Laptop Wallpapers Aesthetic Blue

- Hai dear Bassebal player and team update, Today i will talk about ,I was create this article from anotoher source special for you, I hope you will like this Article laptop wallpapers aesthetic blue, That i wrote can help you.Happy reading

Pastel Wallpapers Free Hd Download 500 Hq Unsplash

Hot News : Torii Hunter's Sad, Bigoted View - update.

- Hai dear Bassebal player and team update, Today i will talk about ,I was create this article from anotoher source special for you, I hope you will like this That i wrote can help you.Happy reading

The Detroit Tigers' new right fielder recently told Kevin Baxter of the Los Angeles Times (for an article published Sunday) that an openly gay teammate would be divisive in the locker room. "For me, as a Christian... I will be uncomfortable because in all my teachings and all my learning, biblically, it's not right. It will be difficult and uncomfortable." I do not doubt that when (not if, because the day will come, sooner or later), for the first time, an active professional athlete in America comes out publicly, it will be divisive, but Hunter (and others who would side with him) should be taken to task for being on the wrong side of that divide.

Is Hunter entitled to his opinion? Yes, he is. Are all opinions created equal? No, they are not. The particular opinion he is espousing, entitled to it as he is, is morally repugnant and a mark against his character.

I find Hunter's use the Bible as a shield for his bigotry distasteful as well. Hunter plays on the sabbath, keeps a neatly trimmed beard, and wears clothing made from mixed fabrics. He has also fathered multiple children out of wedlock. All of those put him in contradiction with various passages from the bible. If having a gay teammate would make Hunter uncomfortable, does he feel equally uneasy around his tattooed teammates, or those who've eaten shellfish? Those men have broken the Bible's code as well. If you would laugh off talk of mixed fabrics and facial hair as lesser issues, The Bible also teaches that slavery is okay. Yet all truly righteous people know it to be and acknowledge it as an abomination against human decency.

If (like 99% of Christians) you pick and choose which of the Bible's myriad (and oftentimes contradictory) teachings to follow, you're acknowledging that in the hundreds and hundreds of years since it was written, the world has changed, and you're enlightened enough to make a few distinctions and acknowledge that the book doesn't have everything just right. Once you've taken that step, to use the Bible as your sole support for any stance is merely a shallow exercise in self-service. It seems to me that the book's more powerful message, the one given far more attention in the text, is to love your fellow human being, and be good to them.

Hunter has a reputation for being a locker room leader, well liked by his teammates*. I am certain there are, among those teammates, many who share Hunter's view on homosexuality. I am also sure there are others who do not agree with him. I hope those men will step forward and speak out in support of any teammates, past, present, or future, who might feel unwelcome in the wake of Hunter's comments.

* It is somewhat surprising that Hunter may be so popular, given that he has sparked controversy with comments about teammates before. In a 2010 USA Today interview he referred to dark-skinned Latino baseball players as "impostors" while discussing the changing demographics in baseball. "People see dark faces out there, and the perception is that they're African-American. They're not us. They're impostors."

A similar situation arose in the NFL, when former Minnesota Viking Matt Birkwrote wrote an op-ed attacking gay marriage. In that instance, Vikings' punter Chris Kluwe responded with his own op-ed published by the Twin Cities Pioneer Press, in which he respectfully disagreed with his former teammate. Earlier this year, Baltimore Raven Brendon Ayanbadejo voiced his support for gay marriage, only to have a Maryland state delegate write a letter to Ravens' ownership, asking that they "order" their players to remain silent. Ayanbadejo did not, and Kluwe again stepped forward, this time penning a letter to the critical politician.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing. Hunter's teammates, especially star players like Miguel Cabrera, Prince Fielder, and Justin Verlander, have the largest platform from which to take a stand against hate. Tigers manager Jim Leyland and owner Mike Ilitch and star players on other teams too, I would hope that when they're inevitably asked about Hunter's comments, they speak out in support of the LGBT community and human rights for all humans.

These rights are coming, but just as they did for African-Americans and for women, they are coming too slowly. The more voices that speak out for what is right, the more swiftly what is right will be done.

