Neat discovery: Finding an eyewitness to Babe Ruth’s Called Shot in my neighborhood; John Kass column on my book

While doing research for my new book, Babe Ruth’s Called Shot: The Myth and Mystery of Baseball’s Greatest Home Run, I obviously wanted to talk to eyewitnesses who attended Game 3 of the 1932 World Series at Wrigley Field.

Unfortunately, the great moment occurred more than 80 years ago, limiting my ability to get first-hand testimony on whether the Babe really pointed. Fortunately, I did talk to two people who were at the game: Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and Lincoln Landis, the nephew of baseball’s first commissioner, Kenesaw Mountain Landis.

So imagine my surprise when I discovered there is a Called Shot eyewitness living only a few blocks from me.

Wednesday, Jamie Bradley of the Highland Park Landmark did a nice story about me and the book. That prompted a call from Marv Freeman.

“You don’t know me,” Marv said. “But I just read the story and wanted to let you know I was at the game.”

I was floored, especially when he told me where he lived. I definitely would have included him in the book. Since it is too late for that now, I’ll do it here.

Marv is 89 and still practices law. He was just short of his eighth birthday when his father took him to the big game.

“We had box seats between first and home plate,” Marv said. “My father pointed that Franklin Roosevelt (running as the Democratic candidate for president) and (Chicago mayor) Anton Cermak were sitting about 10 rows in front of us.

“When Ruth came to bat in the fifth, the crowd started to roar and taunt him. The players on the Cubs bench were also yelling. Since we were sitting on the first base side, his back was turned to us. What he did, I don’t know for sure.

“When he hit the homer, my father knew right away that it was a big deal. Back then, you could walk on to the field after the game. There was no outfield wall. It was just an open paved area with a wire fence.

“We wanted to go to see where he hit the ball (it traveled an estimated 490 feet, the longest homer in Wrigley Field at that point). The ball landed near a flag pole. When we got out there, I still remember an usher saying, ‘That’s where the ball landed.'”

Like Stevens and Landis, Marv was very proud to have been a witness to baseball history. He was very interested in my book and asked where he could get a copy.

I told him I would personally drop off a book. It’s the least I could do for someone who saw the Called Shot.

*******

Also want to thank Chicago Tribune page 2 columnist John Kass for the tremendous write-up on the book Thursday. Appreciate him looking out for a fellow White Sox fan.

Kass writes:

One of the great things about baseball in America is that while the games are played in the present, baseball also lives on in the past. And part of that past involves what I’ve come to understand is the Church of Baseball, that sentimental yearning for a certain type of myth.

That American yearning turns “The Natural,” Bernard Malamud’s novel of dark gluttony and guilt, into a happy ending of a movie with Robert Redford. It’s what prompts Hollywood to offer that soliloquy by James Earl Jones in the movie “Field of Dreams,” with Jones in his Darth Vader baritone waxing on about how the game remains constant, even as America tears itself down and rebuilds again and again.

So I was pleased to see that the introduction of Sherman’s book understands that yearning and begins with a quote, not from a baseball man but from a fictitious newspaper editor in the classic Western film “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.”

After he learns the real story, Maxwell Scott, the newspaper editor, gives instructions to a young reporter:

“When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.”

Did Ruth call the shot? Did the writers provide the myth to feed an America hungry for such stuff?

I guess you’ll have to read about it yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scary: Glazer had near-death experience during ‘routine’ procedure

Dan Patrick on why you haven’t heard much from Jay Glazer lately. He nearly died during a routine procedure.

Mike Florio also had a write-up on Pro Football Talk:

He appeared earlier today on The Dan Patrick Show to discuss the serious health scare that resulted from outpatient surgery.  Glazer separately explained the situation by phone to PFT.

“I went in for a routine back deal,” Glazer said.  “Nothing big.  Dissolving a piece of a disc that broke.  Something that was real easy took a turn.”

After being given anesthesia, Glazer vomited into the face cradle.  The stomach contents ended up in his lungs, and the acid burned the tissue.

Glazer started convulsing, and the doctors revived him.  He was rushed to a local hospital, where he spent four days recovering from aspiration double pneumonia.

He didn’t realize the gravity of the situation at the time.  Once Glazer was out of the woods, doctors explained that the outcome could have been much more dire.

“It could go one of two ways,” Glazer said, “and for a while I was going the wrong way.”

