George Brett

"The Royals were the more deserving team in 1985. Even if Denkinger makes the out call, the Royals still tie the game. The fact that Cardinals completely fell apart after that showed a colossal lack of guts or heart unbefitting a champion."



Well..........that's an opinion, and you know what they say about opinions.

Denkinger was not responsible for Tudor getting torched in Game 7 either.

It ain't over 'til it's over. Just as Bill Buckner so clearly demonstrated.

Anyway, what St. Louis fans don't like to admit is that the Cards were lucky to be still in it by Game 6. They won Games 1 and 2 despite being outhit 8-7 and 9-6. Teams that get more hits win the game about 80% of the time, and KC outhit the Cards in every game except Game 4, and outhit them 68-40 for the series. Even if we take out Game 7, the Royals still have a big edge, 54-35. The Royals would have won it in five games if the usual trend had held.

I can't think of a single WS where a team with that big a per game margin in hits (10-6) lost the World Series. 1912, maybe. The overwhelming majority of WS have been won by the team with more hits. I looked up a few famous WS upsets: the 1909 Tigers outhit the Pirates 55-50 but lost in seven. The 1912 Giants lost despite outhitting the Red Sox 74-60, and Matty was 0-2 despite a 1.25 ERA. The 1926 Yanks outhit St. Louis 65-54, but lost in seven games. The 1997 Indians outhit Florida 72-68 and a had a better team ERA, but lost in seven. There were a few other instances where the losing team led the series in hits, but it's rare. Oh, and this isn't a matter of opinion. It's history.

And another Kansas Citian responds to what was meant as a joke.

That was a joke, son, I says it was a joke!

Jeez - you guys sensitive about something or what?


But, through it all, the only "fact" is that Denkinger blew the call - all the rest is supposition and conjecture.

A comment that reads as snarky and dismissive is difficult to recognize as a joke, especially when it isn't actually funny.

Anyway, I got fed up with Cards fans going on and on about how their team got jobbed out of the series by that call. Bad calls happen. If we're lucky, they don't decide games, but even if they do you still play the thing out.

As for facts, here is the sequence of play in the bottom of the ninth, game six: (Todd Worrell pitching).

J. Orta. Ground ball to 1b, runner safe. Clark argues. Replay shows Denkinger blew call.
S. Balboni. Line drive single to LF. Orta to 2b. O. Concepcion comes in to pinch run for Balboni at 1b.
J. Sundberg. Bunt fielded by pitcher. Orta thrown out at third.
H. McRae. Passed ball. Runners advance to 2b and 3b.
H. McRae. Intentional walk. Bases loaded. J. Wathan in to pinch run for McRae at 1b.
D. Iorg. Line drive single to RF. Concepcion scores. Sundberg scores. Royals win 2-1.

This is the point that no Cards fan will admit. Even with the right call by Denkinger, the Royals have tied the game, have the winning run on (Wathan) with two out, Lonnie Smith due up (9-for-27 in the series; 4 RBI) and they are splattering line drives all over the park off Worrell. Even if they get out of the ninth with no more damage, the Cards have lost the lead and, having scored only 13 runs in six games, are facing an uphill battle. They had only five hits in the game (all singles), with their one run coming on a pair of singles and a walk. The Royals, meanwhile, have the top of their lineup coming up in the tenth, and ten hits in the game to that point against a Cards staff (Cox, Dayley, Worrell) that looks like it's pitching batting practice. Yes, it's conjecture to think that the Cards were basically toast at that point, but it's a lot more reasonable than blaming the whole thing on Denkinger.

That's just nuts. He cost them one lousy out. So did Jack Clark a few minutes later when he misplayed a pop foul.

Lots of teams have to get an extra out in an inning due to an error or bad call to hold the lead and they do it. Worrell cost them the lead and Tudor cost them any chance they had to win it back in Game Seven. The better team won. Then the losers acted like crybabys who'd had their rattles taken away, and their fans egged them on. It made for an ugly winter.

So says a Bostonian and a Red Sox fan.

A rose is a rose is a rose.

A joke is a joke is a joke

An opinion is an opinion is an opinion.

Lighten up and smell the roses.

How's the Redsox doing in the playoffs......oh, yeah....never mind.

We have a correct guesser. The Royals won 85 in 1971 and 83 in 2003.

The Royals have had 17 winning seasons in 44 years, and Brett played in 15 of those winning seasons.
The Royals have never played in the postseason without George Brett in the lineup.

Brett came up for a cup of coffee in 1973, so one could probably look at that as a season he didn't contribute; though technically he was on the team for a few games. Paul Schaal went down with an injury in 74, Brett was called back up and the rest is history. A very average hitter in the minors, Charlie Lau got hold of him and helped make him one of the best hitters of his era. I got to see him record his first major league RBI in 74 against the Yankees. I grew up half-way between St. Louis and KC, and while I am a Cards fan first, I followed both teams closely back in the 70s.

OK, here's one....

How many winning seasons have the Pittsburgh Pirates had since Barry Bonds left after the 1992 season, the year before Brett retired?

Hint: The answer to this makes the Royals look good...

Not that I was a fan of either team - BUT - the bad call changed the circumstances of the inning so the events that followed cannot be taking as fact. IF the call was proper - would Balboni have then gotten a hit? Maybe he would have been pitched to differently - maybe he would have hit a home run! I'm just pointing out that the space-time continuem (or whatever) got knocked off course.

When Jose Lind booted that ball to open the ninth inning in the 1992 playoffs it sent an "uh-oh" through the Pirates - they were rolling, suddenly there was a problem. An easy routine out and I think the Pirates would have won. Anyway, I just thinking the inning was thrown off course by that call and it would have unfolded completely differently.

Exactly - you can't assume that the events that occurred after the blown call would be the same as what would have happened had the correct out call been made in the first place. The rookie Worrell would have been still settled, as well as the vets Clark and Porter - hopefully less apt to making their subsequent costly errors, if the bad call hadn't rattled them. Plus the crowd and Royals possibly may have been less "enthusiastic." So, one event leads to another - usually bad follows bad, while good follows good - "usually"!

Sorry I brought the whole thing up. Really I was just trying to be witty, but apparently you can't be witty here?

Pendleton had already doubled when Lind misplayed the ground ball, so there was a runner in scoring position when Lind erred........still true though, if he makes the play, the Braves have one less out to play with