The Sports Thread
- Thread starter Hell Awaits Us All
- Start date
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
Wow, so now you've resorted to completely removing the argument in order to defend yourself? This is amazing. Why don't you try actually arguing my points for once instead of just spewing bullshit? I don't even care about being right or wrong at this point, it's just a matter of getting you to understand how stupid you are, which you're apparently too stupid to see.
If you recall, you'll be aware that you're the one that started being a dick about it all. I simply asked you why you didn't think there should be replays in baseball.
This is funny because, while it may to be true that I've repeated myself over and over again, you still have failed to understand what I'm saying. You for some reason think that because I used "the batter walking up to the plate" as a comparable amount of time that it would take to actually review the majority of disputable plays, that somehow means that I was either 1) using it as part of my argument, 2) actually using it as part of my argument, or 3) claiming that every play needs to be reviewed, none of which I said or support. And of course the other points you totally ignored, but yeah that's cool.
I never said I don't like you you god damn pussy. This is a loud mouthed argument, nothing more. You don't have to put me on your internet bullies you need to avoid list just because I said that you're monarch of your own mind with a pink crown and a dildo scepter after you said the equally stupid "the problem is that I'm right," which is far from an effective means of debating your own argument. If you really want to pin me down as an "uppity, self-absorbed and angry little nerd," go the fuck ahead. I really don't care. Not that much of it's true, but your opinion of me is meaningless, as I'm sure you well know.
Well the only argument you have fucking posed is the time that it takes to review, making games longer, and thus more boring, which will decrease viewers' interest. The business side of the game doesn't give a shit about improving the game, it cares about improving the ratings.
You're forgetting that that was in response to this:
If I'm "a total e-badness pwner," then so are you.
Appealing to authority and the status quo is not an argument, you schmuck. So stop doing it. I never said that this will ever happen. I said that I think that it should and that it would benefit the game. So why you would say that it won't be implemented as part of your argument for review in baseball being a bad idea escapes me.
Also, do all of your opinions reflect that of the MLB? If not, are your opinions that are reflected by the MLB somehow better opinions than the ones that are not?
If you go back to your first response post to me, you'll see that the arguments you present reflect an implementation of review far removed from the one that I suggested. Accordingly, those arguments are not relevant to the argument, because I never proposed the points that you're arguing against. You're arguing against the implementation strategies that the MLB has already batted down, evidently, and not mine.
Most likely people who's opinions are essentially irrelevant as it is. Big deal. I've spoken to multiple people about the subject as well who have agreed that you've come out looking like the ass, whose opinions I will most likely respect far more than the people who PMed you (regardless of the fact that they agree with you), so I don't care. You make the mistake of thinking that I care about what everyone thinks. I only care what those whose opinions are even worthy of being expressed to being with think. And frankly, not everyone on this board fits that criteria.
This time, why don't you try arguing points instead of completely removing the argument, okay? That would be totally super great.
If you recall, you'll be aware that you're the one that started being a dick about it all. I simply asked you why you didn't think there should be replays in baseball.
This is funny because, while it may to be true that I've repeated myself over and over again, you still have failed to understand what I'm saying. You for some reason think that because I used "the batter walking up to the plate" as a comparable amount of time that it would take to actually review the majority of disputable plays, that somehow means that I was either 1) using it as part of my argument, 2) actually using it as part of my argument, or 3) claiming that every play needs to be reviewed, none of which I said or support. And of course the other points you totally ignored, but yeah that's cool.
I never said I don't like you you god damn pussy. This is a loud mouthed argument, nothing more. You don't have to put me on your internet bullies you need to avoid list just because I said that you're monarch of your own mind with a pink crown and a dildo scepter after you said the equally stupid "the problem is that I'm right," which is far from an effective means of debating your own argument. If you really want to pin me down as an "uppity, self-absorbed and angry little nerd," go the fuck ahead. I really don't care. Not that much of it's true, but your opinion of me is meaningless, as I'm sure you well know.
Well the only argument you have fucking posed is the time that it takes to review, making games longer, and thus more boring, which will decrease viewers' interest. The business side of the game doesn't give a shit about improving the game, it cares about improving the ratings.
You're forgetting that that was in response to this:
If I'm "a total e-badness pwner," then so are you.
Appealing to authority and the status quo is not an argument, you schmuck. So stop doing it. I never said that this will ever happen. I said that I think that it should and that it would benefit the game. So why you would say that it won't be implemented as part of your argument for review in baseball being a bad idea escapes me.
Also, do all of your opinions reflect that of the MLB? If not, are your opinions that are reflected by the MLB somehow better opinions than the ones that are not?
If you go back to your first response post to me, you'll see that the arguments you present reflect an implementation of review far removed from the one that I suggested. Accordingly, those arguments are not relevant to the argument, because I never proposed the points that you're arguing against. You're arguing against the implementation strategies that the MLB has already batted down, evidently, and not mine.
Most likely people who's opinions are essentially irrelevant as it is. Big deal. I've spoken to multiple people about the subject as well who have agreed that you've come out looking like the ass, whose opinions I will most likely respect far more than the people who PMed you (regardless of the fact that they agree with you), so I don't care. You make the mistake of thinking that I care about what everyone thinks. I only care what those whose opinions are even worthy of being expressed to being with think. And frankly, not everyone on this board fits that criteria.
This time, why don't you try arguing points instead of completely removing the argument, okay? That would be totally super great.
