By now, some of you know that Diamondhacks and one of MLBlog’s annointed darlings arent quite hand in glove on the merits of his consuming "hobby". We’ve tried to engage Zack on the issues, and all three times, the ball snagging king has failed to make a substantive response to any of our positions.

While it’s certainly his right to effectively ignore criticism, we regret his decision to do so. Diamondhacks had hoped to engage The Baseball Collector in an intelligent discussion about ballpark etiquette but made the mistake of assuming that a fellah who wrote a book on the subject might actually have the ability and interest to entertain an opposing viewpoint or two.

We were, apparently, wrong.

The reknowned author’s first response to our introduction of the issues was:   

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Completely missing the point. Ouch. Painful. Get me out of here.

He must be a busy man. Read some of the other visitors’ comments, in particular the last entry from "Cyn", who sided with our fundamental position but was critical of a sexist remark we made. She never wrote a book on the subject, but notice how she got the last word. She earned it. On our blog.

"You’re Not With Me, Leather", which never refers to The Baseball Collector explicitly, or implicitly, was then graciously linked to, on the MLBlogosphere site.

Here’s The Baseball Collector’s "rebuttal", in its entirety:

I also have a view on Baseball Glove Etiquette. Ready? Here goes:

To each his own.
(Or her own.)

-The Baseball Collector
http://snaggingbaseballs.mlblogs.com/

Again, this from the 28 year old world authority and author on the subject of snagging baseballs. Our innuendo-laced response, decrying a Darwinian, survival of the fittest, approach, was deleted by Mark Newman, who felt it amounted to too much of a personal attack on his blog. We dont take issue with the deletion, provided that Mark consistently applies his rules to everybody, and as far as we can tell, he does. We dont entirely share Mark’s views, but are totally cool with his consistent application of those values.

We trotted(or trolled, if you prefer) over to Zack’s site with these thirty five words:

//(Newsflash for the b*tch-slapper: Real men refer to this as "competition.")//

No.

Children, and a few immature adults, refer to this as "competition".

The extent to which you disregard others to indulge your "goals", and then rationalize such boorish behavior as "competition" is revealing, and sad.

http://diamondhacks.files.wordpress.com/2006/08/foulball_21.jpg

Here’s the rebuttal, not from Zack, but from one of his loyal minions, one Boodleheimer:

MATT –

Who appointed you sheriff of baseball fans‘ enjoyment of the game? Your decree that ball snagging is “disregard for others”, “revealing” and “sad,” tells us perhaps more about you than you want us to know.

Let’s look at the issues:

First, a fan who misses catching a ball, who in a jealous rage physically attacks one who succeeded is an insensitive bully. (Which you, for whatever reason, overlook. Is it your habit to beat up those who disagree with you?)

Second, the game of baseball belongs to everyone, not merely children. It is played by men who, for the most part, retain their boyhood joy of the game they loved as kids. (cf The Boys of Summer, the legendary book about the Giants & Dodgers, that captures the true spirit of the sport).

Third; virtually everyone who attends a game is avid to get a ball. Kids, sure. Also women (you’ve heard of this group, yes?), and men. Yet you propose to limit access to this dream to children. And to proscribe wearing a glove to the remainder of fans. Wake up, fella: balls inevitably slam into the stands. Are grown-ups to ignore them to conform with your silly, gratuitous rule? Kids have balls tossed to them, mostly when they’re in the front rows. Often their dads wear gloves in order to snag balls to give them. When the kids grow older, they continue to bring their gloves to chase balls more aggressively. It’s called stadium life. (The writer of this blog regularly offers tips to kids on how to acquire baseballs at games. Indeed, he wrote a book called How To Snag Major League Baseballs, that generously reveals his techniques to help neophytes. Watch his blog; questions abound from fans wanting his advice. He answers them all. This is called graciousness of spirit. You could look it up.)

Fourth, we Americans are a varied, idiosyncratic lot. We covet freedom to pursue whatever hobbies appeal to our interests. We don’t take lightly to those, who like you, set themselves up as judges to dictate what pleasures we may pursue. Your self-proclaimed authority to decide who may do what – and at what age – at a ballpark marks you as un-American.

What’s more, your negative posting in an attempt to besmirch this happy blog, based as it is on a pure love for the game of baseball, shows you to be arrogant, clueless and narrow minded.

To quote your own words, it is “revealing and sad.”

Go stew in your destructive juices, pal, while the rest of us inhale the the crisp air of freedom to enjoy the game. And revel in collecting whatever we choose.

Zack Hample’s response to this author was:

I love you.

This was our response to Boodleheimer, which appears here only because you wont find on The Baseball Collector site anymore, because Zack deleted it:

Boodle,

Sorry for not replying sooner, but I was out all day with my son, celebrating his birthday – arrogant, clueless, narrow-minded S.O.B. that I am. Before I address some of the amateurish liberties in your histrionic 430 word "rebuttal" to my thirty five word opinion, I’d like to bring your attention to your paragraph five, where for some inexplicable reason, you neglected to include the import of supporting our troops

From the top:

"Who appointed you sheriff of baseball fans‘ enjoyment of the game?"

