Must Read: Michael Lewis on Baseball in Cuba

Jonah Keri calls this "the best baseball article you'll read all year," and he's right. Michael Lewis (of 'Moneyball' and 'Liar's Poker' fame) writes about the state of baseball in Cuba.

Commie Ball: A Journey to the End of a Revolution

This is reporting at its best. Do yourself a favor and read this over the weekend -- you'll be glad you did.

Congrats to The Kid

Congratulations to Ken Griffey Jr. for hitting home run #600 last night in Miami. Encomiums (encomia?) are

Sweet-swingin' Ken Griffey

appearing throughout the baseball world as the first untainted 600 in 37 years* comes courtesy of one of the prettiest swings in the history of major league baseball.

As is often the case, Joe Posnanski has one of the best columns about this milestone:

Joe Posnanski: 600 Words for Junior

"There's a pitcher I know who gave up three home runs to Ken Griffey — three of the 600 — and when I asked what it was like to give up a homer to Junior, he said: "You know, that swing is so damn pretty, it’s almost an honor."

Next up in the 600 Club is A-Rod, who should hit his around the end of the 2009 season. He will be an interesting case: untainted by steroid accusations but admired rather than beloved.

* -- I have no idea if Griffey is untainted by steroids. I hope he is. But no one knows, and it's been disappointing to see story after story talk about how Griffey "did it the right way." Will Leitch points out the disservice this rhetorical tactic does to Griffey:

"The implication, of course, is that Griffey hit all his home runs without steroids, unlike Barry Bonds and (presumably) Sammy Sosa. This seems more an insult to Griffey than to the alleged users. Praising Griffey by denigrating others' accomplishment doesn't allow Griffey to stand on his own, turns him into a martyr rather than the upper echelon Hall of Famer he is. Griffey should not be defined by others.

And since I'm giving love to Deadspin (not that they ever give any love to The Cub Reporter), here's my favorite Griffey story.

WANT

Back before the Internet, I remember seeing ads for a little handheld gizmo that displayed baseball scores. I imagine it was cellular; you could scroll through all

Niiiiice.

the games in progress and see the score, men on base, count, etc. If I remember correctly, it even had some sort of notification feature that would let you know when your team scored. I don't remember much about them other than it seemed REALLY COOL to be able to get scores whenever you wanted them, and I really wanted one.

With the advent of the Internet I assumed that this sort of thing would have died out -- after all, when you've got Gamecast and other things that let you follow a game (or multiple games) pitch by pitch, why would you need a standalone appliance?

Apparently someone thinks people do, because there's this:

Liveboard - Live Baseball Scoreboard

And you know what? I totally want one. Brookstone's is cheaper and more flexible, since it doesn't require an Internet connection, but that Liveboard sure is pretty. It would look very nice on my desk. If only it didn't cost $200.

This Move Is Made Of Fail

I will be so angry if this happens:

Cubs Ready to Sign Jim Edmonds

I have a visceral anti-Edmonds reaction, and I know I'm not alone among Cubs fans. For me, it's not about his frosted tips (something which I will admit to having done myself). It's about the fact that he is more identified with the St. Louis Cardinals than just about any player in the last decade.

But even that, in and of itself, wouldn't make this a bad signing. Believe me, if the Cubs traded for Albert Pujols, I would have no problem rooting for him. No, the problem is that not only is Jim Edmonds Mr. Cardinal, he also sucks. He just got put on waivers by the Padres, who are currently the worst team in baseball. The Padres are hitting .233 as a team, and they decided they didn't want Edmonds any more, that they'd rather take their chances with Scott Hairston and Jody Gerut in center. Edmonds is about to turn 39 and is in the middle of his fourth-straight season of declining production. He's hitting 178/265/233 (yes, he's slugging .233!). Why send Felix Pie back to the minors to take a flyer on an aging veteran who might, but might not, regain his stroke?

Several years ago there was chatter about the Cubs acquiring Chipper Fucking Jones. Now there are few players in baseball I dislike more than Chipper Fucking Jones. In fact, there might not be any player in baseball I dislike more than Chipper Fucking Jones. But when the possibility of Chipper Fucking Jones becoming a Cub was raised, I was upset at first but was ultimately OK with it because it seemed pretty clear that he would have helped the Cubs.

If Jim Edmonds was still getting on base at a .360+ clip and hitting 20-30 homers, I would be happy to see him in a Cubs uniform. After all, I'm a Cubs fan, and anything that makes the Cubs better makes me happy. But this isn't going to make the Cubs better; it's going to make them worse, at the expense of one of their young prospects, and in order to endure this worsening we're all going to have to put up with Jim Edmonds in a Cubs uniform.

DO NOT WANT.

A-Rod

Interesting timing by Scott Boras and Alex Rodriguez, confirming during the World Series that A-Rod is opting out of the rest of his Yankees contract.

The Yankees have repeatedly said that if he were to opt out, they would not negotiate a new deal with him. Anything can happen, but I'd say it's likely that the Yankees will stick to that and will not attempt to re-sign A-Rod. For one thing, since he opted out the Yankees no longer get $21M from the Rangers to cover part of the cost.

