76 replies to this topic

[TheoShmeo]

The symbolism of the 2004 blowing back the 2007 flag for a while -- "I'm not ready to relinquish center stage yet; OK OK, now I am" -- was pretty cool. Then again, so was virtually everything else about that ceremony.

The Buckner thing was a surprise and it seemed like everyone absolutely loved it. That having been said, I think the whole "Sox fans finally forgive Buckner" angle is so overplayed and off the mark. It's the media that perpetuates the supposed Sox fan angst about this. I don't know one Sox fan who blames Buckner for 1986. Not one.

[Frisbetarian]

The symbolism of the 2004 blowing back the 2007 flag for a while -- "I'm not ready to relinquish center stage yet; OK OK, now I am" -- was pretty cool. Then again, so was virtually everything else about that ceremony.

The Buckner thing was a surprise and it seemed like everyone absolutely loved it. That having been said, I think the whole "Sox fans finally forgive Buckner" angle is so overplayed and off the mark. It's the media that perpetuates the supposed Sox fan angst about this. I don't know one Sox fan who blames Buckner for 1986. Not one.

Year   Round Tm  Opp WLser  G   AB  R   H  2B 3B HR RBI  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG   SB CS  SH  SF HBP
+------+-----+---+---+-----+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+---+--+---+---+---+
  1986   
		WS	BOS NYM	 L   7  32   2   6  0  0  0   1   0   3  .188  .212  .188   0  0   0   0   1

[mabrowndog]

Year   Round Tm  Opp WLser  G   AB  R   H  2B 3B HR RBI  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG   SB CS  SH  SF HBP
+------+-----+---+---+-----+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+---+--+---+---+---+
  1986   
		WS	BOS NYM	 L   7  32   2   6  0  0  0   1   0   3  .188  .212  .188   0  0   0   0   1

I posted the following in P&G, so I'll re-post here because it needs to be said:

Buckner's appearance today should serve two important roles -- and neither of them are to forgive Buckner for his gaffe:

1) To reinforce that Buckner was a career .289 hitter (which actually mattered long before OBP and drawing walks were manly or fashionable), amassed 2,712 hits over parts of 22 seasons, and was a great-fielding first baseman before his knees gave out.

2) To remind the 99.9997% of fans who've already forgotten (including you, Chuck) that without Buckner, there is NO WORLD SERIES FOR THE RED SOX IN 1986. If he makes an out instead of leading off with a single in the top of the 9th of ALCS Game 5, then Dave Henderson never makes it to the plate. Baylor's homer would have only been a solo shot, making it a 5-3 game, and Evans' popup would have ended Boston's season.

So no, I don't look at today's event as some patronizing "It's ok, buddy" slap on Buckner's ass. I saw it as recognizing the man's body of work.

That fucking godforsaken grounder may have helped to erase a world championship (along with the collective failings of McNamara, Stanley, Gedman, and Schiraldi), but it never should have erased Buckner's career. But that's what it did.

[SoxFanSince57]

...I don't look at today's event as some patronizing "It's ok, buddy" slap on Buckner's ass. I saw it as recognizing the man's body of work.

That fucking godforsaken grounder may have helped to erase a world championship (along with the collective failings of McNamara, Stanley, Gedman, and Schiraldi), but it never should have erased Buckner's career. But that's what it did.

Well said. Very well said.

I am a big Billy B fan. Have been since the days when he was with the Cub and Dodgers.

I was surprised by the sting Billy still felt. I was upset at seeing the pain in his face and realizing the depth of the sorrow he has endured all these years. It is testimony of the incredible power of "forgiveness". More often than not when we forgive someone (the media in this case) we free ourselves of the pain. Certainly the media never felt Buckner's anger and sense of injustice. I pray that Bill’s act of forgiveness frees him of further heartache. I hope that Bill can put the pain of the past away so that he can celebrate his wonderful career in full light and so that he can feel the joys and friendships he had in Boston for the few years that he played for the Sox.

[Frisbetarian]

I posted the following in P&G, so I'll re-post here because it needs to be said:

Buckner's appearance today should serve two important roles -- and neither of them are to forgive Buckner for his gaffe:

1) To reinforce that Buckner was a career .289 hitter (which actually mattered long before OBP and drawing walks were manly or fashionable), amassed 2,712 hits over parts of 22 seasons, and was a great-fielding first baseman before his knees gave out.

2) To remind the 99.9997% of fans who've already forgotten (including you, Chuck) that without Buckner, there is NO WORLD SERIES FOR THE RED SOX IN 1986. If he makes an out instead of leading off with a single in the top of the 9th of ALCS Game 5, then Dave Henderson never makes it to the plate. Baylor's homer would have only been a solo shot, making it a 5-3 game, and Evans' popup would have ended Boston's season.

So no, I don't look at today's event as some patronizing "It's ok, buddy" slap on Buckner's ass. I saw it as recognizing the man's body of work.

That fucking godforsaken grounder may have helped to erase a world championship (along with the collective failings of McNamara, Stanley, Gedman, and Schiraldi), but it never should have erased Buckner's career. But that's what it did.

