Re: [外電] Bobby Valentine Blasts Hall of Fame Voters ...

[uranusjr (←這人是超級笨蛋)]

無聊來翻個對照組


※ 引述《Stopper (Stopper)》之銘言：
: http://www.sportsgulp.net/?p=10591
: Bobby Valentine Blasts Hall of Fame Voters,
: Says Fans Should Be a Part of the Voting

Bobby Valentine 抨擊名人堂票選人, 認為球迷應在票選過程有一席之地


: January 11, 2013

: Plenty of people have questioned the Hall of Fame and its voting process over
: the years and especially the last couple days as no player was voted in on
: Wednesday. But this might be the strongest opinion on the entire thing that I
: ’ve heard yet as former MLB manager Bobby Valentine puts sportswriters and
: Hall of Fame voters on blast, while claiming that Barry Bonds and Roger
: Clemens should be voted in and questioning if Greg Maddux will get an
: asterisk due to bad pitches being called strikes.

近年來, 已有不少人對名人堂及其票選程序提出質疑, 而自從週三沒有任何球員被選入
的事件後, 這種狀況更勝以往。但前大聯盟教頭 Bobby Valentine 對運動作家與名人
堂票選人的抨擊, 可能是我到目前為止所聽過最強烈的。他不但主張 Barry Bonds 與
Roger Clemens 應該被選入, 更質疑 Greg Maddux 是否應該因為一些壞球被判為好球
而得到一顆星號。


: Bobby Valentine joined ESPN Radio Las Vegas with Gridlock to discuss his
: surprise that no players were voted into the Hall of Fame, why writers should
: no longer be in charge of the voting, why fans should be a part of it, which
: player was the most snubbed, if Craig Biggio belongs in the Hall of Fame and
: next year’s ballot that will include Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine.

Bobby Valentine 應 ESPN Radio Las Vegas 的邀請, 與 Gridlock 一同討論他針對沒
有任何球員被選入名人堂的訝異、為何作家再也不應主導投票、為何球迷應該擁有一席
之地、哪些球員被貶低的最嚴重、Craig Biggio 是否屬於名人堂、以及明年包含 Greg
Maddux 與 Tom Glavine 的選票。


: Were you surprised that no player was elected into the Hall of Fame on
: Wednesday?:

你對於週三沒有任何球員被選入名人堂這件事感到訝異嗎？


: “The reporters must have been at the computer and electronics show that you
: guys have going on out there in Vegas, and they must have got their wires
: mixed up. I was a little shocked, yeah. I think greatness should be respected
: and acknowledged as greatness.”

「這些記者肯定是去了你們這邊搞的那個什麼電腦電子秀, 而且肯定是把腦子給電壞
了。對啦, 我是有點驚訝。我認為偉人應該被尊敬, 且被認可為偉人。」


: Do you think that writers should be in charge of that vote?:

你認為作家應該主導投票嗎？


: “No, I don’t think the writers should be in charge of anything, as a matter
: of fact. … I think you should have had been at games, should have some kind
: of credible knowledge of what’s going on during the era of which you’re
: voting. … I guess to vote, all you need to do is have 10 consecutive years
: as a sportswriter. Some of these guys haven’t been at a ballpark in 20
: years, some of them haven’t turned on the TV in 10, and yet they have a
: vote. I don’t get any of that. When they were in charge of this sanctuary,
: they were in charge because they were the only ones to view the games live.

「說真的，我覺得這些作家根本不應該主導任何事情。…我認為你應該要參與球賽、應
該對你負責投票的年代擁有某種程度的知識。…現在是你只要連續當超過十年運動作家
就能投嘛, 對吧。這裡面有些人根本二十年沒去過球場, 有些根本十年沒看轉播, 可是
他們還是能投票。根本就沒道理好嗎？以前那個年代, 是因為他們是唯一看過現場比賽
的人, 才把他們選為這個聖殿的老大的啊。


: They were the only ones in St. Louis to watch Stan Musial; they were the only
: ones in New York Polo Grounds to watch Willie Mays. Now everyone watches and
: everyone has an opinion on it and that voting should be given to those who
: pass a test before they vote.”