Later, Florio writes:

Even now, Glazer is far from 100 percent.  As his heart works harder to pump oxygenated blood from his lungs, his resting pulse rate has been 115.

Still, he’s going to attempt to work this weekend for FOX, returning to action for UFC coverage.  He has yet to be able to return to his MMA training business, to the disappointment of NFL players like Kyle Long, Chris Long, and Jared Allen — and draft hopefuls like UCLA linebacker Anthony Barr and UCLA defensive end Cassius Marsh.

Last week, Glazer was scheduled to work out with Barr, but Glazer decided he should wait.  Glazer instead tried nine minutes of shadow boxing instead.  His oxygen level dropped, his heart rate went up, and Glazer ended up in his doctor’s office once again.

Glazer hopes to return to his NFL duties soon, making calls and chasing scoops and attending next month’s draft in New York City.

Stopwatch patrol: ESPN’s Skipper needs to get up to speed about how slow play is ruining baseball

My latest column from the National Sports Journalism Center stemmed from me watching an excruciatingly dull Chicago-Boston game on Tuesday night. Still working on my goal to eliminate slow play in baseball in our lifetime.

*********

Tuesday, I came home around 9:30 (Central), and I noticed that Chicago and Boston were tied at 1-1. Since the White Sox, my team since the age of 5, are off to a decent start after last year’s 99-loss disaster, I have some renewed hope. Hey, that’s the beauty of baseball in April.

So I tuned in to see how they would do against the defending world champions. And I watched, and yawned, and watched and yawned, as the game crawled along at a maddening slow pace. Even White Sox announcers Ken Harrelson and Steve Stone took note.

“This game really is moving slow,” Harrelson said.

“That happens a lot with the Red Sox,” Stone said.

Finally, with the few fans and players suffering in the mid-30s weather (welcome to spring in Chicago), the game mercifully ended on a throwing error by shortstop Xander Boegarts, giving the White Sox a 2-1 victory. Perhaps Boegarts had enough of being out in the cold.

I looked at the clock and it was 10:43 p.m. That meant this 2-1 game in nine innings took three hours and 36 minutes to complete. Ridiculous. By the way, the first two runs were homers and the teams combined for only eight hits. So it wasn’t like there were any extended rallies.

Thus another entry in my “JUST PITCH THE BALL” campaign against slow pace in baseball. I believe these excessively long games are killing the sport, especially with the short attention spans of young viewers.

The Chicago-Boston game, though, struck me as particularly relevant in light of the recent comments from MLB commissioner Bud Selig and ESPN president John Skipper during a teleconference prior to opening day.

Here is the exchange:

****

Q: David Samson has made a big deal the last few months about the speed of the game, and he’s telling Marlins players they must play the game more quickly and it’s a big concern for him as far as attendance. John, from a TV standpoint, does speed of the game still worry you, and Bud, is there anything more being done to speed the pace up?

Selig: Well, it’s the pace of the game. Speed sometimes is not always the right answer. I’ve read David’s remarks. I have been talking to all of our people, particularly Joe Torre and Tony La Russa and Peter Woodfork and everybody, and yes, I’ve talked to a lot of the umpires, and I’m confident that we’re moving in the right direction, and it’s important that we do continue to do that. Obviously it will depend on the type of game, number of pitching changes, everything else, but yes, that is a matter that I have been talking to a lot of people about.

Skipper: Not a significant concern for us. I agree with the commissioner’s characterization that pace is much more important than speed. I’ve been at an awful lot of very riveting three and a half hour games. It really is about the competition and what’s going on, and we’re confident that as demonstrated over a long tenure that baseball will make the right decisions for the game.

****

Did Skipper really say, “Not a significant concern for us?” I wish Mr. Skipper would come to my house and observe my sports-obsessed teenage boys, who watch ESPN 24/7, and see how they squirm while trying to get through a tedious baseball game. They have checked out, and surely Skipper has data that shows other young fans have, too.

And it isn’t easy for me to stay tuned in, and I have been following baseball for nearly 50 years (very sobering to write that last line).

Maybe, it is because I can remember a 2-1 game taking 2:15, perhaps even less to be completed. And don’t give me pitch counts (there were a combined 22 strikeouts and 10 walks in the Chicago-Boston game). Bob Gibson, Tom Seaver and Ferguson Jenkins all had high strikeout totals, and still managed to complete games in timely fashion.