Are you saying that one single in game 5 erased this pitiful line for the series?

Year   Round Tm  Opp WLser  G   AB  R   H  2B 3B HR RBI  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG   SB CS  SH  SF HBP
+------+-----+---+---+-----+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+---+--+---+---+---+
  1986   ALCS  BOS CAL	 W   7  28   3   6  1  0  0   3   0   2  .214  .207  .250   0  0   0   1   0

Which included hitting into a double play and leaving 13 runners on base while the Sox were going down 3 games to 1.

And still, Johnny Mac left him batting 3rd. While I cannot blame Buckner for McNamara's insistence on going with "his guy," nor would I ever claim that his error was the sole reason the Sox lost that World Series. But I also cannot forget Buckner's comments in the aftermath of that series and beyond. He claimed that his gaffe would not have mattered because Stanley was not covering the bag. Even if this were true (and it is debatable), deflecting the blame for his error is not something I can ever respect from a professional baseball player. His comments about being forced out of town by fans/sportswriters while also signing pictures of the ball going through his legs for money were hypocritical at best. There were also reports of him telling Johnny Mac not to pinch hit for him against a lefty (Orosco?) because he was sure he could hit the guy - he couldn't.

I do not blame Buckner for the series loss (the manager and the closer certainly contributed), but I also was decidely not in favor of him coming back to throw out the first pitch yesterday. He was a pretty good ballplayer who was at the end of his career when he played here. He was below average offensively during his time in Boston (especially for a first baseman), and was brutal defensively because of his ankle problems (an aside here, the claims that Buckner's 1986 regular season was a big reason the Sox made it to the postseason are a fallacy; he had an OPS+ of 97 that season, lower than an average major league player and well below an average 1st baseman). He played here for 2 1/2 seasons and was responsible for one of the biggest blunders in World Series history, which he handled poorly in his actions and comments. He was not long time member of the team or a likable, classy player, and he was not the guy I wanted to see back throwing out the first pitch after a World Championship.

[smastroyin]

I split this off. I think Buckner is an interesting case study. He was a guy who was overrated coming into his time in Boston. Even as a 14 year old I knew that as a 1B he didn't provide enough pop and he always seemed to be a rally killer. He looked old and his swing looked slow and in the field he looked like a guy who wouldn't have been able to make my Babe Ruth team, nevermind be the first baseman for the Boston Red Sox. Regardless, he then made the error and there was this huge tide of opinion. Dog says the error erased his great career, and in a lot of ways that is true. As a Dodger and a Cub, he was pretty darn good for a few years (he was mediocre for a lot of them as well). But, it also erased the fact that he was a crappy Red Sox, one of the worst regulars in terms of combination of position, ability to play that position, and the way he hit compared to his peers at that position (not to mention the fact that his name carried gravitas that ensured he got tons and tons of playing time at the top of the order). In short, the error became the thing everyone thought of instead of the negatives he actually put on the field.

As for the hate from Red Sox land, I am going to be honest, I never, ever saw it to the extent that the media made it out. IMO fans of the other teams held that lasting image of him much more than Red Sox fans did. If I had to do a rough percentage chart of "who was to blame for Game 6" among every Red Sox fan I've ever talked to about it, it would be something like this:

Clemens 50% (boy do Red Sox fans hate Roger Clemens)
Schiraldi 30% (fair, but misguided)
McNamara 10% (should get 90% of the blame, just awful awful awful managing from every point after Clemens left the game - way worse than Gump)
Gedman 5%
Stanley 4%
Buckner 1%, if that.

So let's put to rest the thought that this was done to exorcise whatever demons the evil Red Sox fans put into Buckner's life. I'm sure there were assholes, but the guy was cheered on Opening Day 1987, cheered when he came back in 1990, and he brought the house down with his inside the parker. Red Sox Nation forgave Bill Buckner long before Keith Foulke tossed to Doug Mientkiewicz.

That said, to the rest of the soundbite driven, take the easiest story and run media outlets, Buckner's gaffe at one time represented not Bill Buckner's career, but the entire futility of the Boston Red Sox franchise. And personally, I think that is what yesterday was about. "We are now so good we can celebrate our foibles." "We are now so good that we can take an old image that all you other people had of our team and its history, and we will make it part of the celebration of our new history." Something like that.

However, I do agree with Fris in that I think there are more worthy candidates to throw out the first pitch. But it's all bunch of pomp anyway and it seemed to make the players happy so I'm not going to get upset about it.

[DJnVa]

I have no desire to rehash the 86 Series, but I thought it was interesting yesterday that when interviewed Buckner said that the worst treatment came from the media, and then reading numerous game stories this morning, all the media members seemed to make a point of saying Buckner was treated unfairly, but, apparently not by them.

[yecul]

It's a nice easy story that they can use to fill space over and over again. Why would they want to spoil that? A nice 20 year run ain't bad.