Fortnite Wallpapers Epic

- Hai dear Bassebal player and team update, Today i will talk about ,I was create this article from anotoher source special for you, I hope you will like this Article epic amazing fortnite wallpapers, Article epic background fortnite wallpapers, Article epic cool fortnite wallpapers, Article epic fortnite cool wallpapers for iphone, Article epic ultra hd fortnite wallpapers, Article fortnite wallpapers epic, Article iphone epic fortnite wallpapers, That i wrote can help you.Happy reading

Leviathan Fortnite Wallpapers Top Free Leviathan Fortnite

Hot News : Star Wars: What Happens Next? - update.

- Hai dear Bassebal player and team update, Today i will talk about ,I was create this article from anotoher source special for you, I hope you will like this That i wrote can help you.Happy reading

Last Wednesday I got a text from my girlfriend, which is how I learned Disney has paid $4 billion for Lucasfilm and would begin production on Star Wars: Episode VII with the intention of releasing it in 2015, followed by sequels in 2017 and 2019. My reply text was a combination of shocked excitement and confused nonsense. I spent the rest of the day thinking about it, without ever quite figuring out quite how I felt. I'm still not sure, but I've at least had time to organize my thoughts into (semi) coherence. In Part I I wrote about the place the Star Wars galaxy has held in my life. Now I try to examine what the Disney deal means to me.

Because I know how immensely popular Star Wars remains (my job as an elementary school teacher makes that clear on a daily basis) , I know there's no chance I'll actually make it the rest of my life without seeing Episodes 1, 2, and 3 again, even though I'd prefer not to. Someday I'll have children, and while I like to imagine I can somehow keep the prequels a secret, their dopey friends and the world at large will make that impossible. I'll tell them the new ones aren't good and maybe buy myself a little extra time, but realistically, at some point I'm going to be sitting on the couch while Jar Jar Binks pontificates on the meaning of life to my kids.

I am sure this deal means we're going to see a lot of crossover between the Star Wars galaxy and the world of Disney. There's already an ad with Darth Vader visiting Disneyland and I imagine that's only the tip of the iceberg. I expect that before too long, Star Wars will have it's own theme park, much like The Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Orlando. I could do without seeing Chewbacca and Donald Duck in a screaming match over a heated game of Holochess or the Millennium Falcon in a race with Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, but as someone who's favorite commercial ever involves the use of Darth Vader to sell a car, I suppose I can't get too bent out of shape about this sort of thing. But I reserve the right to do just that once I see how bad it can get (and seriously, that VW ad is brilliant, a far better use of a young Darth Vader than Episodes I, II, and III).

One of my first reactions after hearing the news was to wonder what this means for future Blu-ray releases of the movie. George Lucas insists that the newer "Special Edition" of each film is the only real version that exists. That's a shame, because the "Special" versions are a major downgrade from the versions that existed throughout my childhood. Most infamously, Han Solo now only shoots Greedo after Greedo has shot at him first. This particular change caused such a stir that you can now find "Han Shot First" printed on any number of t-shirts and inked onto body parts. Is that an incredibly minor thing to quibble over? Not if you follow the thread of why such a choice would have been made by Lucas, and what it says about the character.

In addition, a horribly awkward scene featuring a poorly CGI-ed Jabba the Hutt is crammed into Star Wars as well. The changes to the other two films are less severe, but seemingly every other shot has had additional CGI work crammed into it, giving the movie a glossy, fake look. George Lucas seems to have little idea what made the originals so special, because every time he's gone back to fuss with them, he's taken away far more than he's added. I'm sure there are shots in Citizen Kane and The Godfather that didn't turn out exactly as Orson Welles and Francis Ford Coppala first imagined them, but the films are fantastic and there's no need to go back and mess with them.

Anyway, I hoped this news would mean Disney would want to rush its own DVD/Blu-rays out, to start profiting as soon as possible, but it turns out 20th Century Fox will retain the rights to the existing movies until 2020, and to Star Wars itself forever (unless of course it makes its own deal with the Mouse House). I suppose my best hope now is that no longer feeling the need to do as Lucas wishes, Fox releases the original version on Blu-Ray. I'm not buying the "Special Edition" set. Not now, not ever.

And what of the newly announced trilogy?

George Lucas is said to be handed over the reins now, meaning that the biggest problem in the prequels (far too much creative control in Lucas' own hands*) should be eliminated. A more nuanced storyteller can write the scripts, a superior director can coax better performances from the cast and rely less on CGI to tell the story. Someone who grew up with the originals and loves them the way I do can be in control of the important decisions.

