thurdl sports

Okay, this is just ******* confusing

We're getting a better picture of what happened when Soriano refused to take the field on Monday. Bear with me, I think I understand this...

Soriano did not refuse to take the field. What happened is that two rosters had been written up, one that had his name, and one that didn't. Apparently the latter was for an emergency use, but ended up being the one posted, and Soriano is claiming it's the one he saw. Therefore he was not sitting in protest, but because his understanding was that he wasn't in the starting lineup.

Okay, that much makes sense. However, Soriano, when talking this event up, made it very clear that he wouldn't have taken the field if his name was penciled in as the left fielder. So...he wasn't sitting in protest, and would like everyone to know he didn't think he was playing, but wouldn't have taken the field anyway if he had known that he was part of the lineup.

Therefore, in Soriano World, this means that he shouldn't be villianized for what happened on Monday, because it was a misunderstanding. Now, don't be mistaken, he wouldn't have taken the field anyway, but his sitting on Monday was not out of protest, so tomorrow should apparently not be seen as his Big Last Chance To Play Ball.

So...even though he would have sat anyway, he wasn't sitting in protest, so he shouldn't have been characterized as sitting in protest, even though he was completely willing and ready to sit in protest.

Make sense?

posted by thurdl @ 11:03 PM