The Nats wore green caps (but their regular batting helmets and do-rags) last night against the Giants. The caps, which even had green underbrims, were part of a promotion to mark the launch of a new Discovery Networks cable channel called Planet Green.
Green has been my favorite color since I was about three years old, and I wish more teams would wear it. I have a green car, a green sofa, green sheets on my bed, green towels in my bathroom, and, lest we forget, a green-themed web site. I’m also supportive of the environmentalist movement and applaud teams that are taking eco-friendly steps.
That said, changing your uniform to support a commercial enterprise like a cable TV channel is way out of bounds for a big league team. More to the point, I think wearing green uni elements (additional pics here, here, and here) as a means of promoting the environmental agenda is total bullshit. Yeah, it’s a good cause, anything that raises awareness is a positive thing, blah-blah-blah, but I don’t like uniforms being used for specific issue-oriented purposes. I can kinda deal with the Earth Day patch that the Red Sox wore earlier this year, but a green cap is just too much. Much like all the pink uniforms for breast cancer research, this strikes me as a well-intentioned idea that simply doesn’t belong on the field of play. And every time another one of these issues becomes associated with a particular color, it opens the door for yet another issue to come along in the months and years ahead.
And besides, green caps are such a lip service-y way for something as wasteful as a sports franchise to approach environmental awareness. You really want to help the planet? How about scheduling more day games, so we don’t waste all that electricity running a gazillion stadium lights at night. Or organizing more mass transit options to the stadium (or installing bike lanes, or tripling your parking prices, or anything to discourage people from driving their cars to the game). Or scheduling an entire road trip by train instead of by chartered jet. Or not releasing a couple of thousand balloons into the sky on Opening Day.
But hey, if teams really want to make a uniform-based environmental gesture, here’s something I bet they haven’t thought of: Polyester is a petroleum product. What if, just for one day, all MLB teams ditched the polyester uniforms and wore cotton, a renewable natural fiber? Once the George Costanza jokes died down, you’d actually have a simple, elegant statement of eco-friendliness. And the teams would look way better besides.
Uni Watch News Ticker: Wanna see something great? Like, really great? Behold! Morris Levin picked it up from a street vendor in Philly and presented it to me in Camden last week. ”¦ Were old-time jerseys really that much heavier than today’s? Interesting analysis of that question here. ”¦ Got a nice note from Mike Bonasia, marketing director of the Greenville Drive (the Red Sox’s single-A affiliate): “One June 21st we’ll be celebrating Mill League baseball, which was a big part of the history of the textiles here in South Carolina and a precursor to the minor league system of today (our ballpark, Fluor Field, includes bricks from former textile mills in its design). We’ll be wearing 1950s-style uniforms — not as exact I would like to be (no stirrups, for one thing), but a very strong rendition when a budget is involved. Each player will have a different mill name on front of there jersey, with 30 different mills represented.” ”¦ Good article here about the Yankees’ visiting clubbies (with thanks to Bruce Soltys). ”¦ Jared Wheeler sent along the uni-description page from the 1969 American League Red Book. Coupla interesting observations: Jerseys are routinely referred to as “blouses,” and the Pilots’ cap was already being described as having “scrambled eggs” on the the brim right from the start. I thought that term had developed sort of organically, as part of the team’s in-season vernacular — didn’t realize it was part of their official specs! ”¦ And here’s the 1979 National League Green Book listing for the Pirates. Note that the pillbox cap is described as “‘Cap’ Anson style.” ”¦ Better photos of the St. Paul Saints’ purple/Prince game here and here. “We also had a purple bases with Prince’s logo on them,” says the team’s ticket sales manager, Mike Nachreiner. ”¦ Yesterday I linked to this photo, which appeared to show mismatched colors in the Lakers’ uni set. That prompted Brett Baker to send along several similar examples, as seen here, here, and here. “This was actually one of my first uni-watching moments as a young uni freak back in the ’80s,” he writes. “Over time I came to the conclusion that they were ordered from different lots or suppliers and mixed together.” ”¦ According to a quip buried in the middle of this story, Nick Swisher credits some of his recent success to the fact that he’s been wearing Toby Hall’s pants (good catch by Greg Sharp). ”¦ Cool contribution from Hank Siarczynski, who writes: “Every year the Reading, Pennsylvania, municipal airport has a WW2 weekend with the usual re-enactors, vintage war planes and the like. While touring the uniform exhibit in the main hangar this past Saturday, I came across this baseball uni top worn by the USMC, circa 1944-45.” Hank didn’t notice (or at least he didn’t mention) the most interesting detail: Check out how the second button is colored to match the lettering, so as not to stand out so much. Never seen that before! ”¦ According to this story, Jerry Rice offered to let Isaac Bruce wear No. 80 now that he’s with the 49ers, but Bruce declined and will instead wear 88. ”¦ Former Mississippi State baseball coach Ron Polk wants his name removed from the school’s stadium (with thanks to Minna H.). ”¦ The USA and Argentina played a soccer match at Giants Stadium last night. “Because it was a home game for us at Giants Stadium, we got to wear our home whites,” says Harvey Lee. “Because we were playing fabled Argentina, they got to wear their home sky blue/white kit, so both teams had white jerseys. Because it was an international friendly, concessions were probably made. Unfortunately, it was very difficult to watch the game on TV. At least they made them wear different colored shorts and socks [full photo gallery here]. In the 1986 World Cup Final, they made Germany, who also wears a home white jersey, wear their road greens for the big game; in the 1990 World Cup Final rematch, Germany got to wear the home whites and Argentina wore their away blues.” … Reprinted from last night’s comment: If you skip ahead to the 2:08 mark of this video clip, you’ll see Marcus McCauley of the Vikings explaining why he’s changed numbers from 31 to 21 (somewhat incredibly, it has nothing to do with Sean Taylor).
I joined the army in 1990. (not recommended)
When we were issued our uniforms, they called our shirts blouses. Even the Drill Sargeants called them blouses. It struck me as odd.
Also, the term Scrambled Eggs has been around a lot longer than the summer of ’69.
link
If you ever want to get a bunch of replica WW2 unis, go here …
link
So much for trusting league guides…they’re only as good as the info teams supply them, such as that ’62 TSN clip that says orignal Mets home unis were white with orange piping. That 1969 guide shown here today give a description (error-filled, too) of the White Sox 1968 Uniforms (road lettering wasn’t black in’68, was navy). In ’69 the White Sox wore, for one thing, white stirrups with royal stripes and royal sanitaries. And they dropped pinstripes for ’69 or ’70, bringing them back in red for ’71.
That’s part of the fun of this, tough, isn’t it, spotting the oddities and inconsistencies.
Ooops.
Wrong link.
Go here for the hat egg thing.
link
Jeez, enough typos in that? Sorry, it’s still early.
Pictures from the Holland vs Italy game last night.
Holland has the most massive numbers on the back of their jerseys and it looks like they were done with masking tape! also Holland is rocking the orange kits with the baby blue socks.
link
[quote comment=”274724″]Ooops.
Wrong link.
Go here for the hat egg thing.
link
I think you meant this:
link
Fascinating. I had no idea the term was so entrenched!
also Holland is rocking the orange kits with the baby blue socks.
Nassau blue, as in the Royal House of Nassau.
sweet uni-related quote from robert donadoni (italy coach) regarding fans in yesterday’s match:
i think the netherlands team are helped by the fans all dressing in orange – you really notice them. aesthetically, it is beautiful
guess teh dutch Get It (TM)
Awesome story about the Yankees clubbies, love to hear the behind the scenes stuff.Oranje looked fabulous not only did they beat the Italians (thank god) they did it in style.
That was one thought provoking rant today. I too have always thought a couple of color changes were a very lame attempt to help a cause myself.
If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.
Paul, the Marines jersey with the matching button on the logo reminds me of something non-uni related but something you might find interesting nonetheless. I remember when MINI was starting out their recent foray in the US auto market. They had adds in the center of some auto mags and the staples were yellow to go with the theme of the ad.
