Babe Ruth's World Series blunder

[coxfan]

Few remember now that Babe Ruth was once arguably a World Series goat. In the 1926 WS, Ruth came to bat in the bottom of the ninth with the Yankees down 3-2 versus the Cards. The bases were empty and there were two outs. Everyone waited with baited breath to see if the HR king would tie game 7 with one swing.

But Ruth walked on a full count, putting the tying run on first and the winning run at the plate. Then Ruth tried to steal second and was thrown out, ending the series on the spot. Ironically, this was the same series in which Ruth had hit 3 HR's in game 4. He even hit one in game 7.

It was the last time until this year's ALDS game 5 that the Yankees lost an elimination postseason game at home by one run. Ironically, it was their two highest-paid superstars ( Ruth and A-Rod) who made the final outs.

Ruth is quite properly remembered for his great accomplishments and not for this mistake. But shouldn't Buckner be also remembered for his great career and not his one mistake?

[coxfan]

I should have noted that this occurred in game 7 of the 1926 World Series with the clubs tied at 3 games each. That was the final game, as baseball had ended its "best 5 of 9" World Series experiment a few years earlier.

[freddiefreeman5]

Ruth made up for his mistake.

Buckner didn't.

[apfriz]

Ruth - Buckner are tough to compare, but I get your point, and I must say that I have ALWAYS felt for buckner!

While his error allowed the mets to come back and win game 6, the Red Sox still had a chance to win game 7 and had a lead in game 7 which they blew too....

But, in reality, getting thrown out attempting to steal and letting a 115 hopper hobble through your legs are truly different ends of the spectrum, especially considering the amount more people that were able to view it....No National TV to see Ruth get gunned down at 2nd....that Mets - Red Sox series must have had some monster ratings....

Still feel real bad for billy b....he was a good player...

[coxfan]

Although the 1926 World Series wasn't televised, it was followed by the nation nonetheless. The first World Series to be broadcast on the radio was in 1921, though I don't specifically know if this occurred in 1926. Large cities actually set up large boards in places such as Times Square to allow fans to follow the action "live", (similarly to today's little boxes in the edge of screens that show the situation in another game than the one being shown). The boards were updated via telephone and telegraph from the park with the game. I don't know if this was done in 1926 but I suspect it was. I'm pretty sure those methods had been in place for years before 1926.

If you go to the Texas Rangers' museum at their stadium, you can see a good exhibit on how early radio broadcasters coped with imperfect technology. They would receive constant updates by phone or telegraph. Then they would create the action "live" by making up commentary, and adding sounds like crowd noise and bats hitting balls, for their listeners.

[sox83cubs84]

If you go to the Texas Rangers' museum at their stadium, you can see a good exhibit on how early radio broadcasters coped with imperfect technology. They would receive constant updates by phone or telegraph. Then they would create the action "live" by making up commentary, and adding sounds like crowd noise and bats hitting balls, for their listeners.

That old-time practice can be visualized at one point in the movie Bull Durham, as their older-than-dirt announcer mimics the noise at a Bulls road game with the bat and crowd sounds.

Dave Miedema

[legaleagle92481]

It takes more than one man to lose a baseball game its a team sport. I hate when people scapegoat one player. There are 27 outs in a game others besides Ruth obviously made them. An out is an out whether its a strikeout with nobody on base and two outs in the 4th inning or being thrown out like Ruth was. No out counts more than any other. The Buckner thing also he was not the only Red Sox player to make an error that series and if Stanely had not thrown a wild pitch noone would have scored on the error. Also there was a game 7 the Sox had 27 more chances to win and failed to.

[coxfan]

Of course I totally agree with LegalEagle92481 completely. Baseball and all team sports depend for their outcomes on everything that happens during a game. Every pitch (or shot in basketball, or block in football) is an opportunity that influences the outcome, whatever is done with that opportunity. It's not logical to focus on only one thing as determining a game.

But it's interesting to note how different World Series' histories treated Ruth's Series-ending caught-stealing in 1926. One recent history uses the words "somewhat inexplicably" to describe his steal attempt. But the "World Series Encyclopedia" published in 1961 omits any mention of it in describing that Series, simply noting that the Cards' pitcher finished the Series with "two hitless innings".

The reason for that 1961 omission is obvious. I recall that MLB was promoting the book actively that year, and the MLB Commissioner was Ford Frick, who was Ruth's biographer and big fan. This was the same Frick who that same year ruled that Ruth's HR record would (in effect) still stand as separate record if not broken in the first 154 games ( 1961 was the first year of the 162-game season, and only in the AL). So the editors clearly thought they should omit an item that might upset the Commissioner.