Who cares about Buckner at this point? Boston has 2 WS wins in the last couple years. Even if it hadn't already been gone it's now magically been cured. History is usually interesting, entertaining, and sometimes fun. Other times it's stale and played out.

Time to move on from the Buckner story.

[Frisbetarian]

It's a nice easy story that they can use to fill space over and over again. Why would they want to spoil that? A nice 20 year run ain't bad.

Who cares about Buckner at this point? Boston has 2 WS wins in the last couple years. Even if it hadn't already been gone it's now magically been cured. History is usually interesting, entertaining, and sometimes fun. Other times it's stale and played out.

Time to move on from the Buckner story.

Agreed. I also want to make it clear that I have no desire to demonize Buckner, but I certainly can see no reason to deify him either.

[Guapos Toenails]

the guy was cheered on Opening Day 1987, cheered when he came back in 1990, and he brought the house down with his inside the parker. Red Sox Nation forgave Bill Buckner long before Keith Foulke tossed to Doug Mientkiewicz.

This is such a good point. The standing O he got in '87 and '90 was the fans expression that we knew it wasnt his fault. That's why I was very surprised when Buckner came out from behind the flag yesterday. Fenway already forgave him.

I think that the part of smas' post that I quoted above should be printed on the inside of every pink Sox hat, and on the back of every Red Sox Nation membership card...

[JayMags71]

It's a nice easy story that they can use to fill space over and over again. Why would they want to spoil that? A nice 20 year run ain't bad.

Who cares about Buckner at this point? Boston has 2 WS wins in the last couple years. Even if it hadn't already been gone it's now magically been cured. History is usually interesting, entertaining, and sometimes fun. Other times it's stale and played out.

Time to move on from the Buckner story.

I think the point of this thread is:

A lot of Sox fans have already "moved on" from Buckner a loooooong time ago (serious thinking fans nver needed to). Yesterday's show was dragged that pointless bull out from the dust bin of history and needlessly put it on display again.

[Manny's Hammies]

As someone who was sitting on my sofa with my dad holding hands during Game 6 in 1986 when it all fell apart, having been to two World Series games, I found Buckner's participation pretty emotional.

People who are angry about him throwing the ball out should go and re-read Mabrowndog's post about celebrating the man's body of work -- regardless of what you think of him, that is, indeed, something that has been overlooked since '86 and something worth tipping your cap to given the circumstances. And I don't care how much "it wasn't really his fault" or he was "forgiven" years ago (both points I agree with), the fact is, that error was/is monumental in baseball lore and forever a quintessential Boston Red Sox moment, like it or not. So having him throw the ball out was very much relevant here.

[JimD]

Lots of great comments and insight in this thread. I hope that yesterday's ceremony proves to be a symbolic end to the misguided perception by too many that Red Sox fans hate Bill Buckner with an undying passion. I haven't thought about the guy or his error in a long time.

[yecul]

Sure, absolutely, but let's not forget that the ownership is also about the lowest common denomenator. Their actions are those of people who have a high level unattached understanding of things and run with it. It's like a politician going to a random town and mentioning a point of interest he has no knowledge of. Which isn't a criticism of them or anything.

And while dog has a point, this was 100% about the "curse" and gauging the "nation's" thoughts on what happens in the headlines.

Edited by yecul, 09 April 2008 - 08:27 AM.

[DJnVa]

Well, at least FOX has stopped with the endless replays of Dent and Buckner every time the Sox play a big game. Maybe if we can get the Red Sox front office to do the same on the Buckner front, we'll be copacetic. Hopefully they see it as dead and buried now.

[Buck Showalter]

It's a nice easy story that they can use to fill space over and over again. Why would they want to spoil that? A nice 20 year run ain't bad.

Who cares about Buckner at this point? Boston has 2 WS wins in the last couple years. Even if it hadn't already been gone it's now magically been cured. History is usually interesting, entertaining, and sometimes fun. Other times it's stale and played out.

Time to move on from the Buckner story.

That about 'sums it up' for me.

Well done.

[Phil Plantier]

I never thought about assigning blame for 1986. 1986 always seemed, to me, to be sort of an Act of God - a crazy series of events that could not have been avoided.

I think similarly about the Super Bowl this year, and I'd contrast it to the 2003 ALCS, where I (and others) can easily imagine an alternate future where Grady lifts Pedro.

[Bucknahs Bum Ankle]

In his post game comments yesterday, Buckner tearfully claimed that he has forgiven the media for "what they did to him and his family" (as an aside, I don't think he really forgives them very much based on the way he phrased that). But here's the question I have. Did the media really treat Buckner unfairly or were they just doing their job? I mean that was kind of a relevant play and a lasting image. Were they supposed to not show it? I agree that it became overblown and cliché to keep showing it at some point and particularly to tie it with the curse BS. But I think we have Shaugnessy largely to blame for that part. Blaming the media as a whole only seems accurate to me in terms being complicit in perpetuating the curse stuff that CHB was putting out there. Buckner was just an unfortunate part of all that.

