getting caught in a rundown there in the first place.

So Posada started it, Cano developed it, and then Posada put the finishing touches. A real team effort.

18 RIYank   ~  Oct 21, 2009 2:01 pm

Whoa, [3] [7] Rorschach picture.

I did see the smiley face right away. Now I definitely see Sliced's thingy too.

19 rbj   ~  Oct 21, 2009 2:05 pm

If the Swisher call was a make up one, then why make such another egregious call later on? It was almost as if calling Robbie safe was to make up for calling Swisher out.

[3] Um, yeah, eyes. That's what they remind me of. Eyes. Nothing else.

[0] What you said. Nice to have an ace again.

20 seamus   ~  Oct 21, 2009 2:33 pm

I thought Cano mostly did the right thing. He basically knew posada was nailed so he moved to take 3rd. I think that is what you want him to do. He stayed where either him or Posada would be safe at third. The real boggler is why Posada runs past third. Maybe he is thinking that Cano is faster but once you touch third why run past? And Cano probably should have just stayed on third base but he also knew that if Po touched third he'd be out. In reality, up until Posada runs past third the play is fine as someone should be safe at third. If Po is tagged out Cano steps on third. What got Cano confused was when Po got to third but still ran past it.

21 seamus   ~  Oct 21, 2009 2:37 pm

honestly though, who cares. We're up 3 to 1. Hopefully we see good AJ tomorrow.

22 Horace Clarke Era   ~  Oct 21, 2009 2:52 pm

[20] He stayed where either him or Posada would be safe at third.

This makes no sense Seamus, though after a 10-1 win it is okay!

The way to be sure someone is safe at third is ... to STAND ON THIRD.

23 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 2:55 pm

[20] Yes, you would want Cano to go move to third, but when I say that I mean and then stand on the bag. That's the play. It happens all the time, it's pro forma and it's safe, there's no thought required.

And if someone were to decide to add some thought to the mix, I'd hope that person wasn't Robinson Cano and I'd certainly hope his partner in crime wasn't Jorge Posada. The irony is, of course, that anyone with the smarts to pull of a stunt like that wouldn't attempt a stunt like that.

What Posada did was bizarre to be sure, but Cano created all the confusion. Like I say though, Posada never should have been caught in a rundown anyway.

24 51cq24   ~  Oct 21, 2009 2:58 pm

just imagine how much we'd be talking about this had it cost us the game! but i guess when we have arbitrary off days we have to talk about something. and it surely was ugly.
if the yanks win tomorrow, we'll have almost an entire week off before the world series, which starts wednesday. not that i'm rooting for a longer alcs, but that is insane.

25 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:02 pm

[24] It was so weird, I think it deserves as much attention as anyone wants to give it. Have any of the players spoken up about it? I'd like to hear what Cano and Posada have to say and Napoli too.

26 51cq24   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:13 pm

[25] it was definitely weird, for a bunch of reasons. but it's a play that doesn't happen al that much, and i don't think it's that huge a deal that cano wasn't sure what to do. obviously he should, and hopefully now he does, but i really think the bigger deal is how bad the umpiring has been. particularly since this bad umpiring negated the boneheaded play, which is why i'm not sure how we can be talking about fault or blame between posada and cano. both made very bad decisions, but i don't anticipate it happening again. bad umpiring, however, is sure to continue until something is done about it.

27 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:15 pm

[13] It's impossible to look at CF and a runner's feet at the same time. Peripheral vision is all he has. And Swisher swinging his arms actually makes it easier to call him out. Guts are connected, after all, to eyes and brains. McClelland "saw" Swisher "run". That's why another ump called him out on the same exact type of play.

28 51cq24   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:18 pm

[27] i agree, and i'm baffled by everyone continuing to point out that mcclelland "wasn't even looking at swisher!" of course he was watching the catch, and of course all he can do is see swisher with his peripheral vision. it was a bad call, but he did it the right way.

29 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:23 pm

[27] You don't necessarily get a view of his feet but he wasn't looking at Swisher at all. What I described is where he should have been.

30 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:24 pm

[26] I don't know what you mean that it doesn't happen that much but it's pretty common for a runner to advance to a base behind a rundown.

31 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:34 pm

[28] Exactly. But Swisher makes it harder to see the correct call. We can't ignore that.

As for Cano vs. Po, it's the same problem. The ump can only look one place at a time. Every human has the same limitation.

32 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:40 pm

[29] You can see alot with peripheral vision - close to a full 180 degrees. Just because you're not looking at something doesn't mean you don't see it.