AchrisK
Weakling
Life Sucks
and then you die
One of the reasons the French national team is so good is because most of the players are actually Africans. I hate to say it, but West Africans are on the whole the best Athletes.
cookiecutter
Proceed to Ultraslamming
I watched most of the Maple Leafs Senators game last nightIm so glad hockey is back
ThisIsACoolName
Member
I've removed the argument because I don't feel like repeating myself anymore. This shit has become redundant. I've already made my point.
This started out as a civil discussion until you called me point "shitgasmic", actually. Try going back an re-reading this whole thing.
I know this is what you meant. I got it a while back and yet your still trying to claim that I don't get it. I have no problem admitting that I misinterpreted it at first, but if you go back and read it, it should be pretty clear that is was a simple misunderstanding and I was hardly being unreasonable for thinking that you meant to use it in your argument. I have said again and again that I don't think it's relevant as an argument or as a passing comment.
You pretty much did.
Of course. You do come across as uppity, though. I'm sure you're aware of this.
If adding replay would improve the game as much as you think, would that not make the game better and thus improve ratings? I don't see how you could totally seperate the interests of the business side of the game and the interests of making the game as good as possible. Obviously there are plenty of business decisions that are made without the better interests of the game in mind. I can see how increased length of game would impact TV / radio contracts, though I do not think that it would have enough of a negative impact to cause MLB to lose much money. I think it would make the game slightly more annoying to watch, but I think the majority of baseball fans would still watch the whole game. I know I would.
What I'm saying is, this topic has been debated many times already by the people who really know what they're talking about (as opposed to this, which is between people who pretty much know what they're talking about) and so far, every time it's been debated, the consensus has been against replay. I'm not using this is my argument so much as I'm using it as a passing comment (which is something I think your familiar with). In other words, if you were debating with someone who was actually a skilled debater, it wouldn't have gone on this long. I bring it up because I recognize that I'm not good at this shit.
I know what you're trying to do here, and it's not going to work. Of course I do not base all of my opinions on what MLB thinks, nor do I think that my own opinions are made "better" if MLB agrees with them or not. That would be absurd. In baseball matters, though, I'm assuming that the league has carefully considered any and all aspects of the game. The fact that my "side" in this whole thing is routinley upheld by the leagues decisions should show you that I'm obviously not talking out of my ass here. Obviously, though, there are plenty of things that I think MLB does wrong, but I do not believe that this is one of them.
And I severley doubt that you're the first one to propose the stategies of implementation that you've suggested here. I'd be pretty shocked if no one has ever gone into the GM's meeting and suggested that they use a panel of reviewers in a boothe using sophisticated video technology.
I'm well aware of what you're suggesting, but I still don't like it.
Great, so we both have people who think it's the other one who looks bad. Terrific.
The Yankees are playing tonight, so don't expect me to continue this further today. Maybe I will, depending on how you reply to this, but probably not.
The Heartbreak Kid
Afterimage
Haha, yeh I was kidding, there are some fantastic African players. And yeh I think you're right about West Africans.
AchrisK
Weakling
King Richard
Hello there
ThisIsACoolName
Member
I was in class, so I had to watch it on Gameday (needless to say, I learned very little about classifying stars). I was pleased with the end result, because I actually want the Red Sox to win. Every time they scored I got all pissed off, then I remembered I was supposed to be rooting... well, not against them.
The reason is because if the Yankees win their series with the Indians (which should be very tough), I certainly don't want them to play the Angels, because they are incapable of beating them. It's just one of those things. They are very capabable of beating the Red Sox, though.
cookiecutter
Proceed to Ultraslamming
Not if Beckett pitches like that. Besides you won't get past the Indians. They have someone named CC and someone named Fausto. Those names are way too cool to lose to Joba and Melky
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
Damnit, you were more civil than I intended, so the impact of this post will be less significant:
This entire argument appears to come down to one simple, fundamental point of conflit between our perceptions of the discourse, namely that I feel that getting the right call supersedes all other points of contention and concern and is, in fact, the singular primary motivation of sport officiating. I see expediency as merely a secondary concern, meaning that it can and should be sacrificed at the expense of giving more credence to ensuring that the right call is made when necessary. We don't seem to agree on this. That's fine. End of story, shake hands, etc.
BTW, I'm hoping this has been as much for your amusement as it has been for mine. And no, I didn't pretty much say that I don't like you.
This entire argument appears to come down to one simple, fundamental point of conflit between our perceptions of the discourse, namely that I feel that getting the right call supersedes all other points of contention and concern and is, in fact, the singular primary motivation of sport officiating. I see expediency as merely a secondary concern, meaning that it can and should be sacrificed at the expense of giving more credence to ensuring that the right call is made when necessary. We don't seem to agree on this. That's fine. End of story, shake hands, etc.
BTW, I'm hoping this has been as much for your amusement as it has been for mine. And no, I didn't pretty much say that I don't like you.
King Richard
Hello there
I see. Well like I'v said before, I'm not an avid baseball fan, however with all of the baseball talk I've gotten a bit interested since the playoffs are in full swing. To be honest, that Sox game was pretty nasty. They straight up raped the Angels. Granted I haven't watched the Sox, or any team for that matter, much this season but that was a pretty strong message sent to the rest of the teams. I'm interested in how the Yanks will respond to that to be honest.
AchrisK
Weakling
Valerie
¯\(ã)/¯
- Aug 29, 2005
- 6,765
- 4
- 38
Matt
Active Member
ThisIsACoolName
Member
Ok.
I tend to get far too bent out of shape about this kind of thing.
And why the fuck does Chien-Ming Wang suck on the road? I fucking knew Pettitte should have started this game, then Phillip Hughes in game two and Wang in game three.
Similar threads