I agree the media could have been more diplomatic in distributing blame for blowing that series, but again the ball going through Buck's legs is the lasting image of that debacle and it's the easiest and quickest one to communicate. It's what the media does. I have a hard time blaming them for that, but then I haven't had to live Buckner's life since.

And of course I agree with everyone here that Buckner is pretty low on the list of blame for blowing the 86 world series. Johnny Mac MY PARENTS ARE ILLITERATE INNER-CITY HARPS WHO RAISED ME TO BE PROACTIVELY STUPID course take most of it. From his horrible pitching decisions to leaving Buckner in there to fail. What is the point of having a defensive replacement sitting on the bench in extra innings of a potential world series clinching game when the guy he should be replacing really isn't much of hitter anymore either (It's not like you'd be pulling Big Papi)?

The reason I chose this screen name (in 2003) is that my lasting image of the guy who became the face of Red Sox Nation's collective anguish is not of the ball going through his legs, but of him hobbling around in high tops and giving everything he had to the game he loved despite his body starting to fail him. That is from the perspective of the 12 year old fanboy in me who was allowed to stay up way past his bed time that night only to feel the crushing pain of watching one of my heroes (misguided as that might have been in retrospect) fail on the biggest stage. The sting of that moment has stayed with me ever since, though it has certainly mitigated over the years (2004 did a lot in that regard). Watching the reception he got yesterday was cathartic for me in in that regard. Yes we all knew RSN had largely forgiven him, but this felt different. I think we (collectively) had forgiven him in our minds years ago, but perhaps only recently in our hearts. That's what was on display yesterday.

[BroodsSexton]

Serious question: Who makes the decision to bring Buckner back to toss out the first pitch? Is that a team decision? A media/p.r. consultant? It's an odd choice, in any event, considering the victory in 2004.

[Bucknahs Bum Ankle]

Serious question: Who makes the decision to bring Buckner back to toss out the first pitch? Is that a team decision? A media/p.r. consultant? It's an odd choice, in any event, considering the victory in 2004.

Not sure, but keep in mind that the team wanted Buckner to be part of the 2004 celebration (can't remember if it was specifically for the ring ceremony in 2005 or not) and he declined. I guess he has only come to terms with the whole thing recently.

[jose melendez]

Interesting side note, Bob Lobel once claimed at a presentation at my middle school in 1989ish, that Bill Buckner was the biggest jerk he ever interviewed and that this was the case before Game 6.

[dcmissle]

I feel great for Bill Buckner. This obviously has torn him up inside. There is something refreshing about someone, esp a pro athlete, admitting that it's torn him up inside. If this closes a chapter for Bill, that's all to the good.

For the most part, though, it's navel gazing horseshit. That it has probably dominated ESPN this morning -- (I don't know, I'm guessing) -- only underscores how unnewsworthy it is.

Someone above put it well. Ostensibly about Bill, this story really is about "us": the fans' obsession, real or imagined, with our own "narrative." The media, certainly complicit, also are convenient targets. People should bring common sense to what Shaughnessy writes or is spewed out on ESPN -- if they read, watch or listen to it at all.

Edited by dcmissle, 09 April 2008 - 09:12 AM.

[norm from cheers]

I have personally watched four Red Sox World Series, albeit on TV of course. My personal memories of what I watched live is a bit muddied years later with the media's highlights of each series. I think it is safe to say that Buckner has been hammered for 20 plus years in any highlight film or clip of the 86' WS.

The younger generation (aka the pink hats) who are too young to personally remember holistically the series nor the playoffs that year, have had their perspectives painted by media who built up the "curse" thing to make the Red Sox losing story more compelling.

I think of the HBO special "Reverse the Curse" and about ten minutes or so of that special was dedicated to that final play and folks reliving their anguish and driving it home by reciting verbatim Vin Scully's live play calling. For many who watched it without knowing much about the path the 86' team took to get there or the series itself, they equate Buckner+error=devastating loss to RSN.

It seemed to me in a post game interview that Buckner still had a few scars and the opening ceremony seemed to help heal them which is well deserved.

My biggest fear about him throwing out the first pitch: The Sox fail to win or even get to the WS and lazy Mediots will recall who threw out the first pitch, unfairly and that will be the lone memory some take away from the 2008 season.

Edit: Typo's here and there

Edited by norm from cheers, 09 April 2008 - 09:20 AM.

[joyofsox]

A few writers mentioned the 1990 ovation, though many also treated yesterday as if it was the first time Red Sox had let Buckner off the hook.

No one mentioned 1987.

Are they all unaware of the fans' post-1986 history with Buckner? Would mentioning the 1987 ovation ruin their storylines?

The 1987 ovation did happen, right? I'd love to see the Globe and Herald coverage from that day.

[Guapos Toenails]

Interesting side note, Bob Lobel once claimed at a presentation at my middle school in 1989ish, that Bill Buckner was the biggest jerk he ever interviewed and that this was the case before Game 6.

After he threw out the first pitch, and after shaking Don and Joe's hands, he made a b-line over to Bob Lobel and they shook hands through the screen...

