I saw the argument in the game thread....

[veryzer]

this is how i sum up the play: lou called for a suicide squeeze. had fontenot executed it, it would have worked and the cubs would have won. so how can it be retarded? if fontenot lays the bunt down, the cubs win. the play would have worked had it been done right. therefore, the call wasn't retarded, the execution of the call was retarded. it was a good call. was it the best call? maybe, maybe not. but the play is predicated on the element of surprise and to that end it worked perfectly because no one saw it coming. fontenot is a retard, not lou.

i'm done with this now.