Skipper should be very concerned about the slow games. I’m sure Fox executives are too, given how World Series games routinely stretch into the four-hour neighborhood. Publically, Skipper may be saying one thing with Selig on a teleconference, but in private, I would be shocked if he isn’t telling the commissioner about the need to pick up the pace.

And if Skipper isn’t, then he is doing a disservice to fans who watch baseball on ESPN. Contrary to what he says, there are very few “riveting” games at 3:30.

I can assure Skipper that there was nothing riveting about a 2-1 game lasting deep into a cold night Tuesday in Chicago. Expect, of course, the final outcome to me since the right Sox won.

 

New ESPN 30 for 30: Cheering for ‘Bad Boys’ of Detroit

Living in Chicago, I don’t have many people who agree with my view on the Detroit Pistons “Bad Boys.” They were one of my favorite all-time teams in sports, even if they did mug Michael Jordan.

As much as you might have hated them, you had to admit some sense of admiration for this unique band of characters and how they played the game.

ESPN’s latest 30 for 30, Bad Boys (tonight at 8 p.m. ET), narrated by Kid Rock, gets to the core of the greatest “bad” team in NBA history.

While the players have gotten older, they haven’t mellowed. Said John Salley: “To the people that say we’re thugs and goons, I say kiss my entire ass.”

Now were they a bunch of idiots for walking off the floor and not shaking hands with the Bulls after they were finally vanquished in 1991? Sure. But when you think about it, how else could “the team they love to hate” have ended their run?

 

Posted in NBA

Sorry Jason Whitlock: No Pulitzer Prizes awarded to sportswriters this year

Dang Jason, you were snubbed again for the Pulitzer.

If recall last year, Jason Whitlock took considerable flak for writing that he did Pulitzer Prize caliber work in 2012. He even compared himself to Mike Royko. He bemoaned the fact that contest isn’t opening to writers who worked for broadcast sites.

Have to admit, it takes some stones to say you should receive a Pulitzer.

Well, not sure if Whitlock had any worthy entries in 2013. He didn’t promote himself this year. Perhaps as a result, when the Pulitzers were announced this week, I didn’t see his name on the list of winners.

Maybe next year, Jason.

More importantly, there weren’t any Pulitzers awarded to sportswriters. Nothing really new there.

Last year actually was the exception–somewhat. John Branch of the New York Times won his wonderful piece on skiers caught in an avalanche. However, that piece was more about survival than sports. In 2012, Sara Ganim of Harrisburg Patriot-News, a cityside reporter, was awarded the prize for her coverage of the Jerry Sandusky disaster. Again, that was a criminal story involving a football coach.

What I’m saying is that neither reporter won for traditional coverage of sports.

Check the record books. Prior to Branch, George Dohrmann of St. Paul Pioneer Press was the last individual sportwriter winner in 2000. He received the Pulitzer for his reports of fraud in the Minnesota basketball program. Ira Berkow shared the 2001 Pulitzer for national reporting for his article “The Minority Quarterback” in a New York Times series on race in America.

Since then, more than a decade, nothing. The Pulitzers bypassed Lance Williams and Mark Fainuru-Wada’s fine work on BALCO for the San Francisco Chronicle.

Actually, the Pulitzer snub goes back forever. Only three columnists: Red Smith (1976), Dave Anderson (1981), and Jim Murray (1990) have won the award for commentary. Zero for Grantland Rice and Jimmy Cannon, giants among giants. And the fact that Smith and Murray had to wait until they were so deep into their careers is absolutely absurd.

Now, it’s been 24 years since a sport columnist has claimed a Pulitzer. Meanwhile, a myriad of other columnists in other departments have enjoyed champagne celebrations in their newsrooms.

Back in 2012, I had Frank Deford speak for the profession. His words are worth repeating again.

In his book, Over Time: My Life as a Sportswriter, Deford details how the sportswriting fraternity repeatedly gets dumped on when it comes to major journalism awards. The Sports Illustrated legend writes in the book that he once asked NPR to nominate him for a Peabody Award for his weekly commentaries on sports.

NPR decided against it after a Peabody representative flat out said Deford wouldn’t win the award.

He writes:

But this is what stung: Peabody’s spokesman told Ellen (McDonnell, NPR’s executive director of news programming), “You should’ve nominated Daniel Schorr for politics.”

The late Mr. Schorr was the distinguished political commentator on NPR–as far as I was concerned, they could’ve given him a Peabody each and every year. But the idea that his work talking about politics merited recognition simply because of the subject matter, while mine disqualified me–well, yeah that upset me. I’m sorry, but every now and then I take umbrage.