[gcapalbo]

I would completely agree with Browndog's assessment on Buckner.

Kind of 'It's a Wonderful Life' on acid-- there's no game 6 if Buckner wasn't there.

I'm not rehashing '86 either-- but even at the time, I never blamed him either-- it was the base hit, after base hit, after base hit, all with two outs (and sometimes two strikes) that made 1986 into a horror show. That game was already in Twilight Zone territory when the ball was hit towards Buckner.

Yesterday was not about 'forgiving' Buckner, it was about closure. The bad days of '86 and '78 and whatever else are gone and not relevant anymore-- and that was the statement made.

Perhaps yesterday was actually about something done for Buckner himself, something this ownership group, who clearly appreciates history (and we know Theo knows how to crunch the numbers) did to make good to the man himself, more than anything else.

As the 2004 and 2007 flags in a very cosmic wind reminded us-- things have changed around here.

It's different now.

[BU1995Hockey]

The younger generation (aka the pink hats) who are too young to personally remember holistically the series nor the playoffs that year, have had their perspectives painted by media who built up the "curse" thing to make the Red Sox losing story more compelling.

It seemed to me in a post game interview that Buckner still had a few scars and the opening ceremony seemed to help heal them which is well deserved.

I was able to watch the ceremony late last night and his body language said throwing out the first pitch was important to him. As stated before he secluded himself from the Sox to the point of not participating in the celebration four years ago, this was his time to come back as a former player.

The media has jammed the 99% of this was Buckner's fault theory down my generation's throat but through our parents and the elder fans (and SoSH) we've come to understand the reality of it. That's an awesome thing because the guy deserves little to no blame imo. On the other hand look at Cubs fans. I was 23 on that day, living in Chicago, and to this day about 95% of all fans who watched Bartman still point the finger at him. It was similar to Johnny Mac (Baker), Schiraldi (Prior), with Alex Gonzalez playing the Buckner role to some extent. Our generation may not be the Greatest Generation of Sox fans but we have seperated the platinum from the bronze.

I liked the 1st pitch selection, seems like it helped him move forward and feel more accepted the organization as a whole.

Edited by BU1995Hockey, 09 April 2008 - 09:33 AM.

[Spacemans Bong]

If it makes Buckner feel better then it's worth it. I have no doubt on some level he's been through Hell. There's enough moronic Red Sox fans (or just fans - I have no doubt everytime he hands his Visa to a cashier he gets the 'are you the Bill Buckner?) combined with the media to make the past 22 years pretty unpleasant for him. It was never about the overall fanbase and never about the team..they basically bought him back in 1990 to be a backup backup DH out of guilt, but if he thinks this turns a page then good for him.

edit: spelling

Edited by Spacemans Bong, 09 April 2008 - 09:37 AM.

[verloc]

When I was growing up, my best friend was a Mets fan.

After the 1986 series his dad bought the World Series highlight tape, and they ribbed me into watching it one night when I was staying over at his house.

Until then, I kind of saw the aftermath of Buckner's play as a moment of man at his loneliest. All the camera shots had Buckner standing alone, hands on hips, and though you couldn't get a good look at his face, you were sure it was red and swelling.

After the initial what the fuck was that reaction following the play, I felt truly bad for the man. Partly for for making a pee-wee league error on the world's largest stage, but mostly for the way he was crucified for it. It wasn't a season ending play. It was just so damn memorable, the singular moment that has defined the series for the last 20+ years.

Buckner was, thanks to the press, the anti-Tiananmen Square Tank Man. The guy who stands alone and gets run over.

It was interesting that the Mets video took the play and transformed it into a moment of destiny, using it as proof that God was a Mets fan. I kind of bought into it and never had any hard feelings towards Buckner after that, the same way that you don't have hard feelings against a tree falling over on account of a hurricane.

I accepted the play as an act of God.

Edited by verloc, 09 April 2008 - 10:38 AM.

[xjack]

Someone above put it well. Ostensibly about Bill, this story really is about "us": the fans' obsession, real or imagined, with our own "narrative." The media, certainly complicit, also are convenient targets. People should bring common sense to what Shaughnessy writes or is spewed out on ESPN -- if they read, watch or listen to it at all.

It's more about the media than us.

Imagine if for the next 10 years, the Herald, Fox Sports and ESPN spent every week of every baseball season mocking Dan Shaughnessy for his Jeff Stone column or for pronouncing David Ortiz "a sack of you know what." Who do you think he would blame more? The fans who sent him nasty e-mails after reading and hearing about Shaughnessy's worst work? Or the print and electronic media who turned Shaughnessy's misery into a ratings-enhancing sport?

What's so interesting about Amalie Benjamin's story in today's Globe is she puts Buckner's quote up high -- ""I really had to forgive, not the fans of Boston, per se, but I would have to say in my heart I had to forgive the media" -- but then makes no effort to understand what he's saying.

