Buckner at Red Sox OD

[charliec107]

If you've watched ESPN for five minutes today, you would see that Bill Buckner threw out the first pitch today. I don't know everything that happened in the aftermath of the 1986 World Series, but didn't he receive numerous death threats? However, now that the Red Sox have one two World Series since, the fans up there now "forgive" him. I think that logic is messed up. It's good that Red Sox fans moved on, but if I were Buckner, I don't know if I would have showed up in front of a fanbase that pre-2003 wouldn't have wanted to see me anywhere near Boston.

[RShack]

Props to the Red Sox and to the BOS fans.

Wounds heal. It's about time.

(He was a good player and deserved better.)

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3335928

[scOtt]

I saw that article. Made my heart feel good. Buckner was a well above average player, who was saddled with tears of grief, for 20+ years now... Great to see him with tears of joy finally! Well deserved return!

[olehippi]

It's good to see the Buckner saga finally come to a happy ending. As others mentioned, time and two World Series appearances can have that effect. Nontheless, Buckner didn't deserve the grief he received.....errors have and always will be part of the game. He was just unlucky enough to have his cost his team a pennant, and for it to happen under a huge national spotlight.

And when you think about it, it really trivializes the misconstrued misdeeds of Millar and Huff this off-season.

[RShack]

He was just unlucky enough to have his cost his team a pennant, and for it to happen under a huge national spotlight.

The thing is, he didn't. In terms of the pennant, without him they never would have got there. He had over 100 RBI and, when they were facing elimination in the playoffs, he started the 9th inning rally that brought them back from the dead. His famous E was in Game 6 of the WS, not Game 7. He was just doing his part to force a Game 7, that's all. During their curse years, the Red Sox *always* took it to Game 7, and lost it there. They did that every time. The Red Sox never, ever lost a WS without forcing a Game 7, and they never won a Game 7 until the 2004 ALCS when they beat the MFY's. They had a Game 7 jinx more than a WS jinx. (It's not like they were the Cubs.) Once the Red Sox snapped their Game 7 jinx, they were fixed...

[PaulFolk]

The thing is, he didn't. In terms of the pennant, without him they never would have got there. He had over 100 RBI and, when they were facing elimination in the playoffs, he started the 9th inning rally that brought them back from the dead. His famous E was in Game 6 of the WS, not Game 7. He was just doing his part to force a Game 7, that's all. During their curse years, the Red Sox *always* took it to Game 7, and lost it there. They did that every time. The Red Sox never, ever lost a WS without forcing a Game 7, and they never won a Game 7 until the 2004 ALCS when they beat the MFY's. They had a Game 7 jinx more than a WS jinx. (It's not like they were the Cubs.) Once the Red Sox snapped their Game 7 jinx, they were fixed...

Plus, the Mets had already tied the game before the error. A lot of people seem to think that the Red Sox were ahead when Buckner made the error (I thought that myself for a long while) and that if he makes the play, the game is over and the Red Sox win the World Series. Not true. If Buckner had made the play, the game would've just gone to extra innings, where the Red Sox might've ended up losing anyway.

I never understood how Calvin Schiraldi got off (relatively) scot-free while Buckner took all the blame. Maybe it's because fans/the media want one "defining moment" to look at? A ground ball through the legs is more camera-friendly than a series of walks and hits allowed by a pitcher.

The same thing happened with the Steve Bartman incident. His interference didn't lose the game for the Cubs (the biggest mistake was SS Alex Gonzalez botching an easy double-play grounder), but the media chooses one "defining moment" and replays it over and over.

[crawdad]

Eh. He received a minute long standing ovation on opening day when he came back to play 22 games in 1990. This is justed a media created thing. I mean, how many more times does Boston giving Buckner a standing ovation remain a story?

[BaltimoreTerp]

Plus, the Mets had already tied the game before the error. A lot of people seem to think that the Red Sox were ahead when Buckner made the error (I thought that myself for a long while) and that if he makes the play, the game is over and the Red Sox win the World Series. Not true. If Buckner had made the play, the game would've just gone to extra innings, where the Red Sox might've ended up losing anyway.

I never understood how Calvin Schiraldi got off (relatively) scot-free while Buckner took all the blame. Maybe it's because fans/the media want one "defining moment" to look at? A ground ball through the legs is more camera-friendly than a series of walks and hits allowed by a pitcher.

The same thing happened with the Steve Bartman incident. His interference didn't lose the game for the Cubs (the biggest mistake was SS Alex Gonzalez botching an easy double-play grounder), but the media chooses one "defining moment" and replays it over and over.

I think it's because his play was the final one that LOST the game, as opposed to the series of bad things that led up to it that were just as bad.

[olehippi]

I think it's because his play was the final one that LOST the game, as opposed to the series of bad things that led up to it that were just as bad.

Baseball is a game of moments.....this particular Buckner moment happened to become the most infamous of that World Series.

[tennOsfan]

I'm glad to see this. I always liked Buckner. He's a good guy, and he was a solid ballplayer.

His name should be synonymous with good things, not one unfortunate play.