Jul 13, 2010, 1:32 PM EST
Well, he was interviewed, anyway. His story — which you can read here — is that he was just trying to protect his kid from the foul ball raining down from the sky. Some of you took that position when it happened. As a father I kind of doubted it — your first impulse is to cover your kid or grab your kid if you’re trying to protect them from danger; I think this guy wanted the souvenir — but it’s his story and that’s fine.
My take on this remains that both Werth and the fan were wrong. The fan should have gotten himself (and his kid) out of the way for what should have been obvious to him as a playable ball, and Werth obviously overreacted.
Read the end of the guy’s interview though, and you’ll probably end up coming down more on his side than Werth’s, even if you were wavering on the point. Seems his kid is a big Werth fan and since the incident he has been all quiet and weird. Which is the same way I imagine I would have been acting if Alan Trammell or Batman or B.A. Baracus or someone like that bitched out my Dad in front of 40,000 people back in 1984.
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot 69
- Phil Hughes signs a three-year extension with the Twins 23
- The Padres have talked to the Phillies about Cole Hamels 23
- Why is John Smoltz a shoo-in for the Hall of Fame? 63
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” 85
- Trea Turner’s agent is unhappy his client is in limbo after trade to Nationals 48
- Nexen Heroes accept Jung-Ho Kang posting fee from unidentified MLB team 37
- Giants acquire Casey McGehee from the Marlins 16
- Bud Selig will get a $6 million a year pension. Which is obscene. (145)
- The United States will seek to normalize relations with Cuba (144)
- Rays, Padres, Nationals agree to 11-player trade (97)
- St. Petersburg City Council votes down deal to allow Rays to look for new stadium site (90)
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” (85)