Ken Rosenthal reported during the game that there had been discussions of a five-year extension, but I didn't get a sense of how serious those talks were -- I've since read that no offer was ever officially made.

So who's out there with the payroll necessary to sign the best player in baseball to the contract Boras thinks he deserves, and with a place to play him? I'm assuming that he's willing & able, if necessary, to move back to shortstop. Some of the teams mentioned:

* Red Sox: There has been talk of the Red Sox not re-signing Mike Lowell and bringing in A-Rod. After the season (and World Series) Lowell just had, though, I find that doubtful. I'm sure plenty of Red Sox fans wouldn't mind it if the Sox traded Julio Lugo to make a spce for A-Rod, though.

* Cubs: Ryan Theriot seems like a nice guy but he's not the answer to anything expect the question, "who was that kid from LSU who played some decent short back in '07?" The Cubs are hoping to build on this year's division championship and the first year of what they hope is a successful Piniella era, and what better way then to bring in the game's best player to play short? Sure, he isn't left-handed, which is what the Cubs really need, but that could be overlooked. Ownership uncertainty is one thing that might keep them out of the running.

* Dodgers: I've seen this one mentioned but it doesn't make sense to me. The Dodgers still have Garciaparra and Furcal under contract, and with the season James Loney had at first I don't see them benching him to move Nomar across the diamond. They could conceivably decline their option on Jeff Kent and move either Furcal or A-Rod to second, but I doubt they will.

* Tigers: An intriguing choice. They've shown a willingness to spend money and definitely think they're positioned to be competitive for a while. Brandon Inge's offensive numbers have declined in each of the last three years, but he's (relatively) cheap (3Y/$19M) and I could see someone taking a flyer on him. Plus, they've already announced that they're planning to move Carlos Guillen to first in 2008, so they're in the market for a shortstop.

* Angels: The odds-on favorite. Arte Moreno is not afraid to spend money, and they could easily move Chone Figgins back to the outfield and either make Garrett Anderson a full-time DH, move him to first, or try to trade him.

Those are the main players. I've seen the White Sox mentioned, but I think they're another re-tooling year or two away from making a huge free agent acquisition. I might suggest the Orioles as a possibility, but Andy MacPhail's previous reluctance to work with Boras, combined with Peter Angelos' unwillingness to spend money, makes that unlikely.

One possibility I haven't seen mentioned that I want to throw out there is Atlanta. Assuming Andruw Jones won't be re-signed, there are a couple of scenarios I could envision -- one would be trading Renteria (maybe to the Tigers for a center fielder) and bringing Rodriguez in to play short; another might be re-shuffling the outfield a bit, moving Francoeur to center and Diaz to right, pushing Chipper back out to left, and bringing A-Rod in to play third.

Just a thought to keep you warm around the hot stove this winter...

Manny Being Manny

Manny Ramirez, who has done a pretty good job over the years of pissing people off while keeping his mouth shut, has managed to do it again, this time by opening it.

On Wednesday he was asked if he still had confidence in the Red Sox. He said he did, and then he added, "why should we panic? If it doesn't happen, so, who cares? There's always next year. It's not like it's the end of the world."

That's right -- a baseball player admitted that what he does for a living isn't the most important thing ever. Obviously, some people disagree, which is not surprising considering the high rabidity level of many in Red Sox Nation. Still, my favorite reaction has to be from my local paper's sports columnist, David Jones, who wrote today that he would rather have any of the Philles on "his team" than Manny Ramirez. The same Phillies who are, last time I checked, not playing in the LCS.

Look, I understand that Red Sox fans are casting about for someone to blame for the fact that they didn't put the Indians away in four. Never mind that the Indians tied the Sox for the best record in baseball; the Indians aren't the Yankees, and therefore they are obviously no match for the Mighty, Mighty Sox (who appear to be, as others have written, turning into the Yankees). So along comes Manny, who decides for some reason to talk to the press, and OH MY GOD, what comes out of his mouth but something other than the same platitudes we've heard a million times.

Here's something Daryl pointed out to me this morning that I find very interesting. Compare what Manny said:

"Why should we panic? If it doesn't happen, so, who cares? There's always next year. It's not like it's the end of the world.

to what was written about Clint Hurdle last week (warning, stuff gets heavy from this point on):

Manager Clint Hurdle seemed irritable. He cut his postgame press conference short when he was repeatedly quizzed about whether the loss was "debilitating" or "crushing."

Just another manager who couldn't take the heat?

Hardly.

"It was just kind of funny at that time because that day I had gotten a call from a mother at Children's Hospital that wanted me to come by and see her son before he was going to pass that night," Hurdle said. "That was debilitating."

And crushing?

"Crushing was when a doctor told me my little girl was born with a birth defect."

The nerve of Hurdle, telling the press that losing a baseball game isn't "debilitating" or "crushing" when you compare it to real life. Hurdle is much more eloquent than Ramirez, but both of them (along with, I imagine, just about everyone involved with baseball) realize this truth: losing a baseball game, even a playoff game, even the last playoff game of the year, isn't the end of the world. Life does go on, and whether that life is caring for your debilitated daughter or, as Jones imagines for Manny, sitting in your basement smoking a bowl, I'm glad to see a few people involved with the game acknowledge that.

