On Friday night, better weather than we’ve had on this Island and beyond it all year, younger generations reined in the seasonal changeover by doing everything but staying inside to watch the game.
Meanwhile, older generations were left perplexed by an unforeseen oddity: their televised stalworth – consumption of a New York Yankee game – was modified to become an exclusive stream courtesy of Amazon Prime Video that night. This maneuver appealed to the exact demographic that doesn’t traditionally watch baseball games anymore anyway.
So, what gives?
As is the answer to most arguments: money. Outlined by the equally controversial Mets broadcast exclusively streamed on Apple TV+ earlier this month, the ability for non-TV platforms to spearhead the migration from cable intake to App-based viewership is too intoxicating, vis-à-vis, product promotion, to forgo pursuing.
Though the game was more or less unspectacularly altered in terms of how it was called, with a familiar face in YES Network’s Meredith Marakovits easing the transition for every disgruntled Amazon Prime newcomer, the struggle was two-pronged: in the set-up, and the why.
Why couldn’t the game also be on TV for those grandfathered into their right to resist change that is not meant to appease them, thus deterring them as a result? Why risk alienating those who still watch every pitch of every game day-in and day-out, while their youthful counterparts are more likely to skim through highlights on their wake up and good night Instagram and TikTok scrolls, respectively, if that?
Across the sports world, alternative broadcasts have helped pave the way for the blend of old school and the future. The NFL notably simulcasts playoff games on Nickelodeon for kids-positive initiatives, without denying adults the opportunity to catch the game on one of the major networks they’re lifelong accustomed to. Why baseball couldn’t do something more like this, ensuring regional blackout victims wouldn’t become casualties of the streaming shake-up as well, is beyond us.
It’s money, but that doesn’t make it right. And it’s not going to go away, either, so brace for impact by downloading the necessary apps now to lessen the blow later.
While fans at home were left scrambling at the top of this weekend, the next day the microscope was placed firmly on the unforgivable behavior of the select few in The Bronx that give the rest of the fandom a bad name.
One beverage-too-many sore winners who’d have the audacity to throw debris at Cleveland Guardians outfielders moments after Gleyber Torres delivered what has to be his millionth career walk-off hit have no business giving The Stadium their business. Nor should The Stadium need to rely on these fans moving forward.
Last year, a fan was banned for life for throwing a ball at, and striking Boston Red Sox outfielder Alex Verdugo, who’s still verbally accosted by Bleacher Creatures and foul-mouthed foul liners alike. After Saturday’s regrettable events, which did not involve these sections, but rather field level front-rowers who presumably paid heftier prices in the categorically obscene range just to end up SportsCenter heels and Internet-bashed rejects, security has reportedly been amped up. But this is not enough.
Fans need to remember there’s a difference between acceptable heckling and reprehensible disrespecting. You don’t have to like your opponents, but you damn well must remember the only thing stopping a professionally-trained athlete from tuning you up is cameras upon cameras upon cameras.
Inexcusable. Simple as that. A societal problem that too won’t go away; another shame in a running slew of many bringing sour attention to a once-pure game. They say all news is good news, but this is most certainly not. If a fan is prosecutable for running on the field of play, then they should be just as subject to legal repercussions for instigating situations that are soon to big players charging into the stands again.
The last thing baseball needs is their own “Malice in the Palace.” Aaron Judge and Giancarlo Stanton look better policing their fans than they ever would going one step further, although they may have to start if this continues in large. In the grand scheme, they’re too good of baseball players, too good of guys, to be called upon to do either.
That is the message. This is The Messenger.
The New York State Court of Appeals delivered a resounding victory for fair election advocates and has vindicated the 2014 constitutional amendment passed by voter referendum.
The letter of the law was clear, “Districts shall not be drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents or other particular candidates or political parties. The commission shall consider the maintenance of cores of existing districts, of pre-existing political subdivisions, including counties, cities, and towns, and of communities of interest.”
Anyone with a map of Long Island could see that the law was ignored. The First Congressional District stretched from Plainview to Montauk, the Third Congressional District Stretched from Nissequogue to Rye, and the Second Congressional District was designed as a pen to corral Republican-heavy South Shore voters together; the law was clearly not followed. The map was so egregious it was featured nationally in the press and spurred Twitter wars.
Town lines were ignored, county lines were ignored, and communities of interest protected in the state constitution were ignored. The township of Smithtown, for example, saw itself in all three of these congressional districts, a completely maddening prospect. The districts themselves became less compact as they stretched to include and exclude certain pockets of voters. How receptive would any elected official have been to the needs of any community with districts so disparate in composition? Not very.
Despite the clarity and popularity of the fair districting amendment, the New York State Democratic Party saw itself as immune from redress. The assumption that Judges appointed by Democrats would suspend the law, the popular will of the people, and castrate the 2014 amendment in favor of partisanship turned out to be a massive miscalculation by Hochul and her legislative allies.
One-party rule was repudiated in this court decision. Holding the levers of power is not the same as holding the law. This decision is a win for New Yorkers. That is the message. This is The Messenger.