Unintentionally, at the end of the story, she actually stumbles onto a pretty good example of how the media bears responsibility. Consider this quote from Kevin Youkilis, someone who obviously knows the Buckner narrative only from what he's read or seen on TV:

"I've probably never almost been in tears for somebody else on the baseball field," said Kevin Youkilis, who made a point to shake Buckner's hand. "I think that was just the most unbelievable thing. It shows how great of a man Bill Buckner is. "There's not too many people that can do what he did today and face thousands of people that booed him, threatened his life. For a man to step out there on the field, it shows how much of a man he is."

If Bill Buckner was ever booed at Fenway for the error, I'd love to see the tape. In fact, he was received warmly at both the '87 and '90 home openers. Youkilis just doesn't know any better, and evidently (and sadly) the Sox beat writer for the Globe doesn't know any better either.

As for the alleged death threats, I can't say it never happened, but it's foolish to say the actions of a handful of idiots are reflective of an entire fan base. It would be like saying that a victim of domestic abuse is brave to go to baseball or basketball games -- because Brett Myers, Robert Parish and Jason Kidd once beat their wives.

Edited by xjack, 09 April 2008 - 10:00 AM.

[Senorec]

I know a lot of the sentiment in this thread is about how Buckner is old news, but for those interested Buckner will be on WEEI at around 11am.

[DeltaForce]

I was surprised by the sting Billy still felt. I was upset at seeing the pain in his face and realizing the depth of the sorrow he has endured all these years. It is testimony of the incredible power of "forgiveness". More often than not when we forgive someone (the media in this case) we free ourselves of the pain. Certainly the media never felt Buckner's anger and sense of injustice. I pray that Bill’s act of forgiveness frees him of further heartache. I hope that Bill can put the pain of the past away so that he can celebrate his wonderful career in full light and so that he can feel the joys and friendships he had in Boston for the few years that he played for the Sox.

What a living hell he must have gone through.

I didn't like the way that the news/sports media reduced the entire '86 postseason to "Buckner," but it's obvious why they did: it was an easy and lasting image that completely captured the narrative the media had already constructed for the Red Sox. And yes, the problem with this is that "Buckner" was not merely a symbol, but an actual human being.

But I've long been a little conflicted about Buckner. I feel bad for him by the way that the general media has reduced his entire career to one error. On the other hand, he doesn't comfortably fit the role of "victim" either: I agree with the consensus here that the vast majority of Sox fans at the time didn't blame him, so there was no need for "forgiveness" yesterday -- if anything, Sox fans have vastly overrated his importance to the '86 Sox. And Buckner himself has made a buck or two over the years by autographing '86-related memorabilia. All that said, I thought yesterday was a very cool moment, if for no other reason than it allows the media (and I guess Buckner) to close a chapter that Sox fans closed a long time ago.

Edited by DeltaForce, 09 April 2008 - 10:05 AM.

[Trautwein's Degree]

Bill Buckner hasn't been shy about making a buck from the moment.

Mookie Wilson and Bill Buckner signed pictures, balls, and bats are all over the place.

In the end, for all involved, from 1986 through yesterday, the error and its significance was in the very least full complicated emotions.

Edit: DeltaForce wrote what I was thinking while I was writing.

Edited by Trautwein's Degree, 09 April 2008 - 10:09 AM.

[reggiecleveland]

To me the cheesy TV movie about Bill Buckner should roll credits with the inside the park homer.

The thing that frustrated me about McNamara, long before the series is that he played Buckner against lefties and hit him in the middle of the lineup.

Buckner is a symbol of how things have changed. All that was wrong with his use and 86 in general is hard to imagine from today's team. theo Etal would never stand for

1. A manager to use a player in the way Mac used Buck.
2. Having no RH hitting 1b player who could hit a little to play against lefties. Is that not the easiest thing to find in the world of baseball? Add Dave MaCarty or Russ Mormon to the 86 Sox and play them and they win 3 or 4 more games.
3. Not having more bullpen and bench depth for the stretch.
4. McNamara keeping his job for leaving Buck in to make the error.

Anyway Browndog said it best, but this guy has been shafted after a great career.

[joyofsox]

Buckner signing balls and pictures of the error with "Oops, my bad!" seemed like a big "F YOU" to the Red Sox fans who died a bit (or more than a bit) inside that October.

[RingoOSU]

The media still isn't letting it go though. SI put together a list of collapses to go with Memphis's choke to Kansas Monday night, and Buckner is still one of them. http://vault.sportsi...14/19/index.htm

Though I'm glad to see the 2004 Yankees on the list too. And the 1986 Angels.

[gcapalbo]

To me the cheesy TV movie about Bill Buckner should roll credits with the inside the park homer.

Buckner, on WEEI this morning was asked about the inside the park HR (his last HR in the majors).

That same night, he tore something in his shoulder fielding, and that (at 40) was the end of his career.

[Pumpsie]

Clemens, McNamara and Gedman were the only three people I blame for 1986. Clemens got off the big stage prematurely as soon as he saw an opportunity to do so. McNamara put Schiraldi and Buckner in places where they should not have been. And Stanley was actually pitching well (he was bringing it) when Gedman let an inside pitch with a lot of action get by him by just being inexplicably and incredibly lazy.