Congratulations, Rockies. Prepare To Be Reduced To Stereotypes

(Gym: yes)

The Colorado Rockies have put together an almost unprecedented run over the last three weeks to win the National League pennant. Since they play in the Mountain time zone, were in fourth place less than a month ago, and have only one recognizable superstar, the hordes of press that are descending on Denver are going to be frantically thumbing through the Rockies' media guide, looking for angles for the requisite personal interest stories.

But fear not, beat writers of America, I have you covered. You've got eight days to fill. Day one should of course, start with the team -- refuses to lose, greatest post-season run in 70 years, strong calm leadership of Clint Hurdle. After that, feel free to run these seven stories in any order you see fit:

Todd Helton: Finally getting his shot after surviving a decade of mediocrity. Bonus points if you can use the word "redemption" or find some other way to refer obliquely to his strongly-held Christian beliefs.
Troy Tulowitski: Goofy. Wears #2 as a tribute to Derek Jeter, who by the way will be watching the World Series from home.
Willy Taveras: Fast, Dominican, bunts a lot. Was Rookie of the Year in 2005, had a terrible sophomore slump. Very fast.
Matt Holliday: MVP. Clutchy McClutch all season long. Still hasn't touched home plate in the Phillies Padres game.
Jeff Francis: The unknown ace. Quiet. Doesn't say much. Lets his performance do the talking.
Seth Smith: This year's Francisco Rodriguez. Perfect example of the Rockies' "a new hero every night" persona. As a college quarterback, was Eli Manning's backup at Ole Miss.
Kaz Matsui: Thriving out of New York spotlight. Provides veteran leadership. Great in the clubhouse.

There, that's pretty much everything you'll be able to learn about the Rockies between now and the beginning of the World Series. You're welcome.

The Playoffs Begin

(Gym: yes)

As I write this, the Phillies are down 3-2 after back-to-back homers by gritty, gutty Aaron Rowand and once-and-future boo magnet Pat Burrell. I have to go home and take a nap so I'll be able to stay up and watch the Cubs game, which starts at the ridiculous hour of 10:30. If Comcast Harrisburg has added TBS-HD (it's good to laugh), I'll watch at home, otherwise I might try to find a nearby bar that'll be showing it, at least for a few innings.

Go Cubs!

Hating On Comcast and Major League Baseball (Again)

(Gym: yes)

The good news is that the Cubs made the playoffs. The bad news is that I apparently won't be able to watch the games in HD. For the first time, major league baseball's TV contract calls for the first round to be aired (cabled?) almost entirely on TBS. That in and of itself isn't a problem since I (and most other people) have cable. The proble is that, at least in The Hbg, Comcast doesn't carry TBS in HD. There have been rumors for a while that Comcast will be adding TBS HD to systems around the country before the playoffs, but so far the only place I've seen that confirmed is in Boston.

I called Comcast this morning and got a surprisingly helpful CSR who checked and told me that it is "in the works" but no date has been set for it to be added. So, it looks like, for the first time in three years, I won't be able to watch the playoffs in HD. It's not a huge deal -- I mean, I'll still be able to see the games -- but it does sort of suck that, in pursuit of the almighty dollar, MLB has seen fit to downgrade the quality of its playoff coverage. That ain't right.

(By the way, I'm not alone -- according to Consumerist, Comcast Chicago hasn't added TBS HD yet, either.)

[UPDATE 2:40 PM]: I've already gotten a bunch of search hits today from people looking forinfo on TBS HD and Comcast, from around the country. So, does anyone have TBS HD on their Comcast system? And if so, can I come over on Wednesday?

WOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get all the good news over at The Cub Reporter, of course.

Now I root for whatever the scenario is that gets the Cubs in either Philly or Shea for the first round, so I can drive up and see a game. I think that means the Phils and Mets need to win out while the Padres and Rockies both lose out. No matter what, though, the Cubs are going to the playoffs!

756, Barry Bonds, and Beating A Dead Horse

No, the horse in question has nothing to do with steroids.

First of all, congratulations to Barry Bonds for becoming the MLB home run king. I lived in the Bay Area in the late 1990s and saw Bonds in person more times than I can count. The year he hit 73 home runs, we went to close to 20 games and I swear it wasn't until August that we went to a game where he didn't hit a homer. Leaving aside the question of what substances he may have used to aid him, I feel privileged to have seen the greatest home run hitter in major league history up close (And I do mean up close, thanks to our friend Art's incredible seats) numerous times.


Photo of the swing, taken by Brady and available on Flickr.

For all the Giants fans out there, I'm sure it was a nice moment last night, when Bonds hit a ball deep into right-center field to break the record, and the scoreboard played a message from Hank Aaron, with Willie Mays and Bonds' family on the field to celebrate with him.

I wish I could have seen it. But, thanks to MLB's asinine blackout rules, I couldn't. As I've posted about numerous times before, I live in an area where four teams, the Pirates, Phillies, Nationals, and Orioles, are blacked out. That meant that last night's game, broadcast on ESPN2, wasn't available to me, even though I don't get Nationals games OTA or on my cable system. In fact, when you look at the map of MLB blackouts, you can see that the Nationals' blackout area covers all or part of six states.

