Game on!
 

Dodgers/Cardinals, Game 1. It's playoff time, baby!

25 Pitches by Woody Williams in the first.. good plate discipline.

And Vin Scully just dusted off the word Paucity.

I love it. Vin.. wanna come work some Sox games next year? :D

Pujols, first of many this postseason.

Bleh. I didn't get a good look at Finley's attempted catch, but from what I saw, it looked like a fan tried to swat it out of his glove. I hope that's just my eyes playing tricks on me.

Not sure who the home plate umpire is, but he sure has an interesting definition of the strike zone.

I hate those fucking "in the neighborhood" double plays. Renteria didn't touch the bag until after he had thrown the ball.

EDIT: Great dig out of the dirt by Pujols, though.

Damn I wish I was at home now. :(

I think baseball needs to change the rules - if a hitter asks for time when the pitcher is in his motion, it's an automatic strike. I've seen some guys almost seriously hurt themselves falling off the mound trying not to throw the pitch after stunts like that.

Argh, Perez, you gotta make those plays when you pick guys off. Thank God he got the next three guys out.

Bye Perez.

It's OV-AH!

I was rooting for the Dodgers.. Errrr, yeah. Go Cubs!

Dodger fans got out of bed for this?

Same here. Go Cards!

That duo looks to get going against Dodgers Game 1 starter Odalis Perez, who did not waste any time in making a bold prediction about this series.

``If we beat St. Louis, we're going to win the World Series,'' Perez said Sunday. ``If we beat them, this is it: Dodgers, champions.''

I thought that was an interesting quote. A big 'if', but straight to ws champs?

Never say die, folks. 53 come-from-behinders speak to that. If we can string a few hits together against Williams instead of this endless parade of popups, anything can happen. What kills me is that Perez wasn't pitching THAT badly until he fell apart in the 3rd. He'd only walked 1 and the only hit he gave up was the homer to Pujols, and then all of a sudden...wham, bam, hit the showers, kid.

Perez has a history of opening his mouth when he shouldn't. I love the confidence, but I think the team needs to win its first playoff game since '88 before you can start making sweeping statements like that.

I suppose his point was that the Cardinals will be the toughest team to beat in the playoffs, so if LA beats them then they should be able to beat anybody. But I agree, that is a big IF...

Dola-


Can Cardinals fans say die? ;)

Not until the fat lady sings! It's just the 4th inning of game 1. Writing the Dodgers off at this point would be a real good formula for a 1st round exit by the Cards.

The first run is always the hardest, boys, keep it goin'!

Take off the Dodger blue glasses and you will see it was clearly in the seats, if the fielder has his glove over the wall, anything goes.

Gah. I've lost count, but we have to be in double digits for pop fly outs this game. I know the Cardinals have a strong infield defense, but can't we just aim for line drives instead of fly balls? Where's my head-banging emoticon?

Also...I don't have any empirical proof to support what I'm about to say, but I think a big part of what makes the Cardinals' starting pitching so successful is that offense, and I don't mean from a W-L perspective.

Williams was struggling early, threw 60 pitches in the first few innings, and a big part of the reason why was a patient approach at the plate by the Dodgers. They were taking pitches, fouling pitches off, and generally trying to get something they could hit. The Cards put 5 on the board in the 4th, and since then, the Dodger bats seem to have shifted from the "make him work" approach they were taking against Williams to a "swing at what he tosses up there" approach. Werth looked foolish on a couple of his swings, even with the RBI double, just as a recent example.

Take your head out of your ass and re-read what I posted: "I didn't get a good look...."

I don't know if that's what happened or not, but from the brief glance I got as I looked up from my computer screen, it looked like that might have happened, and they haven't shown me a replay yet so I can get a better look at it.

For that matter, I have no problem with a fan trying to catch a ball that's clearly in the seats, but there is a difference between trying to catch a ball and trying to interfere with an opposing player as he tries to make a play. Bartman, for example, I didn't have a problem with his actions. He's at a game, he's got a foul ball coming towards him, he tries to catch it. Fine, wonderful. He didn't slap at Alou's glove or push him away or anything along those lines.

IF (and I capitalize that so you'll be sure not to misunderstand me again) the fan out in center did try to swat at Finley, then I have a problem with that. At that point he's moved beyond trying to catch a souvenir to directly interfering with a ball in play - just the same as if a fan reached over the wall in Dodger Stadium to pick up a double in the corner.

