Glenn Davis at it againWell, here we go again. Good old...

LETTERS

September 13, 1992

Glenn Davis at it again

Well, here we go again. Good old injury-prone Glenn Davis is at it again. How long is the Orioles management going to put up with this kind of player? When is the manage-ment going to trade [Manny] Alexander for a top hard-hitting, left-handed outfielder? They may as well do that because he is never going to get to play shortstop for the club. Cal Ripken will only go out of the lineup after he sets the record, it doesn't matter if he only hits .150. The record is more important to the club than winning the league as long as it can draw more than 3 million people per year.

I am sure, from what I have seen this season, the club will sit still this winter and not try to strengthen itself in any way except with old, over-the-hill players who happen to be hungry or will play for peanuts. It has been a crying shame that the fourth- and fifth-place batters have been a sorry twosome. The Orioles will be out of the race by Sept. 15 and then you will see some of the on-the-fence players start to hit so they get a chance to stick with the club in '93. Don't get hurt Cal, play even if you have to use crutches. Don't let any other player get your position until you set the record. Well, it was a close race for a while. Goodbye, 1992.

P.S.: We don't need the following players: Mark Williamson, Mike Flanagan, Bob Milacki, Sam Horn and Glenn Davis. We could get a little something for them together in a big package.

Whitey Morris

Bel Air

5/8 No matter how dull, boring or mediocre baseball telecasts are by CBS, HTS, ESPN or Channel 2, all are fortunate to have friends, not critics, in the press. Movie and prime-time TV shows have only critics among the press, which explains why baseball telecasts never get better.

Since there are no critics, the public is cheated out of superior baseball coverage, and the worst talent in television gets away with producing the worst baseball coverage. Baseball telecasts can't get any better as long as there is no criticism by the press, and as long as TV is locked into its standard three-part narrow-focus format; excessive use of long-holding extreme close-ups, individualism of action, and disjointed scenes resulting in missed action.

There can be no improvement as long as TV crews remain ignorant of the "big-picture" principle, and the fundamental principle of photographic action. The standard three-part narrow-focus format was revealed as obsolete by the "little guys" at WNET, PBS.

As a widespread "fad," extreme close-ups of facial features are standard in football except for coverage of punting, a complex skill requiring exceptional coordination and timing. There is an agreement in TV to never, ever cover a punter close up. Why? Because there are no expert punting coaches and TV and sportswriters don't want the public to find that out. So, there are always only long shots of punting action to protect incompetence among coaching. Sportswriters who know this participate in the coverup and athletes suffer because of it.

The public will get great movies and TV shows in the future, bubaseball telecasts will remain deplorable as long as the press continues to support low-quality professionalism, the type that hTC sports can do without.

C.W. Edwards

Annapolis

Cal, take a look at yourself

Dear Cal Ripken:

During the 1991 season, when you were on your way to earning the MVP award, we recall several reports that your success was largely because of a new, improved batting stance.

We were a little surprised, therefore, when you showed up fothe '92 season with yet another new stance, one you have persisted in using throughout the season even though the results have not been there, especially in the power category.

Is it not obvious, then, that a comparison of the '91 and '9stances is in order? The answer is probably right there on the tapes if you'll just take a look. Come on, Cal, for all of us. Take one more look. Please.

Rod & Justin Brewer

Ellicott City

A vote for instant replay

I sincerely hope that the NFL reinstates instant replay next year. In the Jets-Falcons game I recently viewed, instant replay would have changed the score dramatically. In the first quarter, with the Falcons up 3-0, Browning Nagle fumbled the snap and the officials ruled in favor of the Falcons. But when it was shown to the viewers, it was painfully clear that the Jets retained possession. In addition to that, a Tim McKyer interception and an Erik McMillan fumble recovery at the Falcons' 1-yard line also were taken away. I fear for the NFL if instant replay is not reinstated.

Chris Saarbach

Timonium

Devereaux overlooked

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.