Regarding the Lakers purple mismatches, it might just be that different types of purple fabric show up differently in photographs.
Check out this SI cover of Herschel with the Vikings…
link
I also find the gimmicky hats annoying.
“Or organizing more mass transit options to the stadium (or installing bike lanes, or tripling your parking prices, or anything to discourage people from driving their cars to the game). Or scheduling an entire road trip by train instead of by chartered jet.”
You may be pleased to know that Nationals Park has plentiful bike racks and even a bike valet. It is located a few hundred feet south of the Navy Yard station on the Green line. In the run up to the season, the team preached, Metro, Metro, Metro because there was not enough parking nearby. This has been corrected, but nobody knows about it or are not willing to pay for parking that is twice as much as last year at minimum. They also take the train between D.C. and Philly, probably New York too. Nationals Park is LEED Certified too.
Due to the parking issues, they didn’t schedule many day games though :(
[quote comment=”274742″]I also find the gimmicky hats annoying.
“Or organizing more mass transit options to the stadium (or installing bike lanes, or tripling your parking prices, or anything to discourage people from driving their cars to the game). Or scheduling an entire road trip by train instead of by chartered jet.”
You may be pleased to know that Nationals Park has plentiful bike racks and even a bike valet. It is located a few hundred feet south of the Navy Yard station on the Green line. In the run up to the season, the team preached, Metro, Metro, Metro because there was not enough parking nearby. This has been corrected, but nobody knows about it or are not willing to pay for parking that is twice as much as last year at minimum. They also take the train between D.C. and Philly, probably New York too. Nationals Park is LEED Certified too.
Due to the parking issues, they didn’t schedule many day games though :([/quote]
WFY, you nailed it. I was just about to say that, of all the teams in MLB, the Nationals were probably the worst one to take to task over non-car accessibility, given the prevalence of Metro and the near impossible parking situation by the Navy Yard.
One of the reasons why West Germany wore green in the 1986 World Cup final and Argentina
wore solid blue in the 1990 final was to accomedate those people around the world who were
watching the game on black and white television sets.
Uniforms being used to promote a cable channel brings back memories of this ill-fated experiment: link
What I’m more concerned about than the “gimmicky” use of the green caps was the idea that the green caps, as part of a promotion for a TV network, in my opinion, constitutes on-uniform advertising for a commercial entity.
I mentioned this when the word originally came out, but I don’t remember seeing any other feedback come back. Am I wrong, or am I just the only person who cares. (I don’t think the second option is very likely on this site!)
In my opinion, you’re off base with the callout on the Nationals.
I’m not Nats fan, nor am I a big fan of the caps, either … unless they’re sustainable, made of US materials in an old textile factory.
But I have been to a game at their stadium.
“You really want to help the planet? … Or organizing more mass transit options to the stadium (or installing bike lanes, or tripling your parking prices, or anything to discourage people from driving their cars to the game).”
Obviously, you’re not aware that the Nationals’ ballpark is the only LEED certified venue in all the US. They DO highly promote use of the METRO … it’s truly the best way to get to the game. They have thousands, and I mean thousands of bike rack parking spaces … and only something like 1,500 car spaces. The fees to park are very high.
So, when it comes to environmental stewardship, I think the Nationals take a leadership position. Which is why they did the promo, I suppose. Could they have carried it out more appropriately with more sustainable hatwear, sure. Perhaps recycled hats … of mishmash color (no dyes).
PS – Long live the Astros’ candy stripes!
If you are a male between 35 and 40, this may be one of the most disturbing uniform images of all time:
link
(go to image 11)
[quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).
Is that “Teen Wolf” in the second lakers purple mismatch photo?
link
Unless I’m missing something, Nationals Staduim is not even listed as Registered Project on the USGBC website, let alone LEED Certified.
The only part of the green rant I’d disagree with is getting rid of, or charging more for parking spaces. I already pay about $30 a spot when I go to games, and since I’m coming from out of town my only other option would be to take the park-n-ride to the game, which really isn’t viable for me since many games run past the time when the trains run to where I’d need to go, aka I have to drive if I want to go to a game in Chicago. Hell, even when I’ve used the park-n-ride to go to day games, I still drive the first 60 miles to Chicago before hitting the train, knocking the last 10 miles is nice, but sometimes it just isn’t an option, and I doubt the extra $30 they charge for the spot would go towards any “green” charities, more likely right into Reindorf’s pocket. Just be happy knowing I’m not driving there alone, 6 guys in a Sebring is not only sweety and fun, but energy-effective as well.
[quote comment=”274744″]One of the reasons why West Germany wore green in the 1986 World Cup final and Argentina
wore solid blue in the 1990 final was to accomedate those people around the world who were
watching the game on black and white television sets.[/quote]
Also, I heard that Germany used to wear green as thier alternate strip as a gesture to Ireland, who were the only soccer team to agree to play against them during the war years. Not sure if that is true…
Check that- it’s listed as “DC Major League Ballpark”.
Carry On.
[quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.
[quote comment=”274746″]What I’m more concerned about than the “gimmicky” use of the green caps was the idea that the green caps, as part of a promotion for a TV network, in my opinion, constitutes on-uniform advertising for a commercial entity.
I mentioned this when the word originally came out, but I don’t remember seeing any other feedback come back. Am I wrong, or am I just the only person who cares. (I don’t think the second option is very likely on this site!)[/quote]
It is drawing a fine line between awareness and advertising. Of course had the hats been brandished with the network’s logo that would be a totally different issue. I don’t have a problem with a team “going green” and wearing a green cap in and of itself, but this was a promotional tool for the station and that’s a slippery slope.
I know I’ve disagreed with Paul and others on the logo creep issue. I don’t have any issue seeing Nike, Reebok, Adidas, et al’s logos on unis.
Corporate ads are a completely different story. The LAST thing I want is to see MLB, NFL, NHL and NBA jerseys look like what you see in minor league hockey in the states and european hockey, arena football and european soccer (and soccer around the world really).
Here’s my issue with the green hats for causes, pink jerseys and bats for causes, etc. Deep down, I don’t think 99% of these organizations give two craps about the cause they are ‘promoting.’ It all comes down to marketing. They figure if they go out in support of whatever cause it may be, people will buy those hats, jerseys, etc., being used during that one game. Even better, since they’re different, people who already own a mainstream hat or jersey will need to buy one, to show what a ‘great fan’ they truly are.
It’s no different than all of the alternate jerseys. They’re only there so they can sell them. Why else would someone approve something as absolutely disgusting as this???
link
[quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).
[quote comment=”274748″]If you are a male between 35 and 40, this may be one of the most disturbing uniform images of all time:
link
(go to image 11)[/quote]
i’m a man…i’m 42…come after me
link
it was disturbing last night, and it is even more so today
Triple parking prices? Great idea Paul! How ’bout half price Prius parking? How ’bout free parking if you wear some Obama gear. Perhaps 81 doubleheaders is the answer to the climate and energy crisis?
You are so right about the “opening day balloon problem”. The latex and helium burn up in the atmosphere and add to the Greenhouse effect. I say “Stop the Balloons, Save the Planet!”
I believe that the opening of the Shoeless Joe Jackson Museum is part of the celebration of Mill League Baseball in Greenville, SC next weekend.
Could someone explain why McCauly changed his number, the video link is not working.
Thanks in advance
What street did you get the Mets shirt on? I hate the Mets but my buddy is coming back from Iraq and think that would be a great shirt for him as a mets fan.
[quote comment=”274758″]Here’s my issue with the green hats for causes, pink jerseys and bats for causes, etc. Deep down, I don’t think 99% of these organizations give two craps about the cause they are ‘promoting.’ It all comes down to marketing. They figure if they go out in support of whatever cause it may be, people will buy those hats, jerseys, etc., being used during that one game. Even better, since they’re different, people who already own a mainstream hat or jersey will need to buy one, to show what a ‘great fan’ they truly are.
