iortiz

I'm not the biggest fan of Scutaro, but who else is better than him cost/numbers in the market?.

I'm not sure which part you are referring to, but sometimes we say some things several times, anyway... no big deal dude.

Yes you can. But somehow you're trying to limit ours.

Since this is the "This is need to be said" thread, I don't see anything wrong what SCM33, A700 seabeachfred or me just said. So... If you don't like our opinions, you can move forward and read other threads or something. BTW nothing personal

Welcome... Hawaii is definitely a place I want to go before I die.

Well, in the end somehow we gonna get rid of this bum... Awesome!

+1 I like the way A700, SCM33 and TedWill101 among a few others see the game and I identify myself a lot as a Red Sox fan with you guys. We certainly love this team as much as anybody around here, but the difference is that we don't have a bandage in our eyes or a predefined/tendencious edit policy (sugar coat) as some of the media has like NESN, in order to point what is wrong in this team.

It's out of doubt Oswald's quality but how bad is this back injury? Does Anyone know his current status? I wouldn't like to see another Buch case(s) around. I wonder why the phillies didn't take the options. About Bard, totally agree, he is not ready. They better sign Papelbon.

They must make all the NECESARY in order to sign Pap. Bard is not ready.

My guess is that the injuries don't look good.

My call is that Fielder goes to Cub land.

IMO the guy in your avatar should visit Bogar's office

I told you hahahahaha. IMO He should be our GM.

7 run rule goes beyond frustration these days... it is comic now!

well, somehow we are agree, aren't we?

I'd vote for that option as well

Nobody is expecting an immediate action. It is very simple actually. Why not say something encouraging and accept just the fact that other players have already accepted --drinking in the clubhouse -- and have even agreed that was/is wrong practice. I just don't see a FBI case here if he coincides saying that this was wrong, we learn about this blahblah....

I dont see this as you are seeing when you say " By deferring to answer, he has committed the club to nothing publicly". Sorry ORS, maybe this is about semantics/translation or something but when I read this question: Q: Are you going to ban alcohol from the clubhouse? and then the answer is: A: We won't make that decision until we have a full staff convened. Seems/Sounds to me that he leaves open the possibility since he said "decision" in the sentence -- allow beer in the clubhouse -- IMO you just don't allow it. You just don't consider it as a possibility at all. It is not prudent. It is not the place and moment, It is not a bar. It is wrong. But that's me. IMO You take accountability and answer since you are/were part of this FO, and since this issue was already accepted by some players and agreed that it is/was a bad practice. If he committed the club to nothing publicly, you answer something like "I won't declare about this topic" or something but you don't answer "We won't make that decision until we have a full staff convened" Am I translating well? If not, I'm gonna fire my english teacher.