Author Topic: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3  (Read 25017 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14293
    • Twitter
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #125: May 13, 2012, 05:03:59 PM »
They would absolutely make them up. No mindfacting about it.

Which would mean that games behind determines the standings as opposed to win percentage.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14293
    • Twitter
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #126: May 13, 2012, 05:05:23 PM »
This is going to be crappy loss, especially if it gets called after 5

If a loss is inevitable I'd just as soon have it be a five inning game.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31799
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #127: May 13, 2012, 05:05:32 PM »
doesnt get any more down the middle than that


Offline Obed_Marsh

  • Posts: 7593
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #128: May 13, 2012, 05:06:12 PM »
This is going to be crappy loss, especially if it gets called after 5

Giving up in the first inning?

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #129: May 13, 2012, 05:06:32 PM »
Edwin Jackson is the weakest link in the rotation.

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 7948
  • The one true ace
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #130: May 13, 2012, 05:06:43 PM »
that was high and away

Offline KingHarper

  • Posts: 1144
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #131: May 13, 2012, 05:07:06 PM »
we haven't swept a single opponent yet. doubt we do now

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 7948
  • The one true ace
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #132: May 13, 2012, 05:07:22 PM »
i want bam bam to go boom boom

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #133: May 13, 2012, 05:07:28 PM »
Which would mean that games behind determines the standings as opposed to win percentage.


No doubt.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #134: May 13, 2012, 05:07:56 PM »
Giving up in the first inning?
Edwin is susceptible to giving up lots of runs and we never touch Arroyo for some reason.


Offline thepointe01

  • Posts: 4172
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #135: May 13, 2012, 05:08:28 PM »
great ab, good swing Bryce

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #136: May 13, 2012, 05:08:41 PM »
we haven't swept a single opponent yet. doubt we do now
I can't believe we haven't gotten a sweep yet.

Nice swing by Harper. Steal second

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35131
  • World Champions!!!
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #137: May 13, 2012, 05:08:43 PM »
Harper changed his stance.

He tinkers a lot.

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 7948
  • The one true ace
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #138: May 13, 2012, 05:08:44 PM »
good ab to break out of his slump

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #139: May 13, 2012, 05:09:03 PM »
we haven't swept a single opponent yet. doubt we do now

We sort of swept the marlins.

Offline TylerDC

  • Posts: 5962
  • The Future.
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #140: May 13, 2012, 05:09:12 PM »
Much better.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #141: May 13, 2012, 05:09:21 PM »
Espinosa should be bunting.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14293
    • Twitter
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #142: May 13, 2012, 05:09:21 PM »
Edwin Jackson is the weakest link in the rotation.

Who happens to have pitched the best single game of the year.

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 7948
  • The one true ace
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #143: May 13, 2012, 05:09:33 PM »
I can't believe we haven't gotten a sweep yet.

Nice swing by Harper. Steal second

i agree.  with all the junk arroyo throws we should steal a lot of bases today

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31799
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #144: May 13, 2012, 05:10:19 PM »
Which would mean that games behind determines the standings as opposed to win percentage.

But you can't assume games behind are won or lost.  Mathematically we are still in first.  MLB.com standings have agreed with me every time the Braves have "tied" us.  Obviously if we lose today then the Braves are in sole possession of first, but as of right now, it's us even if the Braves win.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #145: May 13, 2012, 05:10:36 PM »
OT, I mentioned having "won" those tickets from 106.7 and that they never followed through in giving me the tickets. I emailed them to tell them about it and those freakers never got back to me. I don't really give a crap except that it pisses me off that they get away with that type of crap. Any suggestions on whether I should contact them again or should I just say freak it?

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #146: May 13, 2012, 05:10:44 PM »
Espinosa Ks on a curve :?

Should have bunted, PC was right.

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 7948
  • The one true ace
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #147: May 13, 2012, 05:11:19 PM »
1-2 by arroyo means you know it will be a curve so there is no reason why bryce shouldn't have stolen 2nd

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #148: May 13, 2012, 05:12:09 PM »
Who happens to have pitched the best single game of the year.

And still he's the weakest link.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Nationals @ Reds, Game 3
« Reply #149: May 13, 2012, 05:12:15 PM »

Should have bunted, PC was right.

QFR