It’s no different than all of the alternate jerseys. They’re only there so they can sell them. Why else would someone approve something as absolutely disgusting as this???
link
Why is there a Uterus on that jersey?!?
[quote comment=”274752″]The only part of the green rant I’d disagree with is getting rid of, or charging more for parking spaces. I already pay about $30 a spot when I go to games, and since I’m coming from out of town my only other option would be to take the park-n-ride to the game, which really isn’t viable for me since many games run past the time when the trains run to where I’d need to go, aka I have to drive if I want to go to a game in Chicago. Hell, even when I’ve used the park-n-ride to go to day games, I still drive the first 60 miles to Chicago before hitting the train, knocking the last 10 miles is nice, but sometimes it just isn’t an option, and I doubt the extra $30 they charge for the spot would go towards any “green” charities, more likely right into Reindorf’s pocket. Just be happy knowing I’m not driving there alone, 6 guys in a Sebring is not only sweety and fun, but energy-effective as well.[/quote]
Tripling the cost of parking would not encourage me to take mass transit. It would encourage me to not go at all. But, then, I live near Austin, TX and mass transit to Houston or Dallas or San Antonio isn’t a viable alternative. Even taking the bus to a UT game isn’t appropriate because it would take over two hours to get to the game and over two hours to get back. Why would I spend more time on the bust than in my seat at the game?
[quote comment=”274766″][quote comment=”274752″]The only part of the green rant I’d disagree with is getting rid of, or charging more for parking spaces. I already pay about $30 a spot when I go to games, and since I’m coming from out of town my only other option would be to take the park-n-ride to the game, which really isn’t viable for me since many games run past the time when the trains run to where I’d need to go, aka I have to drive if I want to go to a game in Chicago. Hell, even when I’ve used the park-n-ride to go to day games, I still drive the first 60 miles to Chicago before hitting the train, knocking the last 10 miles is nice, but sometimes it just isn’t an option, and I doubt the extra $30 they charge for the spot would go towards any “green” charities, more likely right into Reindorf’s pocket. Just be happy knowing I’m not driving there alone, 6 guys in a Sebring is not only sweety and fun, but energy-effective as well.[/quote]
Tripling the cost of parking would not encourage me to take mass transit. It would encourage me to not go at all. But, then, I live near Austin, TX and mass transit to Houston or Dallas or San Antonio isn’t a viable alternative. Even taking the bus to a UT game isn’t appropriate because it would take over two hours to get to the game and over two hours to get back. Why would I spend more time on the bust than in my seat at the game?[/quote]
I enjoy spending time on the bust.
how often do you see this?
link
[quote comment=”274758″]Here’s my issue with the green hats for causes, pink jerseys and bats for causes, etc. Deep down, I don’t think 99% of these organizations give two craps about the cause they are ‘promoting.’ It all comes down to marketing. They figure if they go out in support of whatever cause it may be, people will buy those hats, jerseys, etc., being used during that one game. Even better, since they’re different, people who already own a mainstream hat or jersey will need to buy one, to show what a ‘great fan’ they truly are.
It’s no different than all of the alternate jerseys. They’re only there so they can sell them. Why else would someone approve something as absolutely disgusting as this???
link
I imagine it’s a little of both…profit and commitment. Certainly no team is getting rich peddling its pink bats, but money IS money. However, it probably is difficult to find people in baseball–players or management–who don’t have someone they care about who has battled cancer.
The Pink and Blue promotions, largely because of some corporate patrons, do raise a fair amount of money. Plus, I heard a guy from the Father’s Day group say that every year the busiest month for men getting prostate exams is the 30 days following Father’s Day. I suspect the blue wristbands and talk of them contributes to that, at least a little. It certainly doesn’t have a negative effect.
The main thing, though–and I heartily agree with you on this–is let’s not have so many that it becomes “Cause of the Week”. I can see it now: every team wearing purple (to symbolize the bruises) in support of those unfortunate folks injured learning to skateboard.
[quote]Tripling the cost of parking would not encourage me to take mass transit.[/quote]
i gotta agree 100% with ya there rick
part of my job involves dealing with the DOT on an almost daily basis, as well as local governmental agencies who are all involved with traffic planning in one way or another…the use of disincentives is completely against all laws of logic as well as economics
you don’t want me to drive to the game…fine…i won’t…i won’t GO AT ALL if you’re gonna rape me to park
however…gimme a FREE ride on the subway, and now we’re talkin! give me a REASON to go to the game (like free or reduced rate mass transit,a bike, etc), NOT a reason NOT to
it’s like in NY…we ended a promotion we had had on buying cars like the prius or hybrid vehicles, which can cost, on average $10K more…by eliminating the tax advantages and rebates that once came along with said purchase…remove the incentive to buy a fuel efficient car and guess what…i won’t…that’s a disincentive and it’s disingenius…but give me a REASON to buy a fuel efficient car and ya know what…i just might
/back to unis now…sorry
In defense of the Nationals, they did give out free return trip Metro tickets to the first 1,000 or so fans last night. Among all the parks I’ve been to, they are embracing the environmental impact the best. As others have said, there are TONS of bike racks and one of the entrances/exits of the Metro station is used exclusively for game fans. There are ads all over Metro cars encouraging people to train to the game and if they want to drive, then they should drive to a Metro station and train the rest of the way in.
One more eco-friendly innovation in Washington: Biodegradable pitching.
[quote comment=”274747″]In my opinion, you’re off base with the callout on the Nationals.
I’m not Nats fan, nor am I a big fan of the caps, either … unless they’re sustainable, made of US materials in an old textile factory.
But I have been to a game at their stadium.
“You really want to help the planet? … Or organizing more mass transit options to the stadium (or installing bike lanes, or tripling your parking prices, or anything to discourage people from driving their cars to the game).”
Obviously, you’re not aware that the Nationals’ ballpark is the only LEED certified venue in all the US. They DO highly promote use of the METRO … it’s truly the best way to get to the game. They have thousands, and I mean thousands of bike rack parking spaces … and only something like 1,500 car spaces. The fees to park are very high.
So, when it comes to environmental stewardship, I think the Nationals take a leadership position. Which is why they did the promo, I suppose. Could they have carried it out more appropriately with more sustainable hatwear, sure. Perhaps recycled hats … of mishmash color (no dyes).
PS – Long live the Astros’ candy stripes![/quote]
Discovery Communications, parent of all the Discovery channels, is based in Silver Spring, Maryland, just outside of D.C. I\’m sure the combination of the Nationals already green thumb and the proximity of the team to the network is why they were involved.
[quote comment=”274763″]Could someone explain why McCauly changed his number, the video link is not working.
Thanks in advance[/quote]
Basically he had always wanted to wear #21 for players like Deion Sanders and Charles Woodson, but in college and high school it had never been available. He also says that it symbolizes him maturing as a player, as #31 was his last uniform number option last year (his rookie season).
No team in baseball does more to stop fans from driving to a game from the front office and by play on the field.
Who cares why Discovery and the Nats are in bed together on this, it’s a minor leaugue promotion.
What’s next Nats’ Redneck day where they wear the cutoff plaid?
Toronto Maple Leafs to announce new coach Ron Wilson today. Wonder if he’ll get a jersey with his name on it.
Always thought it was weird for coaches to get jerseys. Except for baseball I guess because they actually wear them.
CALLING ALL UNI-WATCHERS
Slightly OT
Does anyone out there have any pictures of The Monuments at Yankee Stadium when they were in the playing field?
Any help given would be very much appreciated.
Please email them or the link to link. (I won’t have much time to check the site today which is why I would prefer to have them emailed.)
Thanks again.
Can any serious authentic jersey collectors on this site tell me if they think this is a legit site?
link
[quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
Not calling the Argentines snobs, just stating the fact that they (rightly) probably would not have agreed to play on turf right before their World Cup qualifying started. Don’t know about the turf rule, weren’t the Euro 2008 qualifiers in Russia played on the turf? And I know some Scandinavian countries play all on turf. I think the grass put down for the Champions League final was probably insisted upon by UEFA because they did not want (arguably) the most important game of the year on turf.