只有他們在聖路易看過 Stan Musial 打球; 只有他們在紐約的馬球球場看過 Willie
Mays 打球。這年頭大家都能看球, 大家都有自己的看法, 所以要能投票, 應該至少要
有個門檻才對吧。」


: If the fans should be part of the vote:

球迷是否應該參與投票


: “It’s the fans of the future that we’re handing over the game to and we’
: re handing these Hall of Fame inductees to. I think that they should have
: some kind of voice. I’m not sure how you regulate that and how you make that
: happen, either. The world is closing in on us and the information age that we
: ’ve lived in and now the computer age that we’re living in will solve all
: those problems.”

「我們是把球賽和這些名人堂成員交棒給未來的球迷。我認為他們應該擁有某種形式的
發言權。我不太確定這應該怎麼規範, 也對執行方式不太有概念。不過現在這個資訊時
代, 我們與世界的距離一直在縮短, 現在這個電腦時代會解決這些問題。


: Who do you think got snubbed the most of this year’s potential inductees?:

就今年的潛在成員而言, 你覺得誰被搶最大？


: “Barry Bonds is the best player I’ve ever seen play. How can he not be in
: the Hall of Fame? It just goes against thought and reason. And Clemens, if you
: ’re supposed to dominate and era and that’s going to be your ticket to
: fame, I don’t think anyone dominated their era like Roger did. If you’re
: the best at your position, and you have a catcher who accumulated the
: statistics that Mike Piazza did as a catcher, or a second baseman who got
: 3,000 hits, how do you keep these guys out? I don’t get it.”

「Barry Bonds 是我看過最厲害的球員。名人堂不選他是什麼道理？這根本不合邏輯。
還有 Clemens, 如果你能稱霸你的世代, 應該就能為你拿到名人堂的入場券, 而我不認
為那個世代有任何人擁有比他更強的宰制力。如果你是你那個位置的最佳球員, 如果你
能在捕手這個位置累積到 Mike Piazza 的那個成績, 或者身為二壘手打到三千安, 怎
麼可能不讓這些人進啊？我不懂。」


: Biggio’s numbers aren’t off the charts, but he did it for so long. So in
: your eyes, he’s a Hall of Famer?:

Biggio 沒有那種突破天際的成績, 可是維持了這麼長的時間。所以就你的看法, 他是
名人堂成員？


: “Again, it’s the Hall of Records, and 3,000 hits is one of those goals.
: Everybody with 3,000 hits, except for, I guess, the guy with the most hits in
: the history of the game, Pete Rose, and Barry Bonds, are in the Hall of Fame.
: So how can he not be?”

「我之前說過, 這是紀錄堂, 而三千安就是標的之一。每個三千安的人, 除了我猜歷史
上安打最多的那個, Pete Rose, 還有 Barry Bonds, 除了他們之外所有人都進名人堂
了。所以他有什麼道理不行？」


: Next year, Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux make the ballot. They’ve got to make
: it right away, right?:

明年 Tom Glavine 和 Greg Maddux 都會在選票上。他們馬上就會進吧？


: “Yeah, great statistics. They pitched in the umpire-widened-strike zone era.
: Are we going to put an asterisk because those pitches that were outside were
: called strikes? It gets ridiculous the more you look at things and the more
: you wonder why we do things here, the more you have to question this. They
: should definitely be in, Maddux for sure.”

「嗯, 成績是很棒啦。他們是在好球帶放寬的世代投球。我們應該因為他們有些好球帶
外面的球被判好球而給他們一個星號嗎？你想得越多, 這整件事就越荒謬, 而你越思考
我們做事的方法, 就會越來越質疑這件事。他們當然應該進, 尤其 Maddux。」





其實除了 20 年沒看球那段之外都翻的 OK 了, 只是有點精簡

--


                                      "問おう、貴方が私のマスターか？"

