![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Damned Washington Post...
Jun. 23rd, 2002 11:02 pmAnyone who follows baseball knows that Luis Castillo was working on a hitting streak that ended at 35 on Saturday night. He went 0 for 4 in Saturday's game, and he was standing in the on-deck circle in the ninth when Tim Raines hit a sac fly to win the game.
The Washington Post, in what can't be anything but an attempt to stir up controversy, helpfully points out:
So the Post's baseball writer thinks that, in the bottom of the ninth with the score tied and the winning run at third base, Tim Raines should have given more consideration to Castillo's run at an individual record than he should have given to winning the game. And he writes the paragraph in a way to subtly suggest that Raines was somehow grandstanding, or being selfish, in how he chose to take the at-bat. That much is bad enough.
Except: the story the Post ran is essentially the AP wire story - but the wire story contains a few critical additions. After the line quoted above, the AP story goes on to provide context:
In other words, Raines did what he did on explicit instructions from the manager - who affirmed, properly, that the business of baseball players is winning baseball games, not setting individual records. And the manager was happy to go on record laying these priorities out for the press.
Why did the Post story leave that out? I guess it makes for much better news if you can try to stir up some bad blood in the Marlins' clubhouse.
Feh.
The Washington Post, in what can't be anything but an attempt to stir up controversy, helpfully points out:
Raines could have guaranteed Castillo a fifth plate appearance by not swinging the bat - taking either a walk or a strikeout. Instead, Raines swung 2-0, then again on a 2-1 pitch.
So the Post's baseball writer thinks that, in the bottom of the ninth with the score tied and the winning run at third base, Tim Raines should have given more consideration to Castillo's run at an individual record than he should have given to winning the game. And he writes the paragraph in a way to subtly suggest that Raines was somehow grandstanding, or being selfish, in how he chose to take the at-bat. That much is bad enough.
Except: the story the Post ran is essentially the AP wire story - but the wire story contains a few critical additions. After the line quoted above, the AP story goes on to provide context:
He even asked Torborg what he should do.
"Tim Raines asked me before he went up there if I wanted him to bunt, and I said 'Shoot, no, win the game here. We can't mess around. We're going to be out of players.' And he followed instructions,'' Torborg said. [...]
"You've got to win the game,'' Torborg said. "The team comes first. You can't say enough about what Luis accomplished and what he's meant to the team, but you've got to win the game.''
In other words, Raines did what he did on explicit instructions from the manager - who affirmed, properly, that the business of baseball players is winning baseball games, not setting individual records. And the manager was happy to go on record laying these priorities out for the press.
Why did the Post story leave that out? I guess it makes for much better news if you can try to stir up some bad blood in the Marlins' clubhouse.
Feh.