* It should be noted that while creatively, I haven't been happy with Lucas, as a man, he's about to do a hell of a thing, donating the majority of the $4.05 billion from this sale to various children's charities around the globe. The world will be undeniably bettered by this massive act of generosity.

I would like to be excited about the prospect, but in the end, while I know I will go to see them all (and will probably have talked myself into being excited about them by then), I wish they weren't happening.

It has not yet been announced if the new movies will take place shortly after the events of The Return of the Jedi, with a new cast playing familiar characters, or if the story will jump further ahead and center around new characters. If it's the latter, what's the point? If we're going to be introduced to an entirely new story with new characters, what exactly makes it Star Wars? The Force? Lightsabers? Space battles? If the new trilogy is so far removed from what's come before, the connection merely a tenuous thread such as the existence of Jedi and Wookies, then it's little more than product branding, a cash grab, "call it Star Wars because it will sell better." It seems to be the only creatively worthwhile endeavor is to attempt to pick up the story where it left off (in 1983). But I don't love that idea either. The most obvious fear in that scenario might be that I don't want to see anyone but Harrison Ford play Han Solo, etc. But potential casting fears are of less concern to me than this: If the question is, "What happened next?" there is no answer I will really be happy with.

There are two possibilities for what happened when the Rebel Alliance's celebration with the Ewoks finally died down: Either some other danger quickly revealed itself, or everyone got on with a fairly normal life. There would be a lot bureaucratic type stuff to be taken care of. Han and Chewie would sit in on committee meetings while the Millennium Falcon was put on display at the Smithsonian of Coruscant. Lando would face the crushing debts caused by the disastrous end to things on Cloud City. Luke would be forced to confront a family secret more troubling than his father's turn to the dark side: the fact that the only young and attractive woman in the galaxy is his sister.

I love the Harry Potter series, but I hate the epilogue that was needlessly tacked on at the end of the final bookI don't want to picture the heroes in everyday, ho-hum lives. I don't want to see them after they've packed on some pounds, found boring jobs, and taken up smoking, just another mom and dad picking the kids up from daycare. In real life, heroes coming home and finding normalcy is a wonderful thing, but in my imagination, such normalcy is dull, drab, and depressing.

Of course, if the new trilogy picks up after Jedi, it won't be because things have gotten boring. It will mean there were other Sith lords in hiding and despite the destruction of the new Death Star and death of the Emperor, the struggle continues. So, what then, everything the Rebels have done was for nothing, or merely the build up to some greater evil? NO! That's garbage! I don't want anything that diminishes the importance of what happened in the originals trilogy. That's why I didn't mind when Peter Jackson left out the Scouring of the Shire when he adapted The Lord of the Rings. I understand why Tolkien included those scenes, but realistically, after The Battle of the Black Gate and the destruction on Sauron, it's a little hard to get too worked up about smaller skirmishes that may have followed.

Logically, I know something must have happened after the Ewoks could sing no more and the Rebels left Endor, but I don't need to know what. So long as I don't, my imagination can choose whatever it wants, even if I don't quite know that this is. The second it's turned into something concrete, it'll be something I'm not happy with.

I understand this is as it must be. There's too much money out there for everyone to simply leave it on the table. So, like millions of others, I'll keep an eye out for tidbits of information over the next couple years, I'll download the trailer and watch it a dozen times, and come opening weekend, 2015, I'll be there. I won't be able to stay away from it, but I wish it just wouldn't be there at all.

Hot News : Star Wars: My Life Far, Far Away - update.

- Hai dear Bassebal player and team update, Today i will talk about ,I was create this article from anotoher source special for you, I hope you will like this That i wrote can help you.Happy reading

Last Wednesday I learned about Disney's deal to buy LucasFilm from George Lucas for $4 billion and their announcement of a new trilogy to begin production soon, sending a new Star Wars movie into theaters in 2015. It was huge news for anyone (like me) who has loved the Star Wars galaxy for years. First, I want to share a bit about how Star Wars has fit into my life, ever since before I can even remember. These stories are probably similar to those of many others my age. In Part II I'll try to sort out and make sense of my reactions to the Disney news.

