If Stanley just pitched better that night, Buckner's play would never have happened.
2006-10-24 12:37:30 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
I have always blamed the Steamah.
The Sox were up by two runs.
First two Met batters get out.
Next three batters hit singles, one run scores.
Wild pitch, came tied.
Buckner, infamy
Even if Buckner made the catch and raced to the bag (he had horrible knees) the game was still tied.
In game seven, the Sox had the lead again and the Mets still came back. You gotta give that team some serious credit for having so much heart.
We all know which team gets more credit though.
Love that Dirty Water...
2006-10-30 16:28:11 · answer #1 · answered by David M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am not sure why it happened, but Bill Buckner should not have been playing first base at that time anyways. Utility player Dave Stapleton was regularly put in at first base for defensive purposes; he played in that role in Game 5.
Bill Buckner was a fine all-around player until he started having ankle problems. After the injuries he was playing because he was a good hitter. I personally remember him more for another play. He was the left fielder that climbed the fence attempting to catch Hank Aaron's 715th homerun.
2006-10-24 20:02:27 · answer #2 · answered by jpbofohio 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have always blamed Calvin Shiraldi and Bob Stanley for not getting the outs. Remember, it was TIED when the ball went through Buckner's legs. They wouldn't have won the game, only gone for more innings.
2006-10-26 18:04:07 · answer #3 · answered by jsmails1 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, the manager is also to blame for having Buckner in the game at that time.
2006-11-01 12:48:08 · answer #4 · answered by kflan39114 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Buckner couldn't have won the game with that play, so the bullpen is definitely to blame.
2006-10-24 21:18:49 · answer #5 · answered by jt_kling 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well the question is was it a wild pitch and that's Stanley's fault, or was it a passed ball which would be Rich Gedman's fault. Buckner obviously should have had it, but I agree, it wasn't just his fault. That wild pitch or passed ball, which ever you want to call it, tied the game. And then after Buckner's play, they lost.
2006-10-24 20:01:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
absolutely. You can't blame one guy for the entire loss of the world series. especially if they had a game lead on them in the first place. if stanley would have never allowed mitchell to get into scoring position, threw the wild pitch that moved him to third and then blew the game, we wouldn't be talking about buckner. it would be just another error. Just like if kenny rogers would have lost that game. we wouldn't be talking about the gunk on his hand. And don't even get me started on the bullpen in game 7 during the 86 series. they blew a 3 run lead. i mean cmon. their bullpen sucked aaayyyyaaaasssss that series.
2006-10-24 19:58:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The 2004 Series win made all that a moot point. One error does not define a team or player. That was only Game 6; why does nobody talk about the blown lead in Game 7?
Anyway - October 27, 2004 at 11:40 pm EST wiped it all out when the Sox finished off the Cardinals.
2006-10-25 09:50:40 · answer #8 · answered by Jim G 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
nope, the pitcher did his job, he got an easy ground ball out, but Buckner missed it and the mets won.
2006-11-01 17:41:27 · answer #9 · answered by Zack Stewart 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
win as a team lose as a team, the facts are the teams that makes less mistakes, puts themselves in the better position to win
2006-11-01 01:08:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