[quote comment=”274779″]CALLING ALL UNI-WATCHERS
Slightly OT
Does anyone out there have any pictures of The Monuments at Yankee Stadium when they were in the playing field?
Any help given would be very much appreciated.
Please email them or the link to link. (I won’t have much time to check the site today which is why I would prefer to have them emailed.)
Thanks again.[/quote]
ah jay…about 6 years ago i was searching for the same thing, and i happened to stumble on the motherlode…unfortunately i didn’t bookmark the site and i’m too busy at work right now to search for it
i did have link from the ballparks of baseball site…but it’s not the one i was thinking of (real far away shot)
of course, during 61* there’s a great opening scene where there’s a ball hit into the yankee stadium outfield and a ball is seen bouncing around all the monuments and the flagpole and shit
i’ll e-mail you that one pick/link, and if i get more time, i’ll try to track down those shots
Anyone want to post a better link for the AL uni guide? All I got was the URL on a page….
[quote comment=”274781″][quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
Not calling the Argentines snobs, just stating the fact that they (rightly) probably would not have agreed to play on turf right before their World Cup qualifying started. Don’t know about the turf rule, weren’t the Euro 2008 qualifiers in Russia played on the turf? And I know some Scandinavian countries play all on turf. I think the grass put down for the Champions League final was probably insisted upon by UEFA because they did not want (arguably) the most important game of the year on turf.[/quote]
FIFA says you can play on certain fake stuff. Some of the FieldTurf (and FieldTurf-like) surfaces can be fine…..but the Giants’ Stadium stuff is garbage. I wouldn’t call the Argies snobs, as I’m sure US Soccer wouldn’t have played there without the grass, too.
[quote comment=”274782″][quote comment=”274779″]CALLING ALL UNI-WATCHERS
Slightly OT
Does anyone out there have any pictures of The Monuments at Yankee Stadium when they were in the playing field?
Any help given would be very much appreciated.
Please email them or the link to link. (I won’t have much time to check the site today which is why I would prefer to have them emailed.)
Thanks again.[/quote]
ah jay…about 6 years ago i was searching for the same thing, and i happened to stumble on the motherlode…unfortunately i didn’t bookmark the site and i’m too busy at work right now to search for it
i did have link from the ballparks of baseball site…but it’s not the one i was thinking of (real far away shot)
of course, during 61* there’s a great opening scene where there’s a ball hit into the yankee stadium outfield and a ball is seen bouncing around all the monuments and the flagpole and shit
i’ll e-mail you that one pick/link, and if i get more time, i’ll try to track down those shots[/quote]
Thanks phil…link
[quote comment=”274768″]how often do you see this?
link
Once is quite enough, thank you.
[quote comment=”274783″]Anyone want to post a better link for the AL uni guide? All I got was the URL on a page….[/quote]
Try this one.
link
The Twins logo is great, they should use that more often.
[quote comment=”274780″]Can any serious authentic jersey collectors on this site tell me if they think this is a legit site?
link
They only have ONE Red Sox jersey and TWO Yankees jerseys. Obviously they are not serious about their website.
[quote comment=”274784″][quote comment=”274781″][quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
Not calling the Argentines snobs, just stating the fact that they (rightly) probably would not have agreed to play on turf right before their World Cup qualifying started. Don’t know about the turf rule, weren’t the Euro 2008 qualifiers in Russia played on the turf? And I know some Scandinavian countries play all on turf. I think the grass put down for the Champions League final was probably insisted upon by UEFA because they did not want (arguably) the most important game of the year on turf.[/quote]
FIFA says you can play on certain fake stuff. Some of the FieldTurf (and FieldTurf-like) surfaces can be fine…..but the Giants’ Stadium stuff is garbage. I wouldn’t call the Argies snobs, as I’m sure US Soccer wouldn’t have played there without the grass, too.[/quote]
Here’s a link to a story on the England/Russia qualifier played on the “artificual pitch” in Russia.
link
But I bet the English (especially Paul Robinson) would have preferred the artificial turf over the real grass against Croatia.
link
[quote comment=”274784″][quote comment=”274781″][quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
Not calling the Argentines snobs, just stating the fact that they (rightly) probably would not have agreed to play on turf right before their World Cup qualifying started. Don’t know about the turf rule, weren’t the Euro 2008 qualifiers in Russia played on the turf? And I know some Scandinavian countries play all on turf. I think the grass put down for the Champions League final was probably insisted upon by UEFA because they did not want (arguably) the most important game of the year on turf.[/quote]
FIFA says you can play on certain fake stuff. Some of the FieldTurf (and FieldTurf-like) surfaces can be fine…..but the Giants’ Stadium stuff is garbage. I wouldn’t call the Argies snobs, as I’m sure US Soccer wouldn’t have played there without the grass, too.[/quote]
I doubt the US would have cared, half of their players play on artificial turf for the their club teams. Don’t get me wrong, I hate artificial turf as much as the next guy, but I’m sure it was just the Argentine suits that requested it as not to get any of their players hurt before qualifying.
Couldn’t agree more on the hideousness of gimmicky hats. Can’t teams just do a patch job? Wouldn’t that be cheaper, too, and thus more consistent with the intended effect?
[quote comment=\”274792\”]Couldn’t agree more on the hideousness of gimmicky hats. Can’t teams just do a patch job? Wouldn’t that be cheaper, too, and thus more consistent with the intended effect?[quote]
I may be crazy here but isn’t all the extra materials, time, and expense to make a one-time “yea environment!” statement the antithesis of what the green movement is all about? How many of those silly “carbon credits” were burned to make the green hats?
[quote comment=”274791″][quote comment=”274784″][quote comment=”274781″][quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
Not calling the Argentines snobs, just stating the fact that they (rightly) probably would not have agreed to play on turf right before their World Cup qualifying started. Don’t know about the turf rule, weren’t the Euro 2008 qualifiers in Russia played on the turf? And I know some Scandinavian countries play all on turf. I think the grass put down for the Champions League final was probably insisted upon by UEFA because they did not want (arguably) the most important game of the year on turf.[/quote]
FIFA says you can play on certain fake stuff. Some of the FieldTurf (and FieldTurf-like) surfaces can be fine…..but the Giants’ Stadium stuff is garbage. I wouldn’t call the Argies snobs, as I’m sure US Soccer wouldn’t have played there without the grass, too.[/quote]
I doubt the US would have cared, half of their players play on artificial turf for the their club teams. Don’t get me wrong, I hate artificial turf as much as the next guy, but I’m sure it was just the Argentine suits that requested it as not to get any of their players hurt before qualifying.[/quote]
Half the US players? Uh…no.
Toronto, NY, New England, and Salt Lake have fake grass. Salt Lake is the worst of the bunch, and none of those guys are in the National Team pool. NY is the next worst, and it’s most likely National Team player is now headed to go play in Spain (on real grass), New England and Toronto have better stuff (less worse?) and have a couple of guys. The rest all play overseas (on real grass), or on real grass in MLS. And MLS players are increasingly coming out against artificial turf.
Re: Grass v. Turf
At the pro and international level grass may be preferred, but I coach high school girls soccer and we *love* the Field-Turf! On turf you get a true bounce, consistent “grass” length/thickness, no hills and valleys, and no sprinklers. Some of the HS fields we play on in the urban schools around San Francisco are just terrible. In one game, not only was the field pocked with gopher holes, but we were visited by the actual gopher! We almost gave up a goal because our players were distracted by the “cute little guy.”
Plus, the turf is always a nice even green, which makes everyone look better (so it’s really about athletics aesthetics, not twisted knees and sprained ankles…and relevant to this site!)
babe ruth never played on artificial turf
but he ate a lot of artificial meat! mmm NYC hot dogs…
[quote comment=”274747″]In my opinion, you’re off base with the callout on the Nationals.
