slikmar

"A book?"
 
"That's right. When I was your age, television was called books. And this is a special book. It was the book my father used to read to me when I was sick, and I used to read it to your father. And today I'm gonna read it to you."
 
"Has it got any sports in it?"
 
"Are you kidding? Fencing, fighting, torture, revenge, giants, monsters, chases, escapes, true love, miracles..."
 
"Doesn't sound too bad. I'll try to stay awake."
 
"Oh, well, thank you very much, very nice of you. Your vote of confidence is overwhelming."

website

First, glad they gave trios titles to Death Triangle. Lucha Bros deserve it, I have yet to see a match of theirs that was not the top or close to it on any show they have been on.
The trios and world champion titles had to be vacated. if they had only vacated the world championship, would have shown too much favoritism.
MJF coming out and then showing hasn't changed was great went on his rant before he left I actually agreed with him regarding the ex WWE people coming in and being pushed over wrestlers who had stuck with company from beginning. I suspect Moxley will end up with Title (loved his speech) and a feud with MJF. I also had figured Danielson to win so he can continue the feud with Jericho.

Yup.  I'm too cheap to buy streaming, which is the honest truth behind my saying that we boycott such things.

Yeah, but your not hiring an actress as talented as Tatiana Maslany to play half a part.

I've been to Cleveland, so I can kind of understand an un-Cleveland sentiment....

Saw it.  It has potential...more than the Rams showed, especially.

They showed the Black Adam trailer during thursday night football. I liked it and looks good. Loved the Justice Society.

And they're railing about a letter from 16 years ago...and in fact, Serena was having problems.  December, 2005, she was #11.  By March, #58.  Bottomed out in July, #140.  Ended the year at #95.  From the French Open 2005 through the US Open 2006, she skipped 3, and didn't make it past the 4th round in the other 4.  She'd pulled off the Serena Slam in 2002-3, but in that stretch, she was playing badly.  So if anything, I'd read it as tough love, and entirely deserved.
 
But we are all too aware that ANY criticism of an icon, justified or not, will be met with derision and denial, *forever*.  

I've seen shifts against certain right-handers.  It's not common;  generally it's the lumbering types, IIRC, who hammer the ball but also take forever to get down the line.  Catchers, for example.
 
They were talking about this during the games today, and afterward on MLB Network.  A big factor was BABiP, batting average on balls in play...has been dropping, because the radical shift...SS or 3rd base 2-3 steps on the right side of 2nd, 2nd baseman 7-10 steps into the outfield.  Note that also means the 2nd baseman's countering a number of fly balls, AND is allowing the right fielder to play deeper.  So...yeah, I can see it.  They were saying it was a pretty sizable drop.  They also mentioned the immobile, or less mobile, 2nd baseman.  This might be more common than one would think at first glance...because no slap hitters are allowed.  So 2nd basemen today are...I don't think the size of 3rd basemen of 25 years ago, but maybe?  Can't say as I really looked.  We KNOW shortstops are consistently bigger...let's leave Oneal Cruz out of this for the moment, he's an aberration no matter what, but there's 9 shortstops right now with 15+ HRs.  And base stealing is way down...that's another classic 2nd baseman angle.  So, maybe the mobile 2nd baseman is much less common.
 
I HATE the change because, as far as I'm concerned, any tactical choices should be allowed.  Smart play...shifting properly...should never be banned.  OTOH, I agree that the game is SERIOUSLY boring because there's so little action...along with, at times, horribly slow pace of play.  I still don't know how much banning shifts will help, but clearly it will...or it wouldn't be league-wide.
 
Oh, the reason why, I think, it's "feet on the dirt" is because without it, you would probably see quite a bit of pushing the limits...shortstop as close to 2nd as allowed, AND leaning towards 1st.  (I'm not sure when the infielders are allowed to move, but I suspect it's when the pitch is released.)  With the 2nd baseman in about his same position as npw, perhaps a step or two towards 2nd...he'll still get to many sharp 2-hoppers that get past the first baseman, he still covers the mid-depths, he still allows the right fielder to play deeper.  Force his feet onto the dirt, and none of that's possible.
 
I don't think the larger bases will make any difference on steals...at least not tactically.  90 feet is 1080 inches.  We're talking 4 1/2 inches shorter, base edge to base edge, so that's 1 part in 240.  If stealing a base takes 3 seconds, we're talking about 1/100th of a second.  Yeah, on occasion, that will come into play, but tactically?  Meaningless.  Other factors will matter more...such as, if mobility becomes more valued, if the singles and doubles hitters' value increases, if the game moves away from "all I do is hit dingers"...steals will be more valuable.  I believe there's been *some* move in that direction, by some teams, anyway.  Another angle:  the Yankees' major issues last year were:
--all blasters, no one getting on base first (the Dodgers are THE model here)
--serious defensive limitations, if not downright deficiencies.
 
They'd seemingly addressed those when they were running away with everything...but more recently?  No one's getting on, AND they're not blasting that much.  Running creates more scoring chances, and it forces defensive mistakes.  The analytics guys tend to miss that latter.  
 
Tell ya one thing my sadistic streak is looking forward to.  The veteran pitcher who's never dealt with the pitch clock...who's done it His Way for 10 years...then gets called for ball 4 because he takes too long.  I'm looking forward to the blow-up on the field...even if he can't argue, there's a real good chance it'll rattle him *good*...and then the post-game meltdown.  BTW, this was, from reports, part of the reason why the players *didn't* vote for the pitch clock.  Tough noogies, kiddies.  Cope.  This is in your control.

Rules changes have been made official today.
https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-2023-rule-changes-pitch-timer-larger-bases-shifts
 
--Pitch clock, including a rule that the batter has to be in the box.  Love this.  Super-fidgety hitters and slow pitchers are incredibly annoying.
--The infield shift is out.  Hate this.  Just caves in to robotic hitting.  OTOH, the fact is...that's how it's taught ALL the way back to elementary schoolers (a comment I've heard a few times) so expecting hitters to adjust is impractical.
 
The bases go from 15 to 18 inches as well.  Fundamentally, the goal here is safety, to help avoid collisions and tripping, particularly at 1st.
 
So pretty much what's been discussed all year, I think.  
 
EDIT:  ....how much ya wanna bet that the conspiracy theory types will argue favoritism...that the clock's started slower for Yankee pitchers, for example.  One thing that MIGHT happen...if this is operated by the home team, then there's a more plausible case for favoritism.  Not sure who'll run this, tho.

Americans and football. Yes, I believe it.