Like many boys (and girls too) born into middle class America in the 70's or early 80's, I grew up a huge Star Wars fan. I would love to have experienced the shock of learning that Darth Vader was Luke Skywalker's father, but I simply can't remember a time in my life when I didn't know that fact. I slept with my Luke and Han Solo action figures, til the paint had largely worn from their faces. I had the TIE Fighter where you could press a weapon and make its wings pop off. I had the tauntaun with the open stomach you could put Luke's frozen body into, I had an awesome red Boba Fett iron on t-shirt that I would probably trade one of my suits to have back today. I read books that told new adventures in the lives of Luke, Leia, Han, and the gang. On and on I could go.

It wasn't just the stuff though, Star Wars became the prism through which I imagined the bigger world. I'm not crediting Star Wars with "making me the man I am today" or anything, but I would be different without its influence. To this day, if you put me in a desert or on a rocky ledge, I'm taken to Tatoonine, where Luke grew up and later struggled to save his friends from Jabba the Hutt. If I'm walking through the woods, I'm on Endor, and the shield generator must be nearby. Two years ago Chicago was hit by a massive snowstorm. I woke up the next morning and made my way around the neighborhood, surveying the damage, and you'd better believe I kept my eye out for any wampa in the area. I'm not sure what it says that my mind still goes there as an adult, but... well, there you have it.

Are there more mature sources of inspiration for one's imagination? Sure. And Star Wars isn't my only source, but it was my springboard. Star Wars made me want to visit far off places and meet strange creatures. When I realized I couldn't go off and do those things (yet), I turned to books, where I could at least read about them and then imagine myself any place I wanted.

Back then kids didn't always own their favorite movies, home video existed but was not yet what it would become. When I was 11 years old or so The Return of the Jedi was on network TV one night, only the set at my mom's apartment wasn't working very well and the picture wouldn't come in right. My mom, top notch woman that she was (and is!), went out and rented it, so that I could watch it anyway. I watched it again the next day too, then a third time for good measure. I realized that if I had my own copies, I could watch them whenever I wanted, and so I saved $60 and bought whatever boxed set existed on VHS in those days. I don't know how many times I've seen each of the originals, over one hundred times apiece, I'm sure.

Like most Star Wars fan not yet old enough to be wary, I was overjoyed when it was announced that there would be a trilogy of prequels, that would tell the tale of how Anakin became Vader, Luke and Leia were separated, and... who knew what else?!

On the night the trailer for The Phantom Menace was released (not the actual movie, the TRAILER), I stood in line to get tickets to... whatever movie they were showing the trailer on. For some reason, that movie was "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer." After a couple other previews had played, the Fox and Lucasfilm logos came up, and some guy in the front screamed, "Everyone shut the fuck up!" Everyone did. I remember the first shot, a strange creature walking through the mist, I remember the music kicking in, and I remember a crazy looking guy with a double-lightsaber. Ten people got up and left when the trailer ended, having seen what they had come for, they wanted nothing more (if only I had been so lucky, the feature that followed was merely two hours of my life I would never get back). Like most Star Wars fans not yet old enough to be honest about it, when The Phantom Menace was finally released, I convinced myself that it was well done.

Attack of the Clones was released on the weekend I graduated from the University of Iowa, so my dad had driven over from our home outside Chicago and my mom and sister were in from California. Basking in the glow of my new diploma and the strange, but pleasant sensation of sitting in a movie theater with my sister and both of our parents for the first time in at least fourteen years, I watched Yoda turn back-flips and wield a tiny lightsaber. This was not the Yoda my mom had fallen in love with on Dagobah the year I was born.

By the time Revenge of the Sith was released, I'd confessed to myself that the first two hadn't been very good, but I was still really excited. After all, this was the end, it would connect the remaining dots, complete the story line, and maybe even give me a glimpse of a young Luke and Leia. I was with two of my closest friends, on a road trip from Portland to Las Vegas. We''d spent some quality time in California's National Parks, and could have spent more, but instead we stopped in Barstow, California on the film's opening day. I almost got thrown out of the theater before the movie started, for having smuggled in some Red Vines, but like Han Solo, I talked myself out of it (I didn't even have to shoot first). It was better than the previous two installments, but even in its best moments, it was a hollow shell of the originals.

