Murray Chass calls Richard Sandomir a "twit"

Say what you will about Murray (and I have) but he's fundamentally correct.

The Hunter case was a breach of contract because Oakland had failed to meet a deadline for offering him a new contract. It had nothing to do with the overall issue of free agency.

Flood lost his case and it's generally believed that outcome strengthened the owners' resolve to not negotiate free agency with the players. I guess it can be argued that Flood's willingness to fight the issue helped push it, but there was no tangible progress from his case.

The breakthrough was Messersmith-McNally.

 

The worst one was the Pierce-Simmons feud. Two rich assholes putting on a WWF smackdown show for everybody, then hiring each other afterward.

 

All of these feuds are crap.
I could walk into my corner bar and nobody - nobody - would know who any of these tools are.

 

Yeah. Media writers ain't rock stars.

 

Strange to read of this spat involving two of my former co-workers at The Times.
Chass was one of the best baseball writers of his generation. He elevated the craft.
Sandomir was ---- and is ----- among the most versatile and hard-working reporters I've ever known.
He works as hard as Chass did, and that's saying something.
Two minutes each for roughing.
(P.S. Richard is also a theatre expert).

 

Who gets the instigator penalty?

 

Hmmmmm.
Considering that the initial scrum involved two other guys, we'll have to give Chass an extra two minutes for ``third man in.''

 

Have to side with Murray on this one.