I’m not Nats fan, nor am I a big fan of the caps, either … unless they’re sustainable, made of US materials in an old textile factory.
But I have been to a game at their stadium.
“You really want to help the planet? … Or organizing more mass transit options to the stadium (or installing bike lanes, or tripling your parking prices, or anything to discourage people from driving their cars to the game).”
Obviously, you’re not aware that the Nationals’ ballpark is the only LEED certified venue in all the US. They DO highly promote use of the METRO … it’s truly the best way to get to the game. They have thousands, and I mean thousands of bike rack parking spaces … and only something like 1,500 car spaces. The fees to park are very high.
So, when it comes to environmental stewardship, I think the Nationals take a leadership position. [/quote]
Would they be so eco-friendly if their ballpark wasn’t shoehorned into a section of downtown DC?
I’m just sayin’. Don’t paint them as necessarily being great stewards of the environment just because their hands were basically forced by the fact that downtown DC doesn’t exactly lend itself to fans traveling by car.
[quote comment=”274795″]Re: Grass v. Turf
At the pro and international level grass may be preferred, but I coach high school girls soccer and we *love* the Field-Turf! On turf you get a true bounce, consistent “grass” length/thickness, no hills and valleys, and no sprinklers. Some of the HS fields we play on in the urban schools around San Francisco are just terrible. In one game, not only was the field pocked with gopher holes, but we were visited by the actual gopher! We almost gave up a goal because our players were distracted by the “cute little guy.”
Plus, the turf is always a nice even green, which makes everyone look better (so it’s really about athletics aesthetics, not twisted knees and sprained ankles…and relevant to this site!)[/quote]
Recent studies conducted on Field Turf in Connecticut and New York have confirmed the presence of hazardous substances, many at levels exceeding current allowable NYS Department of Environmental Conservation limits. Among the toxins identified were the metals arsenic, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead and zinc, as well as other chemicals, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and phthalates.
Without long-term field testing, no one is in a position to say the exposure is harmless.
I would be less concerned with aesthetics and more concerned about health and the environment.
[quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
I wouldn’t guarentee that … I mean, growing up, might he have played on an asphalt playground somewhere? I’d call THAT artificial turf! :)
[quote comment=”274794″][quote comment=”274791″][quote comment=”274784″][quote comment=”274781″][quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
Not calling the Argentines snobs, just stating the fact that they (rightly) probably would not have agreed to play on turf right before their World Cup qualifying started. Don’t know about the turf rule, weren’t the Euro 2008 qualifiers in Russia played on the turf? And I know some Scandinavian countries play all on turf. I think the grass put down for the Champions League final was probably insisted upon by UEFA because they did not want (arguably) the most important game of the year on turf.[/quote]
FIFA says you can play on certain fake stuff. Some of the FieldTurf (and FieldTurf-like) surfaces can be fine…..but the Giants’ Stadium stuff is garbage. I wouldn’t call the Argies snobs, as I’m sure US Soccer wouldn’t have played there without the grass, too.[/quote]
I doubt the US would have cared, half of their players play on artificial turf for the their club teams. Don’t get me wrong, I hate artificial turf as much as the next guy, but I’m sure it was just the Argentine suits that requested it as not to get any of their players hurt before qualifying.[/quote]
Half the US players? Uh…no.
Toronto, NY, New England, and Salt Lake have fake grass. Salt Lake is the worst of the bunch, and none of those guys are in the National Team pool. NY is the next worst, and it’s most likely National Team player is now headed to go play in Spain (on real grass), New England and Toronto have better stuff (less worse?) and have a couple of guys. The rest all play overseas (on real grass), or on real grass in MLS. And MLS players are increasingly coming out against artificial turf.[/quote]
Obviously whee I said “half” I didn’t litterally mean half currently do, so get off your high-horse for a minute. But since you bring it up, both Edu and Guzan’s hoem teams play on turf and Hejduk, Donovan, Kljestan, and Mastroeni play away games on field turf at the stadiums you mentioned. Adu played on turf in Salt Lake, and Dempsey spent three years playing on it in New England. Also, many play on practice fields that use it as well. So preteneding that teh US team never plays on it is pretty ignorant.
[quote comment=”274793″][quote comment=\”274792\”]Couldn’t agree more on the hideousness of gimmicky hats. Can’t teams just do a patch job? Wouldn’t that be cheaper, too, and thus more consistent with the intended effect?[quote]
I may be crazy here but isn’t all the extra materials, time, and expense to make a one-time “yea environment!” statement the antithesis of what the green movement is all about? How many of those silly “carbon credits” were burned to make the green hats?[/quote]
Also, isn’t real tough for some teams to do this. “What the hell, just did out the St. Pat’s Day hats.”
i was at Nats stadium a few weeks ago and thier stadium was certifed green, i dont remember the specifics but they did use a considerable amount of recycled material in contruction. plus as of right now pretty much the only option for getting to the stadium is using the metro (which is good and bad)
The linked picture regarding the USA v. Argentina game doesn’t do justice to how annoying the lack of contrast was.
The game was only available on ESPN Classic and therefore was low-def. Any wide shot produced the effect of two teams in white playing one another. The director obviously told his videographers to zoom in as soon as a player started dribbling so that the sky blue stripes would pop out and you could more easily tell who was whom.
I don’t begrudge the Argies the right to wear their famous colors and I sure don’t need to see the ugly charcoal shirts the US has for the road now. If only the US had a distinctive look, but that is another rant.
[quote comment=”274753″]Also, I heard that Germany used to wear green as thier alternate strip as a gesture to Ireland, who were the only soccer team to agree to play against them during the war years. Not sure if that is true…[/quote]
It’s not.
From November 22, 1942 through the end of WWII, nobody played the German national team. They didn’t play. The country was at war. There was very little soccer played at a high level in Europe during WWII. The English league system went on hiatus. There were no World Cups in 1942 or 1946.
From Sept. 1, 1939 (when Germany invaded Poland) until November 22, 1942, the German National Team played 35 matches, none against Ireland.
They played five matches against Hungary and four each against Slovakia and Switzerland. They also played Bulgaria, Croatia (which wasn’t even a country yet), Romania, Yugoslavia, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Bohemia-Moravia (also not really a country), Italy, Spain and “Mailand,” which apparently translates to “Milan,” and must have been a friendly against a group of guys from Milan (hey, you had to make do sometimes).
East Germany didn’t play as a national side until 1952. West Germany began playing as a separate entity in 1950. They played Ireland only four times in the 1950s.
In short (or in shirt), it ain’t true.
From yesterday’s comments:
[quote comment=”274621″][quote comment=”274602″]Susan Freeman’s father attended the Dallas Stars warehouse sale and came away with some nameplate
link
———-
Looks like the white plates are on air-knit material and the black ones are on tackle twill…which leads me think they are for replica jerseys. The gamers would be on air-knit like the white ones.[/quote]
I was wondering about that. Some are tackle twill and some are knit. I am not positive I don’t have replica jerseys with both types, though. Another shot of the nameplate is link.[/quote]
I checked my jerseys last night. The older replica Koho ones have the knit nameplates. But does it really make sense to make different nameplates from the game jerseys when the team uses a placard anyway? Does it depend on the team?
[quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
Field Turf is approved by FIFA. Not mandated. But an option.
I wouldn’t call the Argies “snobs” for not wanting to play on Giants Stadium’s artificial surface. Quite frankly, it sucks. It is routine (though not inexpensive) for grass to be brought in to the Meadowlands for high-profile games (both at the international and the club level).
When you’re the #1 team in the world and someone wants you to come there and play so they can have a big-ass payday (which, make no mistake, the USSF did, even though I’m sure they paid Argentina lots of money and the grass wasn’t cheap), you can say “Sure. But we’re not playing on turf. We have this guy, Lionel Messi, don’t know if you’ve heard of him. But I’m not having him do his knee on that crap surface just as World Cup qualifying is about to begin, thank you very much.”