As an elementary school teacher, I consider myself highly qualified to say that the Star Wars galaxy remains wildly popular with kids. Every day there are kids wearing t-shirts, carry lunch boxes and backpacks. On Halloween Star Wars themed costumes were probably second to only The Avengers. Many of the most popular items at my school's recent book fair were Star Wars related, far more popular than Harry Potter at this point. The originals are popular, but so too are the prequels, and the Clone Wars cartoon too. Because of their popularity among kids, I know there's no chance I'll make it the rest of my life without seeing the prequels again. Someday I'll have children, and while I like to imagine I can somehow keep them a secret, their dopey friends and the world at large will make that impossible. I'll tell them the new ones aren't good and maybe buy myself a little extra time, but realistically, at some point I'm going to be sitting on the couch while Jar Jar Binks pontificates on the meaning of life to my kids.

I understand that a massive part of the original trilogy's appeal to me is nostalgia. I grew up with them, and it's hard for anything to mean as much to an adult as our favorite things mean to us as children. If Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and The Return of the Jedi didn't exist, but then they came out in the next few years, they wouldn't lead me to put toys up in my apartment or salivate over goofy looking shoes and jackets.

At the same time, objectively, I think the originals are great films (especially the first two, both of which were nominated for Best Picture). They tell a great story and tell it with great heart. The characters you're supposed to cheer for are authentically likable, the characters you're meant to fear are scary, the characters you're supposed to learn from are wise, and Boba Fett is stone cold cool.

I'm in my thirties now, but the franchise still has a hold on me. The Star Wars poster I've had since I was a teen still hangs on my wall. There is a Slave I (Boba Fett's ship, obviously) made of Legos on the bookshelf in my room, along with a bunch of figures I got at Burger King when the last movie came out (I ate a LOT of Rodeo Cheeseburgers that summer). I don't have much of an interest in shoes or clothing, but if I was rich, I can guarantee you I'd own a whole bunch of the items from Adidas' Star Wars line (like the awesome limited edition Han Solo Carbonite sneakers, too bad their $250). Man, if I had those shoes, I would be so cool.

Anyway, the Disney announcement means that whatever small chance there was Star Wars would gradually fade from the American pop-consciousness is gone now. There will be continue to be more and more of it (and more and more) for years to come... for better or for worse.

Hot News : World Series Game 4: The End - update.

- Hai dear Bassebal player and team update, Today i will talk about ,I was create this article from anotoher source special for you, I hope you will like this That i wrote can help you.Happy reading

Tonight, for the first time in this World Series, we got some action throughout the game and drama at the end, an extra inning's worth, even. Each league's probable MVP hit a home run, while another star continued to have one of the worst World Series I can remember. San Francisco struck first, as they have all series, but Detroit managed to fight back and take the lead for the first time all series. Of course, they didn't keep it. And with the Giants winning 4-3 in the 10th though, there's now no baseball for months... So many months... Too many months... I guess I'll have plenty of time to brood about that later, for now let's just look back at Game 4 and the 2012 World Series.

The first inning was uneventful. Miguel Cabrera walked, but Prince Fielder struck out. Fielder had probably the worst World Series by anyone since at least 2008 (when Tampa Bay's Evan Longoria had his own nightmare series), going just 1 for 14, with 4 strikeouts, 2 double plays. He reached base just twice (on a single and a HBP), and after the HBP he wound up getting thrown out at the plate when he slid to the wrong side of the plate.

In the second inning the Giants got a ground rule double from Hunter Pence, followed by a triple from Brandon Belt, and took the lead. In the third they threatened again, putting two runners on, but didn't score. In the bottom of the inning, Detroit's Austin Jackson drew a walk, then Miguel Cabrera hit a high fly ball to right field. There was just enough oomph and just enough wind to carry it over the wall. Detroit had its first lead of the series.

The fourth and fifth innings passed without incident, but in the top of the sixth Buster Posey gave the lead back to San Francisco with a two-run homer of his own. Delmon Young didn't want to let GOOD players have all the fun though, so he hit a home run of his own a few minutes later and the game was again tied. Young now has 8 postseason home runs for Detroit, a franchise record. That's somewhat due to the extra rounds that Tiger greats like Hank Greenberg didn't have, but even so, Delmon clearly made some sort of deal at the crossroads.