I expressed the opinion that some of Zack’s behavior is inappropriate. Call me a self – righteous philospher king? OK. High falutin’ moral arbiter. Maybe. But "sheriff"? You lost me here, Boodle. I never mentioned or implied anything about enforcement. I’ll make a deal with you, pardner. You dont pretend to speak fer me, and I wont put yer little buddy in jail, kay?

"Your decree that ball snagging is "disregard for others", "revealing" and "sad,"…"

Never said this, Boodle. There’s plenty of ball snaggers I dont have a problem with. You really need to read more critically. It’s only thirty-five words. Go on. Take all the time you need.

"… an insensitive bully. (Which you, for whatever reason, overlook."

I didn’t ‘overlook’ the bully. My thirty five words focused on Zack Hample. Unlike your overwrought diatribe, it was not meant as an unabridged treatise on American virtue, or a catalogue of every fan Zack’s ever bowled over. For the record, I dont condone that fan’s response, at least as it’s been presented by Hample. This is, however, about Zack.

"Is it your habit to beat up those who disagree with you?"

Egregious innuendo, but I’ll take your implication of damage done as a reflection of my comments’ effectiveness. Thanks. It wasnt my intention to "beat up" Zack, but really to introduce an alternative, albeit fairly mainstream, perspective on this happy island of lockstep, Zack – fawning geeks. Unlike you, Boodle, I extensively researched Zack’s site prior to laying my big wet one. If you had extended me the same courtesy, you’d never ask such a dumb question. People tell me that I take a certain sense of humor out for regular exercise – not unlike Hample. Go figure.

"Second, the game of baseball belongs to everyone, not merely children"

Hooray. We agree! I actually feel quite strongly about that and dont recall saying anything to the contrary.

"Third; virtually everyone who attends a game is avid to get a ball."

Like most of your allegations, this isn’t quite true either, but I understand what you’re trying to say, and agree that a typical ballpark has thousands of fans, of all ages, interested in snagging a ball. This is an important point of agreement.

"Yet you propose to limit access to this dream to children.""

Utterly wrong. I’ve never written this, or even implied it, anywhere! Please dont characterize my thoughts until you learn how to read a little better. Only children should be able to catch a ball?!?! Yeah right. LOL!

"And to proscribe wearing a glove to the remainder of fans".

You understand the denotation of "proscribe", which means to prohibit or condemn, but unfortunately, the connotations escape you. It implies legal or official sanction; grave, serious consequences,etc. What were the consequences of not adhering to my glove guidelines? Merciless disparagement? Again, look into that humor thing I mentioned. And the reading gig. They’re both…um…how can I say this….G-O-O-D! And thanks for the site visit

"Are grown-ups to ignore them[balls] to conform with your silly, gratuitous rule?"

I’ve never advocated that adults ignore batted balls that are hit to them, so to answer your question, "No".

What I find inappropriate, Boodle, is particular adults who go to obsessive lengths to hog an inordinate number of balls from that "avid" park full of normal people you championed just a moment ago. Are you abandoning their interests so soon, Boodle? (Nothing worse than a flip-flopping Boodle.)

I dont know Zack and I certainly dont object to everything he does. The Bonds catch, for example, appeared to result from skill, extensive preparation and luck – and from the diagram Zack provided, he didnt appear to be blocking other fans’ sightlines prior to the catch. Why object to that? I dont. Heck, "Congratulations, Zack!". I’m also well aware of Zack’s school visits and his cheerful blog demeanor with like-minded folks. He has terrific photo albums, a quick wit, boundless energy and, if I may be so presumptuous, a great deal going for him.

But even an undiscerning lackey like yourself, Boodle, must realize that some of Zack’s actions annoy people; players, ballpark security and, most of all, other paying fans. Zack, to his credit, acknowledges this on his blog regularly. To his discredit, IMO, (and this is what I find most annoying) he consistently and cavalierly dismisses these same folks as "oblivious", "missing the point" and my personal favorite, not being "real men". As if all these other folks, who do their jobs, or sit in their seats to watch a game, or who, generally speaking, think there’s more value in an 8 year old getting a ball than a grown man doing the same – that ALL these folks, tens of millions of them, exist in this fog of delusion. That they just dont "get it". Surely, Boodle, even you must appreciate the delicious irony of a twenty-eight year old man, literally competing with kids in a sandbox for balls ( I’m not making this up!), defining "real man" for the rest of us. Now that’s amusing.

I hope we dont need to go on.

I need to get back to beating my family.

I’m sure you understand.

Zack’s response:

Whatever. 

At this point, we didnt expect anything more from Zack and even we realize he’s been legitimately busy exploiting his exploits, as it were. And we’re not broken up about having these extensive remarks deleted. It is, after all, Zack’s blog. But unlike Mark Newman’s deletion, notice how Zack maintains, even lauds, Boodleheimer’s rather nasty missive, while eliminating our efforts, suggesting to some, perhaps, that we somehow gave Boodle the last word, tail between our legs. Perish the thought.

If this was a child’s blog, we’d be barking up the wrong tree, for sure. And we’re always open to the idea that maybe there’s still something big here we’re missing.  But isnt Zack Hample a proficient blogger? Isnt Zack Hample a college grad with a major in English? Isnt Zack Hample an author? Isnt Zack Hample a semi-regular on national radio and TV programs? Isnt Zack Hample almost thirty years old?

How can someone, who is all these things, appear to be such a coward?