That's all of the District of Columbia, Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia, and parts of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina. By my estimates, this area covers a population of over 22,000,000. I have no way of knowing how many of those people get Nats games OTA or on their cable or dish systems, but I guarantee you it's less than half. If people living in Harrisburg, 120 miles from Washington, don't get the games, what are the chances that people living in Charlotte, 400 miles away, do?

I and many others have railed for years about the MLB blackout rules, which are both arbitrary and unfair. I don't begrudge a blackout system -- local television channels generate revenue from their airing of MLB games, and I understand their right to protect that in their territories. But preventing people outside those ares from watching games is counter-productive, and actively hurts MLB.

Here's how the blackouts should work. If you get a channel, either over the air or on your cable or dish system that broadcasts a team's games, that team's games should be blacked out on Extra Innings, ESPN, etc. If you can't receive a team's games on a local channel, that team's games should be available to you. It's that simple.

Here in Harrisburg, that would mean the Phillies would continue to be blacked out, since we get Phillies games on CW15 and Comcast SportsNet. The Pirates, Orioles, and Nationals games should be made available to us, at least until Comcast decides to carry MASN in PA like it's supposed to.

This would open up large areas of the country to see lots more games, which would build allegiances and create new fans, and it would be done without hurting the revenue streams of the local broadcasters or the teams themselves. In fact, I'd wager it would increase attendance (and therefore revenue), since a person would be much more likely to drive to see a team in person if he's had the opportunity to watch the team on TV.

As long as this ridiculousness persists, people are going to complain about it. Major League Baseball, it's time to start paying attention, make some changes, and stop alienating the very people who have made the league the success it is today.

MLB Extra Innings' Misleading Advertising

MLB is airing a "free preview" of its Extra Innings service right now, with lots of ads telling you how you can sign up for the rest of the season.

I believe the ad they are running is deceptive at best, and fraudulent at worst. A line in the commercial says:

"You can watch your team's games no matter where you live."

This is blatantly false. As I and many others have pointed out, there are large areas of the country where various teams' games cannot be seen, and these areas do not correspond to areas where those games can be seen on other outlets. So for Major League Baseball to claim that you can watch "your team's" games "no matter where you live" is bull. If you're a Pirates fan in Harrisburg, or a Cubs fan in Des Moines, or a fan of any NL West team in Las Vegas, you're out of luck.

This ad is running with some sort of scrolling disclaimer at the bottom of it. The thing is, the disclaimer is in such small print, and scrolls by so quickly, that it is impossible to read. For all I know, it says "do not taunt Happy Fun Ball." It certainly does not outline the significant exceptions to the claim being made in the ad.

Who should I complain to about this? The Consumerist, obviously, and MLB (not that that will make a difference). Other than that, who? The BBB? The state Consumer Affairs department? My congressman? Emails are written, ready to be sent; I can call as many people as necessary. This aggression will not stand.

Comcast Redux

Since Consumerist published the email address of Comcast's CEO yesterday, I took the opportunity to ask him a few questions about his company's handling of the MLB Extra Innings package:

From: Christian Ruzich
To: brian_roberts AT comcast.com
Date: May 3, 2007 11:30 AM
Subject: Comcast And Extra Innings

Dear Mr. Roberts,

I'm writing today to try to get some information from you regarding Comcast's carriage of the MLB Extra Innings package. A few weeks ago I went through a long series of calls with various Comcast Customer Service Reps, because at the time my Comcast system was not carrying all of the channels in the Extra Innings package. Eventually, this problem was corrected in my area (Harrisburg, PA) but I know that it is still the case in Boston and other places that not all of the channels are available to people who subscribe to the package. Not only that, there have been multiple instances of Comcast refusing to give partial refunds to people, even though Comcast is not offering the full package to them.

Throughout the process I was confronted with Comcast employees who seemed to have no idea exactly what was going on. At various times I was told:

* The missing channels (GAME 11-14) would show up on the GAME 1-4 channels
* The channels would be added once the NHL playoffs were over
* The channels would be added "tomorrow"
* There wasn't enough room on the system to add the channels, and they would never be added
* The addition of the channels was a "regional" decision and no one at the corporate office was involved in the decision
* Comcast was only offering 10 channels, not 14, throughout the country (despite the fact that, at that moment, people in the Chicago area were getting all 14 channels) and therefore mo one was eligible for a partial refund

None of those responses turned out to be correct, and though (as I said) this problem was eventually resolved for me, I wonder why it has not been resolved for everyone, throughout the country. I know that Comcast received the right to broadcast MLB games at a very late date, but it seems to me that even with that the situation could have been handled better. Comcast should have proactively offered the package at a reduced rate for those people who were not able to receive the entire package, or at the very least your customer service representatives should have been instructed to give refunds to people who called to complain that they were not receiving the channels they had been led to believe they would receive.

I have another question about the Extra Innings package as well. The MLB 07 launch memo from iN DEMAND to its affiliates included a paragraph about games available in high definition:

"iN DEMAND will again be providing a High-Definition version of select games already included in the MLB EXTRA INNINGS package. These bonus HD games (approximately 5 per week) should be made available to all existing package subscribers with HD set-tops and television sets."