It’s not a FIFA rule. It’s not snobbery. It’s good sense.
That’s not to say there aren’t some good artificial surfaces out there – there are. Giants Stadium just doesn’t happen to be one of them. And nothing beats a good grass surface.
[quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.
I have read in “The Ball Is Round,” a great history of world football, that there were a few games played within Axis-held territory during the height of the war. I don’t remember the details but some games were played. It doesn’t affect the point but does give me a chance to plug this good book.
[quote comment=\”274741\”]Regarding the Lakers purple mismatches, it might just be that different types of purple fabric show up differently in photographs.
Check out this SI cover of Herschel with the Vikings…
link
I saw the photo in SI that someone mentioned yesterday. Bottom left – one guy had CELTICS, the rest had BOSTON. Would love to know the story!
[quote comment=”274801″]Obviously whee I said “half” I didn’t litterally mean half currently do, so get off your high-horse for a minute. But since you bring it up, both Edu and Guzan’s hoem teams play on turf [/quote]
Guzan’s home team, Chivas USA, plays at the Home Depot Center, whcih is a grass surface.
[quote]and Hejduk, Donovan, Kljestan, and Mastroeni play away games on field turf at the stadiums you mentioned.[/quote]
That’s true.
Not that they particularly enjoy it.
[quote] Adu played on turf in Salt Lake,[/quote]
He played exactly 15 games for Real Salt Lake, counting exhibitions and Cup matches, before being transferred to Benfica. Only about 10 of those were on turf.
[quote] and Dempsey spent three years playing on it in New England.[/quote]
The artificial surface at Gillette went down in late November 2006. Dempsey was transferred to Fulham in January 2007. He never played his club ball on New England’s artificial surface.
[quote] Also, many play on practice fields that use it as well. So preteneding that teh US team never plays on it is pretty ignorant.[/quote]
The question wasn’t whether they’ve played on it. Of course they’ve played on it. Everybody’s played on it. But they’re not all big fans of it.
[quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
…but in the late 1920’s, I am certain he used some “banned substances” (i.e.: hooch)
[quote comment=”274807″][quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
Field Turf is approved by FIFA. Not mandated. But an option.
I wouldn’t call the Argies “snobs” for not wanting to play on Giants Stadium’s artificial surface. Quite frankly, it sucks. It is routine (though not inexpensive) for grass to be brought in to the Meadowlands for high-profile games (both at the international and the club level).
When you’re the #1 team in the world and someone wants you to come there and play so they can have a big-ass payday (which, make no mistake, the USSF did, even though I’m sure they paid Argentina lots of money and the grass wasn’t cheap), you can say “Sure. But we’re not playing on turf. We have this guy, Lionel Messi, don’t know if you’ve heard of him. But I’m not having him do his knee on that crap surface just as World Cup qualifying is about to begin, thank you very much.”
It’s not a FIFA rule. It’s not snobbery. It’s good sense.
That’s not to say there aren’t some good artificial surfaces out there – there are. Giants Stadium just doesn’t happen to be one of them. And nothing beats a good grass surface.[/quote]
Why can’t they just try replacing the turf at the Meadowlands again w/grass for it’s last couple years?
[quote comment=”274809″]I have read in “The Ball Is Round,” a great history of world football, that there were a few games played within Axis-held territory during the height of the war.[/quote]
link
[quote comment=”274813″]Why can’t they just try replacing the turf at the Meadowlands again w/grass for it’s last couple years?[/quote]
They couldn’t keep it from being a crap surface from all the wear and tear it takes between the Giants, the Jets, the Red Bulls and all the other stuff that happens there.
They’re not going to spend the money necessary to install and keep up a grass surface for a stadium that’s going to be obsolete in two years.
Last thing: I always loved the shirts on the German team in [i]Victory[/i]. The laces, the small logo. Dug it.
[quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…
[quote comment=”274759″][quote comment=”274755″][quote comment=”274749″][quote comment=”274739″]If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that it looked as if the pitch for the USA vs. Argentina game was natural grass.[/quote]
It was natural grass, they laid it over the turf. The Red Bulls have to play on the turf, but the real grass was required for the international friendly (couldn’t get Argentina to come to play on turf).[/quote]
I figured as much. I just didn’t remember reading anything about it before hand.[/quote]
or it could be that its a FIFA mandated rule, but lets just keep calling the Argentines snobs. i believe that CONCACAF is the only federation without this rule, hence why they had to lay down grass for the Champions League final in Moscow (it used to be turf).[/quote]
FIFA does allow certain artifical turfs. The stadium in Moscow that hosted the Champs League final has also hosted Euro Champs qualifiers without laying grass down (England lost to Russia there).
[quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.
[quote comment=”274819″][quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.[/quote]
absolutely…i just thought it was interesting that last night, when i link about how jr. hit #600 and i said he was only the fourth major leaguer to accomplish that feat…someone took me to task by calling the babe’s last 116 illegitimate because he never had to hit against satchel page
i wasn’t sure why…now i know
So many times when we think of what MLB lost by reamining segregated it’s about players who never got to play against each other. And that’s true. I just realized we don’t often mention they didn’t get to play TOGETHER, either.
I’m sitting here imagining an early 1930s Yankees lineup including Ruth in outfield, Gehrig at first and Josh Gibson behind the plate.
Oh, lordy.
…and Satchel on the mound.
Double, oh lordy.
Great points on the green caps. I hated it when the Phillies did the same earlier this season.
link
If someone doesn’t understand what MLB lost by a group such as that (or something like it) never being in pinstripes together…then they just don’t get it.
I think you should stop ragging on the fact that people want to honor Sean Taylor. I don’t think any of the honors we have seen have been over the top or too much. It shows alot of respect to me and I respect that.
BTW… yes, I am a Redskins fan.
I agree that there are too few teams using green, especially since the Rays redesigned their uniforms this year. By the way, the Rays new uniform is kind of growing on me, but I think it would be much more distinctive had they kept the green instead of using a generic shade of blue.
[quote comment=”274820″][quote comment=”274819″][quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.[/quote]
absolutely…i just thought it was interesting that last night, when i link about how jr. hit #600 and i said he was only the fourth major leaguer to accomplish that feat…someone took me to task by calling the babe’s last 116 illegitimate because he never had to hit against satchel page
i wasn’t sure why…now i know[/quote]
That was me last night. While I admit that I’m an unabashed Giants fan, my point was only that every era has its own challenges and advantages, so comparing players across eras is difficult and more complex than just looking at the numbers. Bonds and Sosa were…enhanced…but so were many of the pitchers they faced, so who had the advantage? Ruth was in an all-white league, which may or may not have affected his final totals. And so on…
I’m sure I sound like one of those brain-washed SF fans the media liked to harp on, but all I’m saying is that there were (are) a lot of players juicing and only a few hit that many HRs.
[quote comment=”274805″][quote comment=”274753″]Also, I heard that Germany used to wear green as thier alternate strip as a gesture to Ireland, who were the only soccer team to agree to play against them during the war years. Not sure if that is true…[/quote]
It’s not.
From November 22, 1942 through the end of WWII, nobody played the German national team. They didn’t play. The country was at war. There was very little soccer played at a high level in Europe during WWII. The English league system went on hiatus. There were no World Cups in 1942 or 1946.
From Sept. 1, 1939 (when Germany invaded Poland) until November 22, 1942, the German National Team played 35 matches, none against Ireland.
They played five matches against Hungary and four each against Slovakia and Switzerland. They also played Bulgaria, Croatia (which wasn’t even a country yet), Romania, Yugoslavia, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Bohemia-Moravia (also not really a country), Italy, Spain and “Mailand,” which apparently translates to “Milan,” and must have been a friendly against a group of guys from Milan (hey, you had to make do sometimes).
East Germany didn’t play as a national side until 1952. West Germany began playing as a separate entity in 1950. They played Ireland only four times in the 1950s.
