Baseball Nonsense

I'm not entitled to him

I would up in the middle of another "Tako" sports war tonight.

Chris Kaelin, bitter man, good friend, great umpire, and (surprisingly) all-around exceptional guy is also an angry Mets fan.

He's a blessing to us all.

Just when I think he's not the worst, and thus not the leader of the He-Man Yankees Haters Club (HMYHC), he pulls on his Metsies footie pajamas, autographed by Mike Piazza and begins spouting.

It's in regard to the click-bait kerfuffle about Andre Dawson and Tony Perez saying they won't attend Derek Jeter's Hall of Fame induction next July.

I can assure you nobody will lose sleep over their lack of attendance.

Anyway, I'll spare you all of the nonsense of things being made up, but will hit you with one comment, added by a friend of Kato's.

In short, the comment highlighted that Yankees fans aren't entitled to anything they didn't see.

Thus, everything prior to 1968 for me. I'm allowed to relish those won in 1977, 1978, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2009.

So let's see if I've got this straight: Kato is then not entitled to the Mets title in 1969, for instance.

Does this then mean I'm not entitled to anything in history prior to being born?

Oh, wait, The Beatles. You mean I can only enjoy "The White Album" (came out the day I was born), Abbey Road, and Let It Be? Most of Sinatra's career is lost to me. Movies? Nah.

Guess I can't wear my Lou Gehrig jersey anymore, or write about him.

Red Barber last broadcast a game in 1966. Nope. I might not even be allowed to listen to his old broadcasts.

The Civil War? The Titanic? The early days of radio?

The revolution?

The Big Bang (long before the Theory)?

You're certainly not entitled to The New Testament, and don't even start on The OLD Testament!

Anybody see how silly this logic is?

I  -- and anyone else -- don't need to be told we're not "entitled" to Babe Ruth's history (or any other history) simply because his most famous season happened two years before my father was born.

I'm as entitled to it as you are. While there are no "rules" you're certainly entitled to history especially when you've studied it and understood it.

You see, the thing that people don't get about me is that I'm about baseball -- the SPORT -- before any rooting interest. The lowest of low-hanging fruit is to go for the "precious pinstripe feelings" or "Yankees bias," which rides in the same bucket of nonsense as "get off my lawn," which I also hear.

I've ripped my teams for pathetic performances (such as today). I've praised them. I embrace the sport for the good and the bad.

I've praised the Mets -- yes, them -- where deserved.

Can you say the same?

But if you're going to tell me I'm not "entitled" to Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle, or Happy Jack Chesbro (41 wins in 1904, by the way), then you might not be entitled to Gil Hodges and company in '69 or Ted Williams or Jackie Robinson.

This isn't just a "Yankees issue."

It's flawed logic.

To say the least.