I've never blamed Buckner, or Stanley, for that matter, not even for a second.

However, it IS true that the media, and especially the CHB, homed in on Buckner's gaffe as THE choke of the century because it was easy and simplistic to do so. And, let's face it, some of their knuckle-dragging readers took the bait and some of that media-fed disdain got to Buckner and his family. Buckner, obviously, was hurt by the criticism. Most Red Sox fans, and most all of the more baseball-savvy ones, have never blamed Bill Buckner, and have never "hated" him for making that error.

So, it was pretty anti-climactic for me to see Buckner yesterday. But I guess that people who know Buckner felt that this was important enough to do and that the Sox were the only ones who could do it and yesterday was a golden opportunity to do it, so I'm good with the whole thing. It's like going back and correcting one little mistake of the past, although you can never erase that other one little error from the record books.

[Rossox]

The media still isn't letting it go though. SI put together a list of collapses to go with Memphis's choke to Kansas Monday night, and Buckner is still one of them. http://vault.sportsi...14/19/index.htm

Though I'm glad to see the 2004 Yankees on the list too. And the 1986 Angels.

Well, it was a collapse and the image of Buckner will always be used to symbolize it. Makes a better caption then, say, the image of Johnny Mac taking the ball away from Roger. The myth that we Sox fans stilll blame him, however, is perpetuated on the following slide w/ this doozy of a line: "Maybe Red Sox fans shouldn't complain about Bill Buckner." Ugh.

[JayMags71]

Anyway Browndog said it best, but this guy has been shafted after a great career.

"Great"? Really?

[LahoudOrBillyC]

What I hope people get out of Buckner getting the ovations is this: IT WAS JUST A FUCKING GAME.

Bill Buckner layed it all on the line for 20 years in baseball. He did a lot of good things. He made a few errors, one of which came at a bad time. If this error ruined the life of some fat guy sitting on a couch in Methuen, whose fault is that?

While we paused to give rings to a bunch of people whose careers are almost all less impressive than Buckner's, his entrance onto the scene tells me that the Red Sox, including the players, realize the serendipitous nature of heroes and goats in this game. Terry Francona realizes that Buckner deserves cheers just as much as he does. Curt Schilling realizes it. All those guys on the team cheering with huge grins on their faces realize it. The fact that they are considered heroes and he is not is 99% luck. Ted Williams hit .200 in the World Series. No one felt worse about it than he did.

The cult of Red Sox nation, in large part, is based on the fact that winning trumps everything. The idea of 2004 erasing 1986 is silly. 1986 is what it is, and if you defined your life by the fact that a bunch of people who you never knew won a shitload of thrilling clutch games, but did not win the last one, I suppose it makes some sense that you would now be willing to redefine your life through a different set of people you do not know accomplishing something you did not accomplish. But that's on you, not Buckner.

They are baseball players, and their job is to play the game the right way to the best of their abilities. Buckner did that as much as any player that ever played in Boston. Was he overrated? Sure, but why is that relevant? You know, we don't have to cheer based on OPS+. Sure, I suffered in 1986 and wept with joy in 2004. But the idea that the 2004 club were better people and deserving of more praise or hero-worship than the 1986 team is asinine. They were two hard-nosed clubs who fought with all they had to the very end. Go back and move a few balls an inch or two and we are now arguing about whether we would ever forgive Terry Francona and Johnny Damon.

[xjack]

What I hope people get out of Buckner getting the ovations is this: IT WAS JUST A FUCKING GAME.

A nice sentiment, but a strawman argument nonetheless.

Again, I challenge anyone in the media or anywhere else to produce a tape of Bill Buckner being booed at Fenway after October 1986. In fact, I bet the ovations at the home openers in '87 and '90 were louder than yesterday's.

[troparra]

McNamara put Schiraldi and Buckner in places where they should not have been.

I find it interesting that two of the most indelible world series images are Buckner's error in '86 and Kirk Gibson's HR just two years later. Both guys' legs were so hobbled they were painful to watch. Yet their fates were polar opposites. It just goes to show what a moron John McNamara was by keeping Buckner in the game when the stakes were so high, and knowing that Buckner was a defensive liability. Contrast that to Tommy Lasorda who clearly had a functioning brain and only used Gibson in a pinch hitting situation, where the worst he could do was strike out and end game one of the series. The best part was there was already a man on 2nd, so Gibson could have simply blooped a single and plated the tying run. There is a difference between setting a player up to succeed and setting him up to fail. It's clear which path McNamara took.

[drleather2001]

I find it interesting that two of the most indelible world series images are Buckner's error in '86 and Kirk Gibson's HR just two years later. Both guys' legs were so hobbled they were painful to watch. Yet their fates were polar opposites. It just goes to show what a moron John McNamara was by keeping Buckner in the game when the stakes were so high, and knowing that Buckner was a defensive liability. Contrast that to Tommy Lasorda who clearly had a functioning brain and only used Gibson in a pinch hitting situation, where the worst he could do was strike out and end game one of the series. The best part was there was already a man on 2nd, so Gibson could have simply blooped a single and plated the tying run. There is a difference between setting a player up to succeed and setting him up to fail. It's clear which path McNamara took.