Try this experiment. Look straight ahead. Have a friend or co-worker wiggle their finger in your periphery. You'll see it pretty far out. Now have them write a letter on a note card and put it in the same spot you saw the wiggling finger. See how long it takes you to identify the letter as they move it to directly in front of your face.

There's really only one way to judge the tag up. You have to watch the fielder to determine when he catches the ball AND you have to look for "early" movement from the runner. The problem for Swisher is he moves but he hasn't left the base. That's impossible for any ump to see properly. Perfect example where if you want the right call you absolutely need technology. The human is flawed. There's also no way for two umps to coordinate to get it right since neither can see what the other sees at the same exact time.

33 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:42 pm

[29] And positioning doesn't matter. You can only focus on one place at the same time. Seeing a foot on a bag requires the same detail-oriented vision (the fovea) as seeing a ball in a mitt. That they're often 100 to 200 feet apart makes it that much harder.

34 seamus   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:48 pm

[23] i don't understand how cano created any confusion. Po stands on the base, one of them gets called out. no big deal. Why was Po surprised to see him there? Of course his job is to advance. And Po runs past the bag? I can see no logic in that whatsoever. It doesn't matter, but hard to fathom how this is principally more Cano's fault than Posadas. In what situation ever in baseball is it ok to run past third base and stand there?

35 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:49 pm

[31] But let me amend that, if the ump watched the ball on the Po/Cano play, he gets the call right. When the ball touches Cano (via Napoli's mitt), Cano wasn't on the bag. He's out. Then when the ball touches Po, he's out.

36 seamus   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:53 pm

such a beautiful day. the real travesty is that i'm at work.

37 a.O   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:53 pm

[33] Positioning *does* matter. It is the only thing that matters. The way you make that call is to get down the line in foul territory so that both the CF and the runner are in your fovea. It is really very simple. No excuse for someone who has been umpiring that long.

38 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:58 pm

[37] Thanks for picking up here, i don't have it in me at the moment.

39 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 3:58 pm

[37] The runner's *foot* has to be in the fovea. That's impossible unless the ump is lying on the ground and looking out at CF and the base at the same time.

40 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 4:01 pm

[34] I don't what to say beyond what has already been said. He did something highly unusual during a play that is usually by the book (and for good reason). He was supposed to stand on the base like everyone else does. Posada, the catcher, the ump - everyone assumed he'd go ahead and do what you're supposed to do there, and acted accordingly, perhaps even Posada running off the bag. He may not have seen Cano's foot STILL wasn't on the bag. (I'm not excusing Posada because he's an idiot, at least for running towards home in the first place.)

41 thelarmis   ~  Oct 21, 2009 4:09 pm

[36] be thankful, my man - i'd kill for more work right now...

meanwhile, steve phillips has cheated on his wife...yet again. this time a relationship w/ a girl who works at espn. phillips has taken a leave of absence from the station.

1 down, morgan, buck, caray, timmay to follow... ; )

42 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 4:15 pm

[41] Have you seen the photo? She's the exact opposite of a goddess (last night's discussion). She looks like a man.

Any quotes from Phillips about A-Rod's friend previously that we can now bludgeon him with? :)

43 thelarmis   ~  Oct 21, 2009 4:18 pm

[42] no, i didn't. do you have a link to a picture of her?! wasn't he involved in an extra-marital affair back when he was the Muts GM?

44 Paul   ~  Oct 21, 2009 4:32 pm
45 thelarmis   ~  Oct 21, 2009 4:52 pm

[44] yikes! the "Silver One" doesn't have very good taste. oh well...

she's the anti future Mrs. Zack Greinke. that guy...WINS !!! : o

emily kuchar...pretty WOW!

46 The Hawk   ~  Oct 21, 2009 4:55 pm

What's really disturbing is how young she looks. Really looks like a kid.

47 thelarmis   ~  Oct 21, 2009 4:57 pm

[46] yeah. she's 22. i believe, he's like 47-48, even though he looks older, 'coz of his gray hair...

48 Raf   ~  Oct 21, 2009 5:44 pm

[45] It makes sense if you think about it. Figure since she's homely, she'd be grateful for the attention. It's kinda like why I had such low standards in college. While my buddies would poke fun at me, I would note that "it looks like a line drive in the boxscore."

Regarding the umpires, Fangraphs has an interesting solution


49 51cq24   ~  Oct 21, 2009 5:51 pm

[45] you definitely have a style, no wonder you went down south

50 RIYank   ~  Oct 21, 2009 6:07 pm

[44] Whoa.
Well, as the Mets will testify, Steve never did have an eye for talent.

feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email
"This ain't football. We do this every day."
--Earl Weaver