Third option: they just wanted to “own the libs”.

Yeah, like bunt against the shift towards the pitcher standing at third...  it can’t be that easy, can it?

Shifting is so impactful you have a whole fielder to spare.

I vaguely recall a game, around 1990 or so, where a team started a second pitcher in the outfield.

I think the first comment is suggesting that they’d have to check the charts on the pinch hitter and find a position to shift Romo to.  That’s legal - nothing stops you from shifting your 3B into right field for no reason.

Oh I fully understand how they got pranked. Played like a harp in some cases.

I still don’t get how politicians aren’t ahead of this.

If you have to bat your pitcher at that moment, I can see an argument it’s better than having him swing for the fences.

Well at the end of 2011 they certainly didn’t look like a team ready to cash out Beckett, Gonzalez and Crawford to the Dodgers.  So I completely blame 2012 all by itself.

For me, it always triggers memories of Jose Canseco. So not all that much of a problem. :)

Did he try a suicide squeeze? Cause I can at least see an argument that you’ve got an experienced bunter in that situation.

I thought that season was never to be spoken of again.

I feel I need to re-state the obvious,

Avalon is the same game with a King Arthur re-skin instead of a space theme, if your play group prefers that.

This is the difference between 5 games back and gaining, compared to 5 games back and fading.

The trouble is there’s no actual buy-in for the rich. There’s no reason for a rich person to particularly care for the abstract corporate entity they bought. They didn’t build it, and they don’t necessarily need it if they can just go ahead and buy a different one afterwards.

Folks, act like you’ve been here before.

That’s a good point about not understanding the extent of something so omni-present.

Gonna borrow a popular gag here and focus it....

ON SOMETHING HE KNOWS IS PUBLIC DOMAIN.