However, when I inquired about the availability of games in HD, I was told repeatedly that these games were not available and, in fact, would never be made available to me. Why is it that Comcast has chosen to ignore the request of iN DEMAND, and not make these games available to its subscribers?

Thank you very much for your time. I look forward to hearing from you.

Best,

Christian Ruzich

I got an email back from Cynthia Asbury in the Executive Office in the afternoon, and I'm awaiting an actual response to my questions.

Final (?) Comcast Update

My GAME 11-14 channels showed up over the weekend. Success! Of course I have to say that my efforts had absolutely nothing to do with the channels appearing, since every call I made met with absolutely no success. My flurry of emails seemed to do no good, either, since almost no one responded to me. Just to break it down, I phoned or emailed the following people/organizations about Comcast's deceptive business practices, and got the following responses:

Comcast: Every call I made got me a different response, all of which ultimately turned out to be incorrect. I did get a refund for the first three weeks of the season. Or, at least I'm supposed to get a refund; we'll see if it actually happens.
The Consumerist: Got a "thanks, we'll check it out" response, but no article about it, though they did make a post in response to a similar email from commenter Phildogger.
Deadspin: No response. Where is the love, Will? Is it because I'm a Cubs fan?
WHP CBS 21 News: No response.
WGAL NBC News 8: No response.
ABC 27 News: No response.
Fox43 News: No response.
State Representative Ron Buxton: A staffer from Representative Buxton's office called me within an hour of receiving my email and told me that, according to their office, the channels would be activated on Friday. They were off by two days, but still I appreciate the quick response.
State Senator Jeffrey Piccola: No response.
Congressman Tim Holden: No response.
Senator Arlen Specter: No response.
Senator Bob Casey: No response.
Senator John Kerry (because he's the chair of the committee which held the hearings about the Extra Innings deal): No response.

I'll keep an eye on my inbox over the next week to see if anyone else replies. For those of you in places like Boston who aren't getting the additional channels, keep up the good fight and please drop me a line if the channels show up on your systems.

Today's Comcast Update

Shockingly, it looks like the information Congressman Ron Buxton's office gave me was correct. This morning, when I checked my Comcast guide, I saw four new channels, 781-784. The channels are listed as "TBD," bu that's where GAME 11-14 should go; I'll check later today to see if games actually show up.

So if that's the case, it looks like Harrisburg, at least, will have all 14 channels once the NHL package ends. I'm not sure if there's been any improvement in Boston and elsewhere -- anyone have any updates?

According To The Comcast Executive Office, "All The Games" Means "All The Games We Carry"

I just got off the phone with Judy in the Comcast executive office. I called the executive office to get a phone number for my regional office, since regional numbers aren't available anywhere on the Comcast website or on my bill.

While I had her on the phone, I asked about the status of the four additional channels, and when they might be turned on in the Harrisburg area and other areas (like Boston) which aren't currently carrying. She said there were no plans to add the additional channels, at which point I asked what the process would be to get a 30% discount for the missing channels. Imagine my surprise when she told me that I wasn't eligible for a doscount because Comcast only carries ten channels, not fourteen!

When I told her that, for example, Comcast in Chicago was getting all fourteen channels, she had no response other than to reiterate that Comcast was only getting ten channels.

I decided to tack in a different direction, and ask for a 30% discount on the grounds that I had been mislead by Comcast's advertising, which boasted that I would be able to "catch all the action," which I took to mean "watch all the games." Judy informed me that what it actually means was that I'd be able to watch all the games Comcast offered.

Now, I looked at the page on Comcast.com advertising the Extra Innings package, and I suppose this is technically covered by the sentence "Not all programming and services are available in all areas." Still, I feel this is patently deceptive advertising -- at no point does Comcast mention that they will only be offering 70% of the channels in some areas. Plus, when I go to the guide channel that lists all the games available, I'm shown games on all 14 channels, not just games on the 10 channels that are apparently available to me.

So we have Comcast practicing deceptive advertising practices, and charging customers as much for 10 channels in Harrisburg as they charge for 14 channels in Chicago, or that DirecTV charges for 14 channels across the country. That doesn't seem right, does it?

If you'd like to talk to Judy, or anyone else in the executive office, call 215-665-1700. And if you're a Comcast subscriber in Chicago, or anywhere else that is getting the GAME 11-14 channels, post in the comments or send me an email at ruz at cruzich dot com. I'd love to talk to you.

My Tax Dollars At Work

Now this is excellent response from a public servant -- on my way home from work I got a call from someone in State Representative Ron Buxton's office, saying she got my email and letting me know that according to their information, Comcast would be adding the missing four channels on Friday.

She asked me to please call the Representative's office on Friday if that didn't happen, and I assured her I would.

Comcast Extra Innings Update

I just got off the phone with Juanita Evans at the Comcast corporate office. As the original commenter here said, she was very nice, and I certainly appreciate that she took the time to call me back after I feft her a message this morning.

She was, however, completely unhelpful. After saying that it was a mistake and that she shouldn't have been mentioned on "that website" (which is, I imagine, this website), she said that there was nothing she could do. She said that this should be handled on a regional level, and that they were having the same issues where she was (Boston).

