On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote:
> Then you missed McCarver's good line last night. During the bottom of > the eighth inning he said, "We've said all along that the only way the > Giants could win was through pitching. We didn't mean the Rangers' > pitching..." > It was a pretty good line at the time (I remember the syntax slightly differently, but the meaning is the same). But I thought last night, and have noticed today in other similar observations in the largely east coast dominated national sports media on Game 2, that this is being used to imply that somehow the Giants have been lucky, which is a crock. The truth is the Giants were ahead 2-0 prior to that 8th inning, and shut out the Rangers for the entire game. The Giants would have won even without the Ranger's pitching meltdown, and the Giant's success so far is largely based on what has been their strength all season (they had the lowest team ERA in the National League). The most commonly cited instance of "luck" was the fly ball that landed on the top of the outfield wall and bounced in for a double. Granted, I have seen hundreds and hundreds of games at this park, and dozens live, and I can't remember ever seeing that happen before. But had it bounced out you could have easily said it was the Rangers who were lucky. More to the point, the stranding of that runner at second (I believe with no outs) was not luck, but again, superior pitching and defense. The Ranger's pitching metldown itself was not a function of luck, but of inferior talent, choking under pressure, and bad managerial decisions (while seemingly every move Giant manager Bruce Botche makes turns to gold). -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