The seventh, eighth, and ninth innings were quiet, aside from a bunch of strikeouts. By game's end, there'd been a combined 25 strikeouts, tying the World Series record (also held by the 1963 Dodgers and Yankees, the 1973 A's and Mets, the 2000 Yankees and Mets, and the 2005 White Sox and Astros).

After nine innings it remained unclear whether there'd be another ballgame or not this year, but there would be at least one more inning. Actually, exactly one more inning.

Unlikely designated hitter Ryan Theriot led the tenth off with a single, was bunted over the 2nd, and scored on a single by NLCS hero Marco Scutaro. In the bottom half of the tenth, San Francisco's closer, Sergio Romo didn't mess around. He struck out Austin Jackson swinging, struck out Don Kelly swinging (no, I don't know why Don Kelly was batting with the season on the line either), and finally, struck out Miguel Cabrera looking.

(I wonder if Tigers fans will block out everything else he's done for them team and focus on that, the way many Mets fans have with Carlos Beltran's watched strike three that ended the 2006 NLCS... I'm guessing they won't, because they're not New Yorkers)

With that, it was over, a 4-3 victory for the Giants. Sergio Romo and Buster Posey celebrated and were soon joined by their teammates near the mound. San Francisco has now won two of the last three World Series. Since the introduction of wildcards into the playoffs in 1995, the Yankees are the only other team to win multiple championships so close together.

In my Game 3 recap, I wrote about Detroit's scoring futility. They managed to score three runs in tonight's finale, but still finished with just six total. That's the fewest by any World Series team in 46 years.

Here is a reprint of the list I researched and put together, updated to include this year's Tigers:

#8.  8 runs - 1990 Oakland Athletics (lost 4-0)
#8.  8 runs - 1976 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#8.  8 runs - 1939 Cincinnati Reds (lost 4-0)
#8.  8 runs - 1922 New York Yankees (lost 4-0*)
#8.  8 runs - 1920 Brooklyn Robins (lost 5-2**)
#6.  6 runs - 2012 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0)
#6.  6 runs - 1914 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-0)
#5.  5 runs - 1950 Philadelphia Phillies (lost 4-0)
#3.  4 runs - 1963 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#2.  3 runs - 1907 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0*)
#2.  3 runs - 1905 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-1)
#1.  2 runs - 1966 Los Angeles Dodgers (lost 4-0)

* - Both the 1907 and 1922 World Series featured a game that ended in a 3-3 tie which was replayed entirely from the start, nullifying those three runs for each team.

** - The World Series was played as a best of 9 from 1919 to 1921. Scoring just 8 runs over seven games probably means that Brooklyn team (not yet known as the Dodgers) probably rates 3rd "best" on a more subjective look at the weakest scoring World Series teams.

Two other quick notes:

- Those 1905 Philadelphia Athletics are the only team in history to be shutout four times in the World Series.

- The 1918 Boston Red Sox hold the record for fewest runs by the WINNING team, having scored just 9 in their four games to two win over the Chicago Cubs that season.

The 2012 World Series will not go down in history is a very good one. Pablo Sandoval's three home runs in Game 1 were certainly the most memorable element of the series, and were plenty good enough to win him the World Series MVP Award. Beyond that, I'm not sure what will stick with me when I think back to this series. Detroit's inability to score, I suppose, and Fielder's special role in that ineptitude. Barry Zito getting a touch of redemption after many rocky years with the Giants is a nice story, especially as it came at the expense of baseball's best pitcher. Verlander's quest for his own postseason redemption will certainly be a popular story line the next time he finds himself in the playoffs.

Baseball's off-season brings its own interests and excitements, but none of it is the same as an actual game. I congratulate the San Francisco Giants on a tremendous season. Coming back from down 3-1 against St. Louis and then dominating Detroit the way they did, it's one hell of an accomplishment. At the same time, I'm reminded of something Hall of Famer Rogers Hornsby once said: "People ask me what I do in the winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."

If you need me, you can find me at the window.

Hot News : World Series Game 3: Futile Resistance - update.