In short (or in shirt), it ain’t true.[/quote]
…and apparently, the green and white away kits are from the link, and aren’t Irish-related at all
[quote comment=”274823″]Great points on the green caps. I hated it when the Phillies did the same earlier this season.
link
If they altered the unis to the point where the undershirts and stirrups would also match the hat, it would make it visually at least little more easy to stomach.. but then, y’know, Christmas, etc.
[quote comment=”274820″][quote comment=”274819″][quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.[/quote]
absolutely…i just thought it was interesting that last night, when i link about how jr. hit #600 and i said he was only the fourth major leaguer to accomplish that feat…someone took me to task by calling the babe’s last 116 illegitimate because he never had to hit against satchel page
i wasn’t sure why…now i know[/quote]
Isn’t Jr. the sixth to go yard 600 times? Bonds, Aaron, Ruth, Mays, Sosa, Jr.?
[quote comment=”274820″][quote comment=”274819″][quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.[/quote]
absolutely…i just thought it was interesting that last night, when i link about how jr. hit #600 and i said he was only the fourth major leaguer to accomplish that feat…someone took me to task by calling the babe’s last 116 illegitimate because he never had to hit against satchel page
i wasn’t sure why…now i know[/quote]
Why doesnt anyone ever say “satchel paige didn’t have to face babe ruth?” Don’t you think it’s stereotyping black athletes as superior in all cases when you do that?
Just food for thought, please don’t feel the need to explain racism, apartheid and the color barrier to me. I know that negro leaguers didn’t have a chance to compete with major leaguers and that wasn’t right, I get that.
I’m just sayin, Babe Ruth will always be one of the all-time greats no matter how far in the future this argument is. Sure, it’s impossible to compare eras (didn’t a bounce over the fence back in the day count as a HR too?) It’s a little short-sighted to say his last 116 shouldn’t count.
The average baseball enthusiast has a working knowledge of the Negro leaguers and their traditions and contributions to the game but I have to be honest, and I’ve read a few different books on the subject, outside of Satchel Paige, I cannot name one pitcher from the Negro Leagues.
You think of Josh Gibson, Cool Papa Bell, Buck Leonard, Hank Aaron, jackie robinson, Larry Doby, etc, etc, etc. All position players.
Had baseball been integrated all along, I don’t think Babe’s legacy would have been diminished at all.
[quote comment=”274827″]That was me last night. While I admit that I’m an unabashed Giants fan, my point was only that every era has its own challenges and advantages, so comparing players across eras is difficult and more complex than just looking at the numbers. Bonds and Sosa were…enhanced…but so were many of the pitchers they faced, so who had the advantage? Ruth was in an all-white league, which may or may not have affected his final totals. And so on…
I’m sure I sound like one of those brain-washed SF fans the media liked to harp on, but all I’m saying is that there were (are) a lot of players juicing and only a few hit that many HRs.[/quote]
fair enough…however
in baseball…at least to me (and im sure thousands of others), the numbers 755, 714 and 660 are sacred…
whether or not babe ruth didn’t have to hit against black pitchers (and i’d love to debate that one all day long), it’s not germane to my point about jr. being only the 4th to do it legitimately (as in…without enhancers)…black, white, yellow, blue…i don’t care what color you are, my argument had nothing to do with race but your rebuttal did, so i just didn’t appreciate the inference, that’s all
not an argument for a uni board of course, but if you wanna argue it was a travesty it took baseball so long to integrate, im right with you…you wanna say pitchers juiced too…i got no argument there either
just don’t try to use baroid’s feeble justification that racism is behind our not wanting to accept his 762 as “the” number because it’s absolutely NOT…it’s about cheating
now peace yo!
and back to unis ;)
[quote comment=”274830″]Isn’t Jr. the sixth to go yard 600 times? Bonds, Aaron, Ruth, Mays, Sosa, Jr.?[/quote]
yes rick…i was talking about link from last night
I see a lot of people have already mentioned the mass transit options available to Nationals Stadium, so I won’t go very far there, except to say that team’s promotion of mass trasit (metro, buses, etc) stems more from the fact that there just isn’t parking to be found around the stadium.
I saw someone mentioned that more parking has become available–but anyone who lives in or around DC knows that metro is probably the way to go anyway.
As far as increasing the number of day games, I’ve heard this suggested before, but it seems that everytime I see teams play day games anymore they fire up the stadium lights anyway (even on really bright, sunny days), so I’m not even sure if that would make such a huge difference.
[quote]
jr. being only the 4th to do it legitimately (as in…without enhancers)…
and back to unis ;)[/quote]
Not so fast my friend. :)
I think there is evidence that hitters were not the only players enhancing their performance. If there were pitchers doin’ it to, then, doesn’t that level the playing field somewhat? Making the “illegitimate” homers legit?
rick: “two wrongs make a right”
i love it…you must be a lawyer ;)
[quote comment=”274836″]rick: “two wrongs make a right”
i love it…you must be a lawyer ;)[/quote]
Nope, but I did grow up around ’em. My mother worked for the same law firm for over 40 years.
P.S. Sorry I missed post 115 from last night.
[quote comment=”274837″][quote comment=”274836″]rick: “two wrongs make a right”
i love it…you must be a lawyer ;)[/quote]
Nope, but I did grow up around ’em. My mother worked for the same law firm for over 40 years.
P.S. Sorry I missed post 115 from last night.[/quote]
Much as there’s a “dead ball” era in MLB, it seems likely there eventually will be an “enhanced” era, too, and all the marks set during that time will be looked at a little differently…which is sad for the guys who weren’t using.
[quote comment=”274838″][quote comment=”274837″][quote comment=”274836″]rick: “two wrongs make a right”
i love it…you must be a lawyer ;)[/quote]
Nope, but I did grow up around ’em. My mother worked for the same law firm for over 40 years.
P.S. Sorry I missed post 115 from last night.[/quote]
Much as there’s a “dead ball” era in MLB, it seems likely there eventually will be an “enhanced” era, too, and all the marks set during that time will be looked at a little differently…which is sad for the guys who weren’t using.[/quote]
Eventually? I think we’re there now. People are looking at the accomplishments of Griffey and Maddux, and comparing them to the rest of the needle pushers in the sport, and putting them on a higher pedestal than they would have been on 20 years ago.
BTW … I know it’s kind of late in the day to mention this, but I find it odd to refer to “Every year the Reading, Pennsylvania, municipal airport has a WW2 weekend” (not “WWII”, unless you’re trying to avoiding confusing it with a new gaming system).
[quote comment=”274821″]I’m sitting here imagining an early 1930s Yankees lineup including Ruth in outfield, Gehrig at first and Josh Gibson behind the plate.
Oh, lordy.[/quote]
link
I’m surprised no one’s mentioned yet that a Spanish player with FNOB got a hat trick today in EURO2008. I notice that occurs a lot in Spain/La Liga, any reasons why?
what is it about those puma “shit kits” that are falling apart at euro 2008? illegible numbers, lower case nobs, stripes down the sides of the socks that look like faux baseball stirrups?
Link to David Villa
link
AWARD FOR BEST UNIFORMS, COMBINED SCORE, BOTH TEAMS, IN A SINGLE EURO 2008 GAME —
Spain vs Russia
link
We have seen some fine national kits so far, but most have been paired with garish or otherwise unattractive opponents. Both Spain and Russia look mighty fine here. AAMOF, I don’t know when I’ve seen an all-white outfit as cool-looking as the Ruskies.
May have been mentioned here before- Mike Reiss has a bit in his blog on Boston.com today about the Patriots (and other original AFL squads) sporting throwbacks in as alternates in ’09 or ’10 for the AFL’s 50th Anniversary
scroll down
link
I would think cotton jerseys would get very heavy after moisture gets on them. Plus they would wear out quicker to daily washings and would be more susceptible to tearing.
And then there’s the bit that the green caps would only be worn once and thus is a huge waste of resources.
[quote comment=”274819″][quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.[/quote]
Satchel Paige never had to pitch against Sadaharu Oh.