Regarding the Pulitzers, Deford also takes umbrage with the committee giving an annual award to an editorial cartoonist.

Deford writes:

Hey, I love political cartoonists. But how many of them are there left? What? Two dozen? And how many newspaper sportswriters are there? Thousands. And for them, the Pulitzer people deign to give out one to a guy at the New York Times every generation or so.

Deford concludes his rant as only he can.

I’m sorry, I can’t apologize for pointing out what slights we in the profession so regularly receive. Sports journalism has been such a crucial economic part of the daily press that it ought to be recognized more, if only because it’s kept a lot of newspapers in business. And yeah, I know, it’s the toy shop. But some toys are very well made.

Exactly. Time for the Pulitzer committee to take a closer look at our toys. Even Jason’s.

 

 

 

Best time of year: NBC platforms superserve NHL fans during first round of playoffs

Tonight begins what might be the best two weeks of the year for NHL fans. It is hard to beat the quantity and quality of NBC’s coverage of the first round of the playoffs.

All games will air on its various platforms again. Tonight features Montreal-Tampa Bay on CNBC at 7 p.m. ET; Columbus-Pittsburgh on NBCSN at 7:30 ET; and Dallas-Anaheim on NBCSN at 10 p.m. ET.

There will be four games Thursday, including Chicago-St. Louis on NBCSN at 7:30 p.m. ET.

The multi-platform presentation has been huge for the NHL. Play-by-play man extraordinaire Mike Emrick recalled the old days of limited coverage and the contrast to what fans get today.

“I remember there were times when I was with other networks and I’d go into a city and fans say, ‘why aren’t you guys covering more of our series, you’re only doing one game and then you’re leaving? Emrick said. “And it has been so much fun to say we’re doing every game of every series.That was 87 games two years ago, that was 88 games last year, and, who knows, it might have 90 this year.”

The other best part of the playoffs is the parity that exists in the NHL. In the NBA, it is a shock if a No. 8 seed beats a No. 1. Not so in hockey. Every team in the playoff is capable of winning the Stanley Cup.

“I don’t see any sweeps (in the first round), I really don’t,” said Eddie Olczyk. “I think in the Western Conference I mean you’re talking about six games for every playoff series in my opinion.”

The NHL also has some good rivalry series: Rangers-Philly; Blackhawks-Blues; and Boston-Detroit locking up in an Original 6 battle. Plus it has NHL icon Montreal playing Tampa Bay.

Let it begin. Enjoy.

 

Posted in NHL

Joe Buck, Greg Norman reportedly to lead Fox Sports’ coverage of ’15 U.S. Open; Who will join them? Gus Johnson?

John Ourand has the exclusive on Fox’s new golf team:

Joe Buck and Greg Norman will be Fox Sports’ top on-air voices when the network debuts its golf coverage next year, according to several sources. The two will be set up in the 18th green tower at the ’15 U.S. Open, when the event will be held at Chambers Bay outside Seattle. The decision to tap Buck and Norman comes as somewhat of a surprise, as neither has announced golf on television before.

Actually, it really isn’t much of a surprise. Buck is Fox’s lead voice, and reportedly a good golfer. It was a natural that he would be tabbed for the high profile assignment.

While Norman hasn’t formally worked as an analyst, he has appeared in the booth of golf telecasts of many occasions. He hardly is shy about his views, and as a two-time major winner and a many more-time near-miss in the majors, he brings a big-name presence that is essential for Fox’s golf coverage.

However, unlike football or baseball, this isn’t a two-man operation in the booth. Fox still will need to find more play-by-play voices, analysts and on-course reporters to fill out their coverage team. It remains a daunting task for Fox to do this endeavor from scratch. The network has to be good on so many levels beyond the 18th tower.

It will be interesting to see Fox brings Gus Johnson into the mix. If it does, definitely put him on a par 3. I’d love to hear Johnson’s call on a hole-in-one.

 

 

 

Sorting out truth about Tiger’s absence on Masters ratings; Huge Friday, Saturday declines are more telling

As I wrote yesterday, it is too bad Sunday’s final round didn’t produce more drama. The lack of suspense on the back 9 accounted for the sharp decline in the rating as much as Tiger Woods’ absence.