I asked her what she meant by regional -- I'm in Harrisburg PA, and is there someone who covers just my city, or all of Pennsylvania, or what? She suggested that I look on my bill, call the 800 number for customer service, and express my concern that way.

So, basically, the brushoff. Today's call will be to the customer service number (1-800-COMCAST), to start the process of asking for a partial refund since they are not providing the service I'm paying for.

UPDATE 4:10 PM: Based on the good idea that commenter Phildogger had, I've emailed all four local Harrisburg TV stations, as well as my state and federal senators and representatives.

Comcast, Extra Innings, The Consumerist, And You

Well, after three calls to Comcast this week about the four missing channels, and after an anonymous commenter posted about his attempts to do the same from Boston, I decided to escalate things a bit. I just sent the following email to Ben Popken, editor of The Consumerist.

As I say in the email, I encourage everyone who's a Comcast subscriber with an incomplete Extra Innings package to call the phone number that our anonymous commenter provided. After all, we're only getting 10 of 14 available channels, which is about 71%. I don't see why we should be expected to pay more that 71% of the fee.

Are you still missing the additional Extra Innings channels? Post a comment and let me know where you are, and also let me know if you've called Juanita (her number is below) and what she had to say.

Here's the email to The Consumerist:

---

Ben,

I'm hoping the Consumerist can help put a little pressure on one of everyone's favorite companies, Comcast. Obviously you know what happened with Major League Baseball, DirecTV, and the Extra Innings package. Last week Comcast turned the EI package on, but they only made 10 of the 14 channels available.

I called them last week to find out when the other channels were going to be made available. The first CSR I talked to told me that the channels started back over at 1 after 10.

Me: "So the GAME 14 game will be on the same channel as the GAME 4 game?"
CSR: "Yes."

I figured I would just call back and try to get another CSR, since I wasn't up for explaining that those two games started less than a half-hour apart, so I was pretty sure the first game wouldn't be over before the second one started.

The second CSR didn't know what I was talking about, but as soon as I mentioned that I could just switch to DirecTV and get all the channels, I got transferred to a retention CSR right away. After a few minutes, he told me that the Game 11-14 channels weren't going to be added to the Comcast channel lineup until the following day.

Shockingly, the next day came and went and the channel weren't there. I didn't get a chance to call back for a few days, but I called back last night when I noticed that there were games on the Game 11-14 channels that weren't available on my system (some of the games on the other channels weren't available either, but that's a blackout problem with MLB and a subject for another email). This time, the first CSR I talked to knew what I was talking about and said that they were still trying to find space to put the additional channels, and that the problem was that "the government" let them have the EI package at such a late date that there wasn't room for the channels, and with the NHL playoffs going on they were still trying to figure out how to get the additional four channels on the system.

I am planning to call again on Monday, for two reasons. First, the "free preview" ends Sunday, which means that as of Monday we have to pay for the EI package (although I did get my April bill and I've already been charged the first installment of the fee). I'm encouraging people to call on Monday and point out that since we're only being given 71% of the available channels, maybe we should only be charged 71% of the cost.

Second, a commented posted a link on my blog to the following document:

http://www.tsq.com/alerts/MLB%2007%20launch%20memo2.pdf

This is a memo from In Demand to its affiliates on April 5th reminding them about the additional four channels and urging them to submit the authorization form and launch the channels as soon as possible, something that several Comcast affiliates have yet to do.

Oh, the memo also mentions up to five games per week in HD which "should be made available to all existing package subscribers with HD set-tops and television sets." They haven't done that either, at least not here in Harrisburg.

The anonymous commenter was nice enough to pass along the phone number and extension of the person in Corporate who he spoke to about this, and I urge all Comcast Extra Innings subscribers who don't yet have their additional four channels and/or HD games to call her:

Juanita Evans
1-888-309-2583 X44283

As the commenter says, "She is very, very nice, and is trying to help. Please be polite, but insistent!"

Thanks,

Christian Ruzich
The Dilettante's Dilemma

Major League Baseball Blackout Map

On Sunday I mentioned the fact that, thanks to arcane blackout rules, I'm prohibited from watching games from four teams (the Phillies, Pirates, Nationals, and Orioles) on the Extra Innings package. A commenter asked me if there was a map showing all the blackout areas, and there is. Dan werr at Baseball Think Factory put one together, and it was referenced in two fine articles Jeff Passan wrote last summer:


Click map for large version

As you can see, a four-team blackout like we face here in central PA isn't that unusual -- I count ten different chunks of the country with the same number of blacked out teams, including the entire states of Oklahoma and Arkansas. And it's even worse in a couple of places, like:

* The southern half of Nevada, which is blacked out from six teams: all five California teams (Oakland, San Francisco, LA, Anaheim, and San Diego) plus the Arizona Diamondbacks. It looks like parts of the Las Vegas area are included in this blackout.

* The entire state of Iowa, where it is impossible to watch Cubs, White Sox, Royals, Brewers, Twins, or Cardinals games.