Well...wait a minute. You can get on McNamara all you want about the decision to leave Buckner in, but I thought he left BB in there so he would be on the field for the celebration. Was it a bad decision? Obviously. But he had his reasons.

[LahoudOrBillyC]

A nice sentiment, but a strawman argument nonetheless.

Again, I challenge anyone in the media or anywhere else to produce a tape of Bill Buckner being booed at Fenway after October 1986. In fact, I bet the ovations at the home openers in '87 and '90 were louder than yesterday's.

This is irrelevant to my point. The sentiment in this thread seems to be, "Welcome back, Bill. It was never your fault--it was that f'ing McNamara (or Stanley, or Schiraldi, ...). No, no, no.

My point is that none of them are goats. The 1986 team deserves our cheers just as much as the 2004 team. The difference between those teams is a few bad hops.

[AusTexSoxFan]

What adds to the whole Buckner situation is that it has now become part of just sports history and culture but popular culture. Just glance at his Wiki page (http://en.wikipedia....ki/Bill_Buckner) and you can see the numerous references to Bill Buckner, all of which include some sort of blunder that has transpired. Unfortunately not everyone outside the SoSH world is as knowledgeable about baseball history and the 1986 WS. Most of the people in this country probably have no idea of the hell this man went through afterwards.

If I recall correctly, after he retired, his kids were harrassed at school and he himself got harrassed by people everywhere he went including the damn grocery store. I could see how that could drive a man to the edge and wanna give a big F You to everyone.

I'm glad he came back yesterday and I'm glad he threw out the first pitch.

[curly2]

I'm so glad people beat me to the punch about Buckner making the rounds with Mookie Wilson signing autographs and making piles of cash on the play. I have no problems with what Buckner did in 1986. He made an error; everybody makes errors sometimes.

What I DO have a problem with is how he acted after his career ended, especially the more time went on. It's well-known that he not only got huge ovations on Opening Day in 1987 and 1990, but also the City Hall rally in October 1986. I don't even think he was treated that bad by the media in general. There are some lazy reporters who made it sound like the Sox would have won the series if he makes that play, and that's inexcusable, but I don't think most people killed him.

Eric Wilbur did a great piece on this a couple of years ago. It was in Buckner's best financial interests to keep the play in people's minds. If you truly want to let the play die, don't do memorabilia shows about it. I would imagine the promoters of those shows generally make Buckner and Mookie available to newspapers and TV before that generate bigger crowds.

By the way, I blame Gedman, Schiraldi and McNamara for Game 6, but I also think, even though the game was already tied, the Sox would have won the game if Buckner makes the play. The Mets had already used McDowell, Orosco and Aguilera. Thdey would have brought in Doug Sisk in the 11th. That would be like the Sox making a stirring comeback and having to continue on with Javier Lopez or Kyle Snyder. In an extra-innings battle of Sisk vs. Stanley, I go with the Steamer.

[Lose Remerswaal]

The 1987 ovation did happen, right? I'd love to see the Globe and Herald coverage from that day.

Both the 1987 and 1990 ovations happened.

I find Buckner's forgiving of the media to be interesting. It looked to me like he was about to forigve the fans, and then realized that that would be a mistake, so he blamed the media instead.

Buckner seemed to blame the fans over the years. He got death threats, which weren't from the media. He wasn't looking for forgiveness, so I'm not sure what the point of showing up yesterday was all about.

Heck, even Maxim says it was the fans that drove him to Idaho.

Like others have said here (and I've said before), he's been soaking in the error for 20+ years, and he's made a ton of money off of it. We all know he shouldn't have been out there, and that even had he made the play, Mookie Wilson may well have beaten Buckner to the bag.

Hey, 2004 wouldn't have been nearly so cool if he had made the play cleanly.

[RingoOSU]

My point is that none of them are goats. The 1986 team deserves our cheers just as much as the 2004 team. The difference between those teams is a few bad hops.

Right, it seems 22 years later no one really acknowledges how good that Mets team was. They attempted to slay a dragon, came close, and failed.

[Oil Can's Liver]

The symbolism of the 2004 blowing back the 2007 flag for a while -- "I'm not ready to relinquish center stage yet; OK OK, now I am" -- was pretty cool. Then again, so was virtually everything else about that ceremony.

The Buckner thing was a surprise and it seemed like everyone absolutely loved it. That having been said, I think the whole "Sox fans finally forgive Buckner" angle is so overplayed and off the mark. It's the media that perpetuates the supposed Sox fan angst about this. I don't know one Sox fan who blames Buckner for 1986. Not one.

I blame the Dale Ford more than anyone else. Stanley and Schiraldi had guys struck out to end the game...that umpire blew it more than Buckner or MacNamara.