From Sports Media Watch:

Final round coverage of The Masters earned a 7.8 overnight rating on CBS Sunday afternoon, down 24% from last year (10.2), down 4% from 2012 (8.1), and the lowest overnight for final round coverage since 2004 (7.3).

Overall, the 7.8 is the third-lowest for the final round since at least 1991, ahead of only 2004 and 1993 (6.8). Excluding Easter Sunday telecasts, the 7.8 is the lowest over that span.

It was one of the dullest final rounds at the Masters in years, and had to account for at least 10 percent in the ratings decline. If you had a good battle between Bubba Watson and the young Jordan Spieth, the audience would have been much higher. Remember, the previous two Masters went to playoffs, and not one of them involved Woods.

In regards to Woods, for a true apples to apples comparison, you have to look at the Friday and Saturday numbers. The ratings tell the story.

In 2013 with Woods playing late in the second round, ESPN did a record 3.0 rating (4.2 million viewers). This year, the rating dropped 40 percent to 1.8 (3 million viewers).

The Saturday rating also is telling. In 2013, with Woods in contention despite a controversial two-shot penalty, CBS did a 6.3 overnight rating. This year, with no Woods, the rating dropped 30 percent to 4.4.

Really, the third round was quite compelling with Spieth making a surge and Watson struggling. Yet a considerable amount of viewers didn’t tune in because Woods wasn’t in the field.

Declines of 40 and 30 percent on Friday and Saturday make this Volume 258 on Tiger’s impact on the ratings.

 

ESPN 30 for 30 Soccer Stories debuts: The tragedy at Hillsborough

ESPN 30 for 30 is doing a special soccer series leading up to the World Cup. The debut is tonight with Hillsborough (8 p.m. ET), the story of an unthinkable tragedy at a soccer game where 96 fans died in 1989.

This is an interview Keith Olbermann did with director Daniel Gordon last night.

Here is the summary on ESPN’s 30 for 30 site:

********

“Hillsborough” is a comprehensive account of the Hillsborough Stadium disaster, a tragedy that occurred during an FA Cup semifinal soccer match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest at the Hillsborough Stadium in Sheffield, England. The film focuses on the events that unfolded before, during and after the horrifying afternoon that led to the deaths of 96 people as well as the injuries to several hundred more and the traumatization of countless lives.

Beginning on the fateful day in 1989, “Hillsborough” explores what happened and why. It offers a detailed examination not only of the horrific loss of life but also of key developments in the preceding years, months, weeks, days, hours and minutes leading to the disaster. Featuring first-hand accounts of fans in attendance as well as police officers — many speaking on camera for the first time — the film also explores the tragedy through the experiences of families who lost their loved ones and undertook a painstaking journey in a quest for justice that is still ongoing.

 

Decline of golf coverage: Dallas Morning News wasn’t at Augusta to cover local boy Spieth

I couldn’t help but notice that the Dallas Morning News wasn’t at the Masters this year. That means they wouldn’t have had a staff byline piece from Augusta if Dallas’ very own Jordan Spieth had won the tournament.

As it is, his second-place finish at the age of 20 was a big story in its own right. Yet the Morning News ran a Spieth story from Gerry Dulac of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette from Augusta.

I am not trying to knock the Morning News. There are plenty of big-city papers that no longer staff the majors. Budgets are tight, and it is expensive to send writers on the road.

However, the Morning News situation is different.

The Morning News used to be big time into golf. They sent their golf writers (Jeff Rude, Phil Rogers, Brad Townsend, Bill Nichols) to 10-15 tournaments per year, maybe more. No newspaper in the country matched the Morning News’ coverage on the pro tours.

And with good reason, considering Dallas and the state of Texas produce so many champions, starting with Hogan and Nelson and now with the up-and-coming Spieth.

Again, I bring this up because during my 12 years of covering the Masters, the Chicago Tribune only was granted two seats in the media center. A few times we tried to send a third person, but were turned down. Other papers received the same treatment.

This irked me because the Morning News, sitting in the row in front of us, always had three seats. When I asked why, I was told the paper had been “grandfathered” in for its seating.

Last week, other outlets sat in the Morning News’ seats. It should be noted that the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram also wasn’t at Augusta.

I’m not trying to single out the Morning News. However, it is a striking statement about the current state of newspapers and their coverage of golf. It isn’t a priority anymore.

Given what Spieth did at the Masters, it will be interesting to see if the Morning News staffs future majors. He is going to win a major sooner and later, and when he does, it will be a big story, especially in Dallas.