Some of these restrictions are beyond ridiculous. Thanks to Yahoo Maps, for example, I can tell you that the good people of Hammond, Montana are unable to watch Mariners games, despite living 1,013 miles from Seattle. That's an extreme, of course, but when you look at that map there are tons of things that jump out as wrong.

I think the main thing comes down to this -- all over the country, people are being deprived of the ability to watch out-of-market games that they don't have any other way of seeing. I understand the theory behind, say, blacking out Phillies games in the Philadelphia area. You don't want the MLB package taking viewers away from over-the-air or Comcast Sports Net games. But how does Major League Baseball justify blacking out Pirates games here in Harrisburg, where we cannot get any Pittsburgh OTA stations or FSN Pittsburgh? That's just one of literally scores of examples of games being blacked out and that blackout serving no purpose other than preventing fans from watching games.

The whole idea of putting the games on TV is to build fan loyalty, right? The more games we see, the more hats and pennants and replica jerseys we'll buy. So why make it harder for people to see the teams they want to see? The more Mariners fans there are in Hammond, or Reds fans in Tupelo, or Rangers fans in New Orleans, or Orioles fans in Charlotte, the better for baseball, I would think, but obviously the smart folks who run MLB think otherwise.

How Comcast and Major League Baseball Are Conspiring To Piss Me Off Today

So here we are. It's 40 degrees and windy outside, so we're all hunkered down in the house. D-Jo just came back from the hospital with the new baby, so I'm with Zosia in her playroom, and I figured that since it's the first Sunday afternoon of the baseball season, I'd like to watch a game.

I switched from DirecTV to cable last year because the cable system (Comcast) had a lot more HD channels, and since I bought a nice, big HDTV as a present for selling my website, it made sense. I've had the Extra Innings package on DirecTV for the last few years, and expected that when the season started I'd buy it on Comcast.

Then of course came all the recent unpleasantness with MLB attempting to give DirecTV an exclusive on the Extra Innings package, and Congress getting involved, and MLB extending the offer to Dish and cable, and then at the 11th hour (actually at the 13th hour, since it happened after Opening Day) cable coming through and matching the deal.

So I signed up, but didn't get a chance to watch any games until today, what with the new baby being born and all. I turned on the schedule channel, and this is what I saw:

Channel Match-Up Time
GAME 10 Baltimore vs. NY Yankees 1:05
GAME 9 NY Mets vs. Atlanta 1:05
GAME 8 Philadelphia vs. Florida 1:05
GAME 7 Seattle vs. Cleveland PPD/Snow
GAME 6 Pittsburgh vs. Cincinnati 1:15
GAME 5 Arizona vs. Washington 1:35
GAME 4 Toronto vs. Tampa Bay 1:40
GAME 14 Chicago Cubs vs. Milwaukee 2:05
GAME 13 Minnesota vs. Chicago White Sox 2:05
GAME 12 St. Louis vs. Houston 2:05
GAME 11 Detroit vs. Kansas City See note
GAME 10 LA Dodgers vs. San Francisco 4:05

And here's where the fun begins. There were, originally, 11 early games. One was cancelled due to weather, leaving 10 games for me to theoretically watch. However, my channel guide only goes up to the GAME 10 channel. I called Comcast customer service, because the game I wanted to watch was on GAME 14, and asked where I could find that game.

The first CSR told me that the channels started back over at 1 after 10.

Me: "So the GAME 14 game will be on the same channel as the GAME 4 game?"
CSR: "Yes."

I figured I would just call back and try to get another CSR, since I wasn't up for explaining that those two games started less than a half-hour apart, so I was pretty sure the Toronto/Tampa game wouldn't be over before the Cubs game started.

The second CSR didn't know what I was talking about, but as soon as I mentioned that I could just switch to DirecTV I got transferred to a retention CSR right away. After a few minutes, he told me that the Game 11-14 channels weren't going to be added to the Comcast channel limeup until tomorrow.

So, out of 10 possible games, four were unavailable thanks to Comcast. That left six games to watch, right? Well, no. I live in Harrisburg PA, an area that MLB has decreed has four "home" teams: the Pirates, the Phillies, the Orioles, and the Nationals. That means the games from all four of those teams are blacked out here, even when they aren't on other channels. Today, only the Phillies game was on another channel.

So, out of 6 possible games, four were unavailable on Extra Innings due to Major League Baseball. That left two games, one of which (Mets/Braves) was available on TBS.

That left a grand total of one out-of-market game available to me on this, the first Sunday afternoon of the baseball season. Not exactly the sort of all-access viewing we've been promised, that's for sure.

Maybe the GAME 11-14 channels will show up tomorrow (though I'm not holding my breath). Maybe Major League Baseball will change the archaic and ridiculous blackout rules (even less likely). Until then, all I can do is write nasty emails, bitch, moan, and watch the Blue Jays beat the Devil Rays.

Conan O'Brien Plays Base Ball

From Deadspin, here's a link to a hilarious Conan O'Brien piece where Conan visits people playing by 1864 rules:

The Hall Of Fame

Congratulations to Cal Ripken Jr. and Tony Gwynn, the two newest inductees into the baseball Hall of Fame. They are certainly worthy of election. Personally, I think there are a number of other players on the ballot who deserve to be in -- Bert Blyleven, Andre Dawson, and (yes) Mark McGwire, for example -- but I have no problem with Ripken and Gwynn, two icons of one-team baseball, having the dais all to themselves.