- Hai dear Bassebal player and team update, Today i will talk about ,I was create this article from anotoher source special for you, I hope you will like this That i wrote can help you.Happy reading

Not all World Series are created equal. In 2011 we were treated to close games, including an all-time classic in Game 6, while the 2012 edition is ready to go down as a clunker. San Francisco's 2-0 win last night leaves them one win away from a sweep, great news for Giants fans, but not so exciting for the rest of us. In the 2004 ALCS, the Red Sox proved that a team CAN come back from down three games to none, but that's the lone example in baseball history. In fact, of the twenty three World Series that have begun 3-0, twenty ended in a sweep and none went farther than a fifth game. The Giants are on the verge of their second championship in three years, and the Tigers don't seem interested in doing much about it.

In my Game 2 recap, I mentioned how much I enjoy a good pitching performance. Game 3 served as a good reminder that not every low scoring game is the result of strong pitching though. The Giants managed a second consecutive shutout, making them the first team since the 1966 Orioles to pull that off (more on those Orioles in a minute), but it wasn't because their starting pitcher was tremendous, or even particularly good. Ryan Vogelsong didn't allow a run, but he allowed multiple base runners in three of the first five innings, and didn't make it through his sixth.

In the 1st inning the Tigers had runners on first and second with one out, but Prince Fielder rolled into an easy double play. In the last two games, Fielder is 0 for 6 with 2 strikeouts, 2 double plays, and 1 horrible slide at the plate. That's about as bad as it gets, without having a ball bounce off your head to become a home run or something.

In the 3rd inning Detroit again had two runners on with one out, and again they hit into a double play (Quintin Berry this time). Then in the 5th, the Tigers managed to load the bases with only one out, but Berry struck out and then soon to be A.L. MVP Miguel Cabrea hit a weak infield fly to end the inning.

This wasn't a good pitching performance by Vogelsong, it was an escape act, aided by a complete inability to take advantage of numerous chances on Detroit's part.

The Tigers' Anibal Sanchez was arguably the better pitcher, despite taking the loss. He had a rough 2nd inning, allowing a walk, a wild pitch, a ball that was crushed to deep right-center field for a triple, and in the end, two runs. But in his six other innings, he allowed just four singles. The best pitching of the night came from San Francisco's bullpen, with Tim Lincecum dominating for multiple innings for the second time this series, and closer Sergio Romo making quick work of the 9th to end things. Neither of them allowed a hit.

The Tigers have now scored just three runs in the first three games of this series. I found myself wondering where that ranks, in terms of scoring futility in a World Series. I dug around and discovered that the last team to finish a a World Series with fewer than ten runs was the 1999 Atlanta Braves, who scored just nine while being swept by the Yankees. The Tigers could certainly score seven runs tonight (or win a game or two) and avoid that fate, but if tonight is anything like the first three games, Detroit is going to join this list:

FEWEST RUNS IN A WORLD SERIES:

#7.  8 runs - 1990 Oakland Athletics (lost 4-0)
#7.  8 runs - 1976 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#7.  8 runs - 1939 Cincinnati Reds (lost 4-0)
#7.  8 runs - 1922 New York Yankees (lost 4-0*)
#7.  8 runs - 1920 Brooklyn Robins (lost 5-2**)
#6.  6 runs - 1914 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-0)
#5.  5 runs - 1950 Philadelphia Phillies (lost 4-0)
#3.  4 runs - 1963 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#2.  3 runs - 1907 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0*)
#2.  3 runs - 1905 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-1)
#1.  2 runs - 1966 Los Angeles Dodgers (lost 4-0)

* - Both the 1907 and 1922 World Series featured a game that ended in a 3-3 tie which was replayed entirely from the start, nullifying those three runs for each team.

** - The World Series was played as a best of 9 from 1919 to 1921. Scoring just 8 runs over seven games probably means that Brooklyn team (not yet known as the Dodgers) probably rates 3rd "best" on a more subjective look at the weakest scoring World Series teams.

Two other random notes:

- That 1905 Philadelphia team was shutout in all four of their losses, which is a record.

- The 1918 Boston Red Sox hold the record for fewest runs scored by a WINNING team, having scored just 9 when they beat the Cubs in six games that year.

Unless the Tigers manage at least five runs between now and whenever the World Series ends, they're going to have scored the fewest runs in a World Series in 46 years. Almost any chance of winning the World Series is now gone for them, what remains to be seen is if they lose it in historically inept fashion.