Again: I didn't see the play clearly. I post only what it looked like to me, and I'm not accusing anybody of having actually attempted to interfere. All I'm saying is that I hope it was just a bad look at a split-second shot, and that there was no attempted interference going on.

Classy

Yeah, so was telling me to "take off the Dodger blue glasses and you'll see that the ball was clearly in the seats" when I said up-front that I got only the briefest glimpse of the play.

I guess we get to share that crown, don't we?

I don't agree.

Good for you. Any other brilliant insights for us today?

Dodgers are quickly replacing the Red Sox at the bottom of the "who I want to win the world series" list. Go Cards.

I don't get it, just trying to get some courtesy, and comparing Dodger blue glasses to head up your ass seems a bit different to me.

You're not going to get courtesy when you accuse me of homerism in a post where I pretty clearly said "Look, I didn't get a good look at what happened, but here's what seemed to be going on, and I hope that's just my eyes playing tricks on me." I didn't accuse anybody of anything, I said nothing about it changing the course of the game, nowhere in my later posts do you see me coming back to that homer or what may or may not have happened. I was simply commenting on what appeared to be happening in the brief glimpse that I got.

And what do I get for that simple comment? Somebody who pretty clearly didn't read what I had to say telling me to "take off the Dodger blue glasses." I damn well take offense to that, and if you say such a thing to me - which you did - you're going to get told to take your head out of your ass, because that's pretty clearly where it must have been.

Unless your Cardinal red glasses were preventing you from understanding what I was saying in the first place.

Take your pick.

this thread has provided good humor since i've returned home from class. but in all seriousness, i am hoping for a cards series win.

Well, after it happened, did you watch the replay?

I didn't see a replay. Don't you think if I had, I'd have followed up on my comment?

I have no idea, if that had happened, I'm guessing that you would have hung in there and watched the replay.

Of course I would have watched the replay. But more to the point, if I had seen the replay, and it showed me that, yes, my eyes were playing tricks one, I would either have followed up my first post by saying that, or if I saw the replay soon enough to change the content of my first post, and the replay showed that, yes, my eyes were playing tricks on me, I would have done that, too.

I'm a Dodger fan, yes, but I'm going to call it how I see it, and that goes both ways. If it looks like the Cardinals got jobbed on something, and I see it, I'm going to bring that up. If it looks like the Dodgers might be getting the raw end, I'm going to bring that up, too.

And, obviously, calling it like I see it doesn't guarantee I'm going to be right. It does mean that I'm going to call it regardless of team loyalties. I want the Dodgers to win, but since how I see it isn't going to influence an outcome, what's the point in letting team loyalties color a perception?

the fan appeared to be backing away from the ball as it came in to me, FWIW

do the Dodger pitchers hold stock in Rawlings? they sure are getting rid of a lot of balls today ;)

And here I thought they were just trying to show their appreciation for the best fans in baseball by giving them a few souvenirs to take home? ;)

Fair enough, my initial post was not meant to insult, more to provoke discussion. If you had said Cardinal Red glasses, I would have had no beef. I think when you are a big fan of a team, it's very hard not to have your(or my) posts slanted towards the team you cheer for.

Sure, and I can understand that. I'm sure I HAVE been guilty of "Dodger blue glasses" on occasion, but when I am, there won't be any ambiguity about it. If you see me say "That's bullshit, the fan interfered," then either it was blatant interference, or else I've probably got my glasses on. If you see me expressing uncertainty, then the glasses are probably off. ;)

Why is Rolen still out there? With this lead, the ought to sub in for him and let him rest that leg.

only thing I can think is to try and get him back in shape?

[wishful thinking] maybe the leg isn't an issue anymore? [/wishful thinking]

Isringhausen is warming up? LaRussa must take this late-inning comeback thing seriously.

Well, Marquis vs Weaver and Morris vs Lima. I still see this as a sweep.

Cards/Astros sounds like a fun series.

Tom Wilson has just about the funkiest batting stance I've ever seen.

Wow. Can't argue with results.

Izzy trying to make this interesting?

8-3 = 1-0, baybee. :D

I'll take it! I'd like to see the Cards get through this series as quickly as possible.

Woohoo!