868. World Record.
[quote comment=”274848″][quote comment=”274819″][quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.[/quote]
Satchel Paige never had to pitch against Sadaharu Oh.
868. World Record.[/quote]
Rose: “Don’t worry about it, brother. I ain’t in the hall of fame, either. And I got the world record for most hits.”
Oh: “Wha?!”
link
[quote comment=”274849″][quote comment=”274848″][quote comment=”274819″][quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.[/quote]
Satchel Paige never had to pitch against Sadaharu Oh.
868. World Record.[/quote]
Rose: “Don’t worry about it, brother. I ain’t in the hall of fame, either. And I got the world record for most hits.”
Oh: “Wha?!”
link
Oh: “I can’t believe that…”
Rose: “Wanna bet?”
[rimshot]
i think pete still has that suit
in fact…i think that photo was taken last week
[quote comment=”274851″]i think pete still has that suit
in fact…i think that photo was taken last week[/quote]
We know he still has the same hairdo
Nothing like planning ahead:
link
(Oh, trying out the new handle – much less typing, and easier for Minna to give me a shoutout)
Oh, almost forgot,
DAMMIT, PHIL
There, I feel better already
And Sadaharu Oh never had to hit against Dooley Womack.
Nah, just kidding. Sorta. Difficult to compare. isn’t it, honestly now. The truth of the matter is, no matter how much any of us discuss and debate, a mess of home runs one season for the Roswell Rockets do indeed show up in the record books somewhere, but no one says it’s the same as hitting them for the Yankees. Or the Braves. Or the Giants.
And I guess we should be thankful those pitchers were juicing, huh, otherwise Bonds’ numbers would have been abnormal.
Hey, wait, they WERE abnormal
You mean to say you got this brain from Abby Normal?
[quote]Oh, almost forgot,
DAMMIT, PHIL
There, I feel better already[/quote]
what the hell did i do now?
[quote comment=”274853″]Nothing like planning ahead:
link [/quote]
The writer refers to 49ers’ Montana-era jerseys as “cherry red.”
The writer has stepped into area where he is clueless.
I want one of those mets shirts that you got
AMEN PAUL! Best commentary in a long time. Green push, great idea, but insulting execution.
[quote comment=”274848″][quote comment=”274819″][quote comment=”274817″][quote comment=”274808″][quote comment=”274796″]babe ruth never played on artificial turf[/quote]
He didn’t fly in an airplane to road games, either.
And he didn’t have any black teammates, either.[/quote]
A HA!
so it IS about racism afterall…[/quote]
Intersting thought, though, that’s often overlooked: “Yeah, well, he never had to hit against Satchel Paige.” Uh-uh, and maybe he never would have, i.e, the Yankees being the Yankees, in that imagainary world of integrated baseball they’d probably have been teammates.[/quote]
Satchel Paige never had to pitch against Sadaharu Oh.
868. World Record.[/quote]
Hey ladies in the place I’m callin’ out to ya
There never was a city kid truer and bluer
There’s more to me than you’ll ever know
And I’ve got more hits than Sadaharu Oh
[quote comment=”274795″]Re: Grass v. Turf…Some of the HS fields we play on in the urban schools around San Francisco are just terrible. In one game, not only was the field pocked with gopher holes, but we were visited by the actual gopher! We almost gave up a goal because our players were distracted by the “cute little guy.”[/quote]
Sound like the Polo Field to me. I almost broke my ankle playing lacrosse there.
time for a manny update, methinks
as mr. lukas reported recently, link by sporting his “34”…
he is keeping his link on his other forearm tho…
if you look closely, link or link
he is NO LONGER sporting the link link on his dome
and the doo-rag?
link link
A couple mini-camp observations:
1. How long to teams keep their footballs? I’ve found shots of Bernard Berrian and Darren McFadden with footballs with Paul Tagliabue’s signature on them.
link link
2. Speaking of McFadden (and the Raiders in general), is the slanty-style “2” on their practice jerseys a new thing? And if so, is it going to appear on their game jerseys?
yanks v. a’s in jokeland…
a’s wearing black
eveland (a’s hurler) is wearing greensleeves (long) as are a number of fielders (half)…needless to say…this is NOT a good look
Mr. Met rules the world.
Is it just me, or are the NBA finals really dull this year?
[quote comment=”274805″][quote comment=”274753″]Also, I heard that Germany used to wear green as thier alternate strip as a gesture to Ireland, who were the only soccer team to agree to play against them during the war years. Not sure if that is true…[/quote]
It’s not.
From November 22, 1942 through the end of WWII, nobody played the German national team. They didn’t play. The country was at war. There was very little soccer played at a high level in Europe during WWII. The English league system went on hiatus. There were no World Cups in 1942 or 1946.
From Sept. 1, 1939 (when Germany invaded Poland) until November 22, 1942, the German National Team played 35 matches, none against Ireland.
They played five matches against Hungary and four each against Slovakia and Switzerland. They also played Bulgaria, Croatia (which wasn’t even a country yet), Romania, Yugoslavia, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Bohemia-Moravia (also not really a country), Italy, Spain and “Mailand,” which apparently translates to “Milan,” and must have been a friendly against a group of guys from Milan (hey, you had to make do sometimes).
East Germany didn’t play as a national side until 1952. West Germany began playing as a separate entity in 1950. They played Ireland only four times in the 1950s.
In short (or in shirt), it ain’t true.[/quote]
All of those countries were either direct allies of or friendly (yes, even the Swiss) with the Nazi government. Other than that, the 15-35 year old male generation throughout Europe was bled out from the war so there weren’t too many men left around to play soccer.
link
one last thing…
does link have a shoe contract anymore?
link
link
link
link
link
link
and
link
lots of 3 stripes and swooshes
what…no more link
[quote comment=”274847″]“I would think cotton jerseys would get very heavy after moisture gets on them. Plus they would wear out quicker to daily washings and would be more susceptible to tearing.”[quote]
Quit stealing George Constanza’s ideas, will you?
[quote comment=”274770″][quote]Tripling the cost of parking would not encourage me to take mass transit.[/quote]
i gotta agree 100% with ya there rick
part of my job involves dealing with the DOT on an almost daily basis, as well as local governmental agencies who are all involved with traffic planning in one way or another…the use of disincentives is completely against all laws of logic as well as economics
you don’t want me to drive to the game…fine…i won’t…i won’t GO AT ALL if you’re gonna rape me to park
however…gimme a FREE ride on the subway, and now we’re talkin! give me a REASON to go to the game (like free or reduced rate mass transit,a bike, etc), NOT a reason NOT to
it’s like in NY…we ended a promotion we had had on buying cars like the prius or hybrid vehicles, which can cost, on average $10K more…by eliminating the tax advantages and rebates that once came along with said purchase…remove the incentive to buy a fuel efficient car and guess what…i won’t…that’s a disincentive and it’s disingenius…but give me a REASON to buy a fuel efficient car and ya know what…i just might
/back to unis now…sorry[/quote]
$4 a gallon gas isn’t enough of an incentive to buy a fuel efficient car? I don’t know about you, but getting 500 miles on a 12 gallon tank of gas feels pretty good. Not to mention the lower emissions. So waht about the tax breaks? Think about the planet instead of your wallet for once. “Convenience” is what got us into this energy mess in the first place. Swallow your pride, shell out a couple extra bucks, and TRY, JUST TRY to do something to better the world a little bit.
That’s one hell of an incentive to me.
Is it just me, or are the NBA finals really dull this year?
It’s just you.
[quote comment=”274726″]also Holland is rocking the orange kits with the baby blue socks.
link
No, they’re not. Nobody “rocks” anything. They may be wearing them but they’re not “rocking” anything.
Not sure if this is just something that i never noticed and is obvious to the entire planet, but the interlocking SD on the padre cap creates a P at the bottom left of the interlocked letters. is this intentional? I noticed it over the past weekend watching the mets embarrass themeselves. Now in my head its like the hidden Fedex arrow, i can’t not notice it.