Did you see

fonzzy07 · #1 (**permalink**) Sat Aug 05, 2006, 10:44am

Hey did any of you guys see the article on MLB umpires in ESPN the magazine. to me it seemed like a good article, any comments, ect.

mattmets · #2 (**permalink**) Sat Aug 05, 2006, 05:35pm

Just read it....didn't think it was anything that spectacular....this guy spent a week with Randy Marsh's crew and only had 4 pages of mostly regurgitated information? No stories from the guys on the crew, no real look at the depths of umpiring....just the typical stuff you see in every umpiring article.

Oh well, I guess every bit of exposure helps people understand it better, but I wasn't impressed with the article that much.

bobbybanaduck · #3 (**permalink**) Sun Aug 06, 2006, 06:58am

there is a book in the works about minor league guys. won't be published til fall of next year, but it should be pretty good. the guy who is writing it writes for the NY Times.

rookieblue · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Aug 07, 2006, 04:24pm

Oh, then I'll look in the "Fiction" section.

GarthB · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Aug 07, 2006, 05:09pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck

there is a book in the works about minor league guys. won't be published til fall of next year, but it should be pretty good. the guy who is writing it writes for the NY Times.

What is the basis for your opinion that "it should be pretty good?" Is it because that the author writes for the NY Times?

UMP25 · #6 (**permalink**) Thu Aug 10, 2006, 03:25am

No, it's probably because WhatWuzThatBlue wrote the foreword or something.

umpduck11 · #7 (**permalink**) Thu Aug 10, 2006, 10:00am

Quote:

Originally Posted by fonzzy07

Hey did any of you guys see the article on MLB umpires in ESPN the magazine. to me it seemed like a good article, any comments, ect.

If you are correct, then in my opinion, that would be the first "good" article
ever in ESPN the mag. That is the worst magazine available today. It should
be renamed " Diary of Popular Culture (oh yeah,with a little sports thrown in)
Magazine".

Carbide Keyman · #8 (**permalink**) Thu Aug 10, 2006, 03:43pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by umpduck11

If you are correct, then in my opinion, that would be the first "good" article
ever in ESPN the mag. That is the worst magazine available today. It should
be renamed " Diary of Popular Culture (oh yeah,with a little sports thrown in)
Magazine".

BOOOOOOOOOOYAH !!!!!!!!!!!

Umpduck, dog, you as cool as the other side of the pillow !

You done made all yo' kinfolk so proud ! Moesha, Tyreese, NanaMama, Darius, Ray-Ray ..................

Now, I'll be going BACK, BACK , BACK, BACK, BACK ..................

Doug

bobbybanaduck · #9 (**permalink**) Thu Aug 10, 2006, 11:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB

What is the basis for your opinion that "it should be pretty good?" Is it because that the author writes for the NY Times?

in part, yes, but there is more. he is an established writer that did a story about umpire school after attending Jimmy's for a few days a couple of years ago. he was so intrigued by the "umpire world" that he never knew existed that he enrolled in the 5 week course last year as a student, went through all the same things that the students went through, and also got a behind the scenes view from the instructing staff. he is also out on the road this year and has spent 3 days with an A ball crew, 4 days with a AA crew, plans on spending 5 days with a AAA crew, and has met with various big league guys as well. at the and of the season he plans on getting on the field and actually working some games around his hometown area, something he has never done before. the guy is putting in the effort to try and shed a little light on what all of us know is a tough job, but that somebody that has never called a game knows anything about. maybe we should all pitch in and buy McCarver a copy of it when it comes out...

UMP25 · #10 (**permalink**) Thu Aug 10, 2006, 11:45pm

The fact that the guy writes for that piece of trash called the New York Times is enough for me not to read the article.

aceholleran · #11 (**permalink**) Fri Aug 11, 2006, 12:45am

Quote:

Originally Posted by UMP25

The fact that the guy writes for that piece of trash called the New York Times is enough for me not to read the article.

Why? Too many polysyllables? Crossword too hard? No restaurant reviews of Cracker Barrel?

Ace

mrm21711 · #12 (**permalink**) Fri Aug 11, 2006, 01:45am

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceholleran

Why? Too many polysyllables? Crossword too hard? No restaurant reviews of Cracker Barrel?

Ace

Because UMP25 is right.

waltjp · #13 (**permalink**) Fri Aug 11, 2006, 07:50am

The New York Times is a first rate newspaper. You may not agree with everything they have to say but it's their constitutional right to publish it. Why everyone is so quick to deprecate The Times, when our nation was built upon the principle of free speech, is beyond me.

I guess most would prefer to have their news and information spoon-fed to them in neat, little sound bites so they don't have to take the time to research and think for themselves.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

voiceoflg · #14 (**permalink**) Fri Aug 11, 2006, 09:46am

Quote:

Originally Posted by waltjp

You may not agree with everything they have to say...

That's the problem I have with it. They don't differentiate between the news and the opinions. If they just gave the facts in their news stories and left the commentary to the opinion page, the NYT would be more reputable than it is today. I have a problem with any newspaper, no matter the slant, analyzing a story for me in the body of a news article.

GarthB · #15 (**permalink**) Fri Aug 11, 2006, 10:38am

Quote:

Originally Posted by voiceoflg

That's the problem I have with it. They don't differentiate between the news and the opinions.

Where did you read that?