Pumpkin Eater

Alex Rodriguez cheated. Took the easy way. Lied. And if he really does have faith, as he said after the Red Sox game Sunday, he knows he’s right out of Pinocchio.

His lawyer, however, appears to have no idea what a gigantic donkey he himself is.

To recap —

Ryan Dempster missed Rodriguez with his first try, plonking him with his second — in the same at bat. He was clearly throwing at him, and he should have been ejected.

Later, Rodriguez helped his team win with an RBI groundout and a colossal home run that, in baseball parlance, means screw you.

The next day Major League Baseball said essentially the same thing to Rodriguez lackey and lawyer, Joe Tacopina.

I say these — including the part about tossing Dempster — as a Sox fan. Hate the Yankees. And based on, oh, every single one of these types of things that get played out in the media every time for like forever, Rodriguez did what MLB said he did, and is what he is demonstrating himself to be, every time he opens his mouth.

And then his lawyer said, “I can’t talk about stuff” because of confidentiality agreements.

This is the guy who kills his parents and pleads for the court’s mercy because he’s an orphan. Because there is a way — assuming into account all possible legalities and technicalities — for everyone to let Rodriguez says publicly as much as he likes. As he does now.

Whatever it would take, whichever side would have to waive whatever dealios, there is a way.

Yahoo!’s Tim Brown says simply, and to both parties, bring it.

[Brown, by the way, is the guy to read on this. He writes about baseball the way Rod Carew or Tony Gwynn played it: with elegance and class, making contact nearly every time, and getting tons of hits. Think Ichiro. Jeff Passan writes like my dog plays baseball. But I digress.]

The one corrective I suggest is that the bit from the lawyer wasn’t even good enough to be a bluff. If he tried it in an actual poker game it would technically be known as bullshit.

Watching Rodriguez jerk his team around — right, they don’t want you to play — helps me hate them a little less.

A little.

Even more, I hope my Red Sox don’t do that again. Though we know it will come back on them, next time they play the Evil Empire.

Instead, I hope they take my wife’s advice, and walk Rodriguez every time he’s up. She says every team should.

Hitting him is basic and boring, not to mention lying, cheating, and taking the easy way. Instead, refuse to pitch to him. Walk him every time. If he insists he “just wants to play” … OK let him. His on-base percentage will go through the roof.

But he won’t hit another home run, not ever.

And his lawyer could stop braying to all fields.

Not that he would.

 

Note: MLB fined and suspended Ryan Dempster, and
Joe Girardi was fined, for their parts in Sunday’s events.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent

Coyotes and Christians

I am not saying Christians are like coyotes. [For that, some could cut caustically to coyotes are like Christians — tricksters, roaming in the dark, feeding on the dead … ] Simply noticed — somewhat in passing, as it’s said, having attained, apparently … achieved? … some kind of state where nearly anything I hear,

Read More »

And Did Dostoevsky Say ‘Beauty Will Save’

Short answer: he did not. Neither did Prince Myshkin, that we know of. Likely both believed it. Beauty — in the person of Christ — will do so. And clearly D wrote of M in The Idiot to explore art and beauty and ugliness and salvation. But did he say it, and did he believe that

Read More »

What I Recalled Watching Netflix

[Television is educational.]   One Saying the same stuff over and over looks like you have different things to say. Two If you’re ever in a below-average film or streaming series, and you beat the tar out of a guy, in a house, and you gaze down in both some shock as also a certain

Read More »

Seeking the King

A line everywhere misattributed to Chesterton reads thus: The young man who rings the bell at the brothel is unconsciously looking for God. This line is not from the great [several senses of the word] man who recently celebrated his 150th birthday, but the mid-century most unmodern novelist Bruce Marshall. The words — which do

Read More »

Random

Battalions Book

This is the second book in the duology, with IRS Agents and Crack Whores. Where the first goes after the Church for its sins, this one asks those outside of faith into the discussion.

Read More »

Do Piece — Love (Frankl)

Love is the only way to grasp another human being in the innermost core of his personality. No one can become fully aware of the very essence of another human being unless he loves her. By his love he is enabled to see the essential traits and features in the beloved person; and even more,

Read More »

Protective Covering

A wayback bit of my memory mentions to me how George Thorogood and Bob Seger each felt, responded, etc., when asked to play their single most widely known songs — which are of course this one and this one, respectively — for live shows. Elements of the discussion — one article, with thoughts from both?

Read More »

Chiclet Chick Lit

In virtue of two females in the house reading it I have discovered a new (to me) genre and given it a new (to all) name, which title appears as the title of this post. Hermione is patron saint of females pre-sexual still satiated when tittering gleefully over Nancy Drew and Ned Nickerson, with New

Read More »

Related

When We Lie

If mere humans may have things abominable to them, mine is lying. I hate it in nearly all forms: commercial advertising and political propaganda, of course, as well as even when people doing good things feel compelled to pretend they are flawless: that the rotten thing they just did is required by that good thing

Read More »

Kingdom In

When we hear of our twinclinations — the two tendencies within us all, one toward good and one toward ill — most time is spent on the first. Anyway I’ve spent most of my time on that — on being most concerned over time with what’s good and am I being that, and often justifying what doesn’t

Read More »

Can We Tawk?

Comedienne Joan Rivers’ catchphrase was, ‘Can we talk?’ with all that that entails — its rhetorical nature, the Jewish thing, an implication that at least one of the parties will be better off for having done so … Like God. T’other day a priest spoke of ontological remembrance, the immediate and ongoing memory of past-present-future

Read More »

Why Not Two Cupcakes?

Something we know well and another I know little. Remember … re-member … before we begin Dallas Willard on knowing — namely … named-ly … not intellectual apprehension but interactive relationship. Each and both come from the same aim: good and right and lovely when well and harmful on all counts when not, as is

Read More »