Friday, April 22, 2005

nicest cheaters in the game

Idris called us that on his blog yesterday, saying he learned how to do better in the foul/contest game by watching us. To which I say:
1. Nuh-uhh.
2. Oh yeah? Sez you.
3. Count the ringz, bee-yotch.
4. Well, that's players X, Y, and Z for you. Good ol' X, I haven't seen him in ages. Remember that time X just completely beat the crap out of that one wuss guy on Double and he just cried and cried? What laffs!

5. Huh, interesting. Corey said something similar a month or two ago when I was assailing the NUA guys for their stated approach to the game, but we all know Corey (a guy wins a title or two and all of a sudden he thinks he knows everything! Sheesh, some people. (Note: I'm mocking myself here.)). What do the guys formerly on DoG say about the way DoG plays? There aren't that many who have moved on to other teams. Three (four, if you count Dutchie in 2005) guys have moved on to Jam, one moved to Chicago, and that's pretty much it (well, plus 3 or 4 foreigners were repatriated). The rest are still playing, have retired, or have retired to Coed. I guess Bickford is still kicking around somewhere, showing up every year at Regionals with some team. It would be instructive to see what they say, if they were to talk honestly.

I've certainly seen teammates make subjective calls that I thought were bad and I rarely if ever said anything at the time (but I'm sure I've said something about objective up/down or in/out calls), although many a time I've asked the guy about it later. I know for a fact that this is not the way things are taught, although I've always suspected that those D guys have their little pow-wows and who knows what their tiny minds discuss.

But I don't know for sure how we compare to other elite teams.

File this one under "Jim throwing teammates under the bus in order to see whether they're reading."

5 comments:

Idris said...

my point was that everyone cheats, but you were the first group that i saw so many guys make what i would call questionable calls with a straight face and not get into heated arguements. its not that any elite team teaches people to cross the line (I would assume most would prefer to win playing fairly), but every team has one or more of those types of guys who will. concious of it or not. how they do it, varies.

the fact that players today are thanked for "having good spirit" when they retrack a total bullshit call says something about what how much people expect from each other. my favorite line to say is "thanks for not cheating".

in my limited number of games playing against and watching boston, i haven't found your play to be exceptionally spirited. not that its horrible [relative to the other top 4-5 teams]... but at worlds and nationals, while other top teams are seller dwellers in the spirit award category, boston always seems to be up near the top.

here you are making all the same types of calls other teams make, yet your opponents want you to marry their daughters. i mean, i could care less if a guy smiles, screams, or whines.. a lame call is a lame call. but clearly it effects some people.

that's when i say "ah ha".. yet another reason why your fingers bling while most other people's don't.

this of course a comment on the late 90's boston team, the current one [last couple years] i have no real take on.

DoG - Nicest Cheaters
Furious - Self Righteous Cheaters
Condors - Agro Cheaters
Sockeye - Loud Cheaters
Ring - Dumb Cheaters
Jam - Only team that doesn cheat ;)

Alex de Frondeville said...

I believe someone once said that DoG didn't cheat because they didn't have to in their prime, they were that dominant. And that when their backs were finally up against the wall in the 2000 semis against Condors, they finally resorted to the same tricks that all the other teams do to try and avoid losing.

I am more than willing to admit that the 2000 team was desperate, and that may have been reflected in their calls, but I also feel that the composition of that team was VERY different than DoG in its prime. In the 97 semis, DoG was down 10-4 in the second half to Ring of Fire. I don't think you'll find anyone that says we cheated our way to victory, and again, I think this was personnel based.

Yes, we had the leisure of being able to be magnanimous for many years, but I think this was not only from a position of strength, but from the very roots of the team, which was trying to shed the image of its nastier, failed 1993 predecessor, Big Brother.

PS And don't get me started about bad spirit in that 2000 semi. I still remember Studarus pushing through Wicks and I like a fucking prick after they scored an upwind goal in the second half. I wish I had known he was coming so I could have thrown an elbow in his gut as he jumped through us.

Anonymous said...

Looks like Idris had you guys all wrong.
Never made a bad call in your lives!

Alex de Frondeville said...

Nah, like he said, it's all in how you call it.

luke said...

http://mlsmith.blogspot.com/

i don't know if the content warrants inclusion in the 'discnerdwebring' yet, but I have posted parts 1 and 2 of... the great wallet in the dumpster story.