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 114.32.81.146
※ 編輯: uranusjr        來自: 114.32.81.146        (01/13 21:06)
推 jshuang:Bonds 沒有 3000H
推 ygjhsu:有看有推
推 mess0706:Bonds*沒3000安還不是被默契封殺的關係...
推 siliver:推~~~~~~~
推 abc12812:Bonds被IBB太多次才沒達陣 打擊不要那麼強的話早就三千了
推 jshuang:記錄上就是沒有 3000H 啊. -_-
推 mika0120:3000H沒有可是IBB跟HR都很誇張啊
→ geneaven:安打要幹嘛,六成OBP已經不是人了還要什麼證明
→ mygoing:已經不是人了 所以能證明什麼??
推 hbk20491:2000h 裡面1000轟  還要3000h做啥
→ kiuo:jshuang應該是指倒數第三段,8bv在講3000H時提到Bonds
推 ccf0423:1F的意思大概是說8BV記錯bonds沒有三千安...
推 hydeplus:語不驚人死不休
推 mess0706:是沒有三千安啊，不過也跟三千安沒什麼兩樣了XD
→ a12582002:差65隻3000H IBB 688
推 jshuang:一串下來 總算有人看懂了... -_-
推 MTal:拿麥狗出來講有點說不通,好球帶放寬是那個世代所有投手都享受
→ MTal:到的標準,但服用特殊藥品則是部份投/打者...雖然聯盟當時是睜
→ MTal:隻眼閉隻眼...
推 langeo:真的只有部分有吃嗎?不是說有103條好漢名單 搞不好公布出來
→ langeo:整個90年代都要歐罵罵了
推 CGary:肯定只有部分～ 只是這部份不知道是那部分 所以所有人都得有
→ CGary:罪了 這件事情無解的。
→ cha122977:說真的 沒有規定不能吃 那你不吃試你的選擇 沒啥不公平
推 kuyung:就像期末考老師沒說不能open book 有人帶書老師沒抓
→ kuyung:考完後成績照算 但也有人開書考成績比沒開書的爛
→ kuyung:然後愈來愈多人考試開書考 還是有人堅持不這麼做
→ kuyung:N年後老師宣布禁止open book 放話取消之前開書考的人的成績
推 Bagwell5:kuyung大的比喻非常貼切
推 super009:不過事實上 成績還是掛在官方紀錄上 並沒說要不承認啊
推 mightymouse:BB沒open book就已經是同年級裡最強的學生了,只是加了
→ mightymouse:open book他馬上可以挑戰史上最強校友,結果一堆根本
→ mightymouse:連校友也不是的評審委員不知哪裡不爽??
推 mightymouse:不過禁藥可能不是只有open book那麼簡單,禁藥之所以會
→ mightymouse:變成禁藥,是因為會傷身體的壞處,不是成績會提升的好處
→ mightymouse:一個要如果能提升成績,而且完全不傷身,是不會變禁藥的
→ mightymouse:沒有明文禁止時,你用你的身體健康換取成績是不好的,可
→ mightymouse:是拿這來說處罰人實在很沒道理
推 bkm1:其實進的了選票名單 想想就不該用加*去看待 不然就直接剔除
推 tinghsi:完全認同8bv的話 投票的人到底在想啥
推 kuyung:Open book的比喻不是我原創的 是之前版友的比喻XD
推 javatea:棒子就是屌!!
→ kuyung:想想也是 有意見就修改入選資格 連資格都不給你不是比較好?
→ kuyung:(題外話)open book考前不用特別認真準備 所以可能考完還是
→ kuyung:啥都不會 這應該算壞處吧XD 吃禁藥就不用花那麼多時間訓練
→ kuyung:但還是有吃藥也很認真訓練的(開書考但考前認真準備)
推 maxspeed150:打類固醇只是讓肌肉長多一點快一點 可是不練還是永遠
→ maxspeed150:不會長........
推 kuyung:我剛剛想起投MVP給他的不就是BBWAA的那群人嗎?
推 wasiwatery:難得同意大情人的看法
推 sinotrade:以球員身體健康來評禁藥的話，Baker也算一種禁藥了lol
推 LuisB:不可思議的是 整整十幾年的藥物/類固醇濫用年代裡
→ LuisB:有很大力量代表輿論的BBWAA這些成員做了些什麼?
→ LuisB:跟著聯盟吹捧自己領高薪? 視而不見當作沒這回事?
→ LuisB:跟Selig一樣 當年毫無作為 現在卻把自己當成正義使者
→ LuisB:這些人應該讓球員/球迷投票檢討 超過75%才有資格投票
→ ReeJan:t the computer and electronics show that you
→ ReeJan:以上這句話是指在拉斯維加斯舉行的CES Show...翻得真爛
→ ReeJan:英文不懂中文不通的就少誤導大眾了 版主出來管吧
推 Kinra:樓上如果你看不出Valentine的語氣就是想表達他根本不care那
→ Kinra:個show的話，我想你還不到可以批評這篇譯文的程度……