Wanna puke, if you're not puking already? Check out this piece of crap article by John Donovan of SI.com.

Besides having a second mouth surgically implanted to be able to kiss Steinbrenner's and Jeter's asses at once, Donovan writes this nonsense about the series:

"If not for a fluke of a ninth-inning comeback against closer Mariano Rivera on Friday night, the Yankees would have made a clean sweep of this series. Boston had gone 9-0-1 in its last 10 series. Saturday and Sunday marked the first time the Sox had dropped back-to-back games since early August, too."

Fluke of a ninth-inning comeback? You might be able to say that if Mariano had previously shut down the Sox every other time he's faced them. But from what I heard from yankee announcers, he'd blown 7 saves against the Sox in his career, compared to 14 against the rest of the league combined. That's closer to the norm than it is to a fluke. And notice how I quoted my source there, unlike Donovan, who, in classic sports media dork fashion, spewed to me exactly what I already heard from Yes announcers a few hours ago, acting like he came up with everything himself.

Another reason to check those facts would be so you don't end up saying something completely untrue, like the Sox not having lost back-to-back games since early August. Uh, dumbass, we lost two in a row less than one week ago. (That's mid-September.)

That's all I'm gonna say about John Donovan right now. I don't want to waste space on JOHN DONOVAN. You'll note I'm using the name John Donovan a lot. My hope is that he reads this, so I figure the more I write "John Donovan," the better the chance he sees this, since you know that this insecure bastard google-searches his own name every five minutes. (The other four he spends looking for nude pics of Jeter.)

About the game today: Hey, sometimes (all the time) the yanks are gonna hit 319 foot home runs, what can you do? Pedro didn't do all that bad. We're four back in the LC with three to play against them at home next weekend. If we can just keep pace this week, we've still got a good chance to take this division. The question is, can we figure out the damn Orioles?

Kay told his usual lies today. One that he's basically turned into reality by driving it into people's heads is that last season Pedro "hit Jeter and Soriano" back to back, sending them both to the hospital. You might be saying, "Yeah, that's true. That did happen." But listen to how Kay says it--Pedro "hit" them. This would imply that they were both hit by a pitch, and awarded first base. Wrong. Soriano went to swing at the ball, the ball hit the bat and got a piece of his hand before going foul. This is not "getting hit by a pitch." This is a "strike." Then Soriano proceeded to strike out, before the next batter, Jeter, was actually hit by a pitch. Look at the play-by-play from this game, which took place July 7th, 2003 (thanks Redsox1918.com): "New York 1st -- Soriano struck out swinging. Jeter hit by pitch." And from the boxscore: "HBP - D Jeter (by P Martinez); J Posada (by B Kim)." That's right, Soriano was not hit by a pitch. The "evil Pedro" was just throwing inside, and got the strike he was looking for. (And Jeter's hands were right over the plate when he got hit, by the way.) (And both stayed in the game after they were hit, if only for a short time; Kay acts like they were carted off from the batter's box.)

You may have also seen in that article by John Donovan that he defended Jeter's bunt with the yanks up 7-1 today. This was much different than my reaction, which included lots of loud f-words, as well as making it known to any neighbor with an open window that I hope we throw at Jeter "with intent to injure."

I'm not saying he should "give up an at bat," as the yanks' announcers kept bringing up, but it's 7-1, swing the god damn bat. That goes for Little League games, Old Timer's games, any game, any sport, anywhere. You ever get the feeling Jeter would bunt for a hit in a beer league softball game? And for the cowardly suck-ups in the yankee booth to not jump all over that cheater for that weak, classless move is just unbelievable. And then when he got up again, in the eighth I believe, Paul O'Neill starts talking about how you don't want to "give up an at bat," because it might mess you up for tomorrow. Jeter went on to get one of the all time cheapest bloop hits into no-man's land, and Kay boasted, "See, he didn't waste the at bat, and now he's got a three-hit day instead of a two-hit day." Well, la-ti-freakin'-da. I'm telling you, a slow, horrible death awaits Michael Kay.

What kills me is this game was on ESPN, but it was blacked out because of Yes, so I should've had neutral announcers. The score made me mad enough without having to hear those horrible yankee-rooters.

Kay also was appalled by Francona doing the interview with Fox while down 9-0 the previous day. He said how Joe Torre would never do such a thing. In this case, both other announcers jumped in to defend Tito, saying Fox makes you do the interview. Kay said that Fox "encourages" them to do it, but they don't have to. I don't know if he's lying about that, but the point is, MLB gave the networks the right to interview players and managers during games this year. Fox asked Tito to do an interview, so he did it. It was nine to friggin' nothing, what else did he have to do? Would it be better if it was tied in the ninth, and he wasted key minutes getting interviewed when he should have been plotting strategy? Kay needs to just shut up in this situation. You could tell that all he was doing was trying to stir up shit. Had Torre done it, Kay would have praised him for being so generous and honorable to do an interview even when his team was being blown out.

You don't like the manager being interviewed during the game, Kay? Well how do you feel when the crowd in the bleachers at the Stadium chants each yankee fielder's name in the first inning, and each fielder raises their hand in acknowledgment, WHILE THE GAME IS GOING ON? How about about taking a stand against that, you fucking prick!!!!!!

Finally (I swear), someone commented to my blog in response to my saying that Sheffield shouldn't be MVP. (By the way, did you notice how John Donovan did exactly what I talked about yesterday? Saying how Sheffield is "looking more and more like the MVP." Why? Because you're saying it more and more? What a scam.) Anyway, to respond to this person, who told me that Sheffield is more valuable because he's "carrying" the yanks, while Manny has Ortiz to back him up and vice versa: First of all, I am familiar with this argument. I watch Yes, too. (Not saying you wouldn't of thought of it yourself, because you sound smarter than the usual yankee fans that write to me.) But I'm just saying that as long as this yankee lineup is going to be referred to as "murderer's row," and called "the best offense in the game," I don't see how taking one guy out of it would hurt the yanks all that much more than the Sox would be hurt with one less guy in theirs.