1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Great writing, great reporting

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by LemMan, Apr 23, 2007.

  1. LemMan

    LemMan Member

    Just another reason why I think this guy is one of the best columnists in the country.

  2. buckweaver

    buckweaver Active Member

    Pretty impressive to have Foytack's number in hand so quickly. His phone's not exactly ringing off the hook these days.

    EDIT: Never mind; it's listed. But give Passan credit for taking 10 seconds to find it.
  3. imjustagirl2

    imjustagirl2 New Member

    So I assume that was off different pitchers? Because not explaining that, but leaving it in the middle of a story about two people giving up four consecutive home runs made it confusing.

    Maybe just to me, but still. You can't assume everyone knows everything.
  4. pallister

    pallister Guest

    Glad to see that even when the Yankees do something historically bad, we still have to start a thread about it.

    Seriously, this was my favorite line: "He had turned his television to the game momentarily, watching Ramirez hit his home run and wondering why his pants were so baggy." Classic.
  5. torrie_wilson

    torrie_wilson Member

    Damn - and that was a night game, too, right? When did the column pop up? Last night? This morning?

    Either way, that's some strong, strong writing and reporting by Passan in a short amount of time. Jeff is doing a heckuva job for yahoo. Quality writer. Quality guy.
  6. Dale Cooper

    Dale Cooper Member

    If journalists really are becoming obsolete, we can reverse that if we do work like this.
  7. chazp

    chazp Active Member

    That sounded confusing to me also. The part about the four pitchers made me wonder if they were four consecutive pitches? I think some readers would wonder the same thing. Besides that, very good.
  8. buckweaver

    buckweaver Active Member

    For the record: Foytack was the only pitcher, until Wright last night, to give up four straight homers all-by-his-own-self. I thought that part was clear in the column, seeing as how that was the point of the column. Guess it wasn't clear to everybody.

    I think it's the 5th time in ML history -- first since the Dodgers last year, and first in the AL since the Twins in 1964 -- that a team hit four straight homers. None of them were off four straight pitches, which wasn't mentioned.

    Probably both were details that could have been mentioned/clarified, but the homers came late last night and this was written on deadline. Pretty impressive, in light of that.
  9. jaredk

    jaredk Member

    There were 13 pitches. HRs came on 2-1, 1-2, 1-1, and 0-1 counts.
  10. imjustagirl2

    imjustagirl2 New Member

    If you read what I wrote, I got that that was the point. My point was, why leave in a confusing segment when a.) it wasn't necessary to the piece and b.) it wouldn't have taken more than four words to clarify it?
  11. hondo

    hondo Well-Known Member

    Don't most guys get yanked after HR No. 3?

    Reminds me of the old line. Pitcher is getting shelled. Manager calls time and goes to the mound. Turns to the catcher and asks: "How is his stuff?"

    Catcher replies: "I don't know ... I haven't caught one yet."
  12. chazp

    chazp Active Member

    You're right, very impressive on deadline.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page