Much has been written about how neither election was unanimous. That doesn't bother me. Greater players than Ripken have been voted into the Hall without a unanimous vote. In fact, there has never been a unanimous election to the HoF -- every electee, including Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, Ty Cobb, Nolan Ryan, you name 'em -- has been left off of someone's ballot. 'Twas ever thus.

What does make me cranky is The Daily Southtown's Paul Ladewski, who is getting an awful lot of press for
his blank ballot, submitted as some sort of protest against steroid use in baseball:

At this point, I don't have nearly enough information to make a value judgment of this magnitude. In particular, that concerns any player in the Steroids Era, which I consider to be the 1993-2004 period, give or a take a season.

This isn't to suggest that Gwynn or Ripken or the majority of the other eligible candidates padded his statistics with performance-enhancers and cheated the game, their predecessors and the fans in the process.

[...]

But tell me, except for the players themselves, who can say what they put into their bodies over the years with any degree of certainty?

This strikes me as the worst sort of sloppy logical fallacy, as well as a way to draw attention away from Gwynn & Ripken and onto himself. He manages to smear the names of Gwynn & Ripken, all he while protesting that of course he's not suggesting that they used steroids, it's just that, well, they played when all these other people did, and so who can really know for sure? It's poor journalism at best, and cowardly at worst.

The problem is, he undercuts his own "argument" with this conclusion:

"Rest assured that I haven't written off anyone who played in the 'Roids Rage Age permanently. At this time next year, the Barry Bonds case may have revealed more substantive evidence on the subject. Maybe some of the names of the nearly 100 big-leaguers whom federal investigators said tested positive for steroids will become public information. And maybe a few of them will come forward to tell us what they know, good or bad."

So after spending most of the article saying that there's no one who can say for sure who took steroids and who didn't, he suggests that at some point in the future more evidence might come to light which will clear things up? How? How will the players who played between 1993 and 2004 prove to Ladewski, or anyone else, that they didn't use steroids? Major League Baseball didn't test for steroids during that time, so until we're able to go back in time and retroactively institute testing, the players of that era (and every other one) will apparently live in Ladewski's brain in some sort of neverland.

Besides, even if we could test the players from that era, you can't test a negative. Barry Bonds has been tested for steroids along with every other major league baseball player over the last few seasons and hasn't tested positive once. Yet that doesn't change what seems to be a rock-solid belief by many that he used PEDs during that period. Some people are going to believe whatever they want to believe, evidence (or the lack of it) be damned.

Let me be clear -- much of the fault for this lies with MLB. For years they turned a blind eye toward something that many people near the game knew was a regular occurrence. Now they're left to deal with the result of that willful ignorance, which is a game which, though it enjoys an unprecedented level of popularity, is paradoxically dogged by doubts about its integrity.

I'm not trying to argue that Gwynn, or Ripken, or anyone else did or didn't use steroids. Just like Ladewski, I don't know if they did or not. Unlike Ladewski, however, I'm not going to penalize them and every other potential Hall of Famer from the 90s and 00s because of what I don't know. If I had a vote for the Hall, I'd look at what the players did on the field under the rules of the game at the time they played. Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripken deserve to be voted into the Hall of Fame, and if Paul Ladewski, for whatever reason, believes they don't, then he shouldn't be allowed to take part in the voting process.

Suddenly Yorvit Torrealba's Name Makes Sense To Me

From Sunday's New York Times (registration required):

Venezuelan Parents Love A Famous Name

Apparently there is a long tradition of Venezuelan parents bestowing, shall we say, unusual names upon their children:

"A glance through a phone book or the government’s voter registry reveals names like Taj-Mahal Sánchez, Elvis Presley Gomez Morillo, Darwin Lenin Jimenez, even Hitler Eufemio Mayora. Other Venezuelan first names, which roll off the tongue about as easily in Spanish as in English, include Yusmairobis, Nefertitis, Yaxilany, Riubalkis, Debraska, as well as Yesaidú and Juan Jondre — transliterations of 'Yes, I do' and 'One hundred.'"

Further down in the article is this:

"Some parents relish the challenge. Gilberto Vargas named his daughters, ages 10, 7, 4 and 2, Yusmary Shuain, Yusmery Sailing, Yusneidi Alicia and Yureimi Klaymar. His sons, one 9 years old and the other 9 months, are Kleiderman Jesús and Kleiderson Klarth."

Are Yorman Barzado and Yusmiero Petit their long-lost brothers? And of course no baseball namephreak post would be complete without mentioning Ugueth Urtain Urbina, currently in jail for his involvement in a shooting in his native Venezuela.

Perhaps the Venezuelan practice of unusual names has spread a bit throughout the rest of Latin America, particularly to the Dominican Republic, which has given baseball not only the well-known Vladimir Guerrero, but also Ubaldo Jimenez, Edinson Volquez, Yhency Brazoban, Merkin Valdez, Runelvys Hernandez, and my personal favorite, Ambiorix Burgos.