September 20

Is there any way that a batter can bunt for more than one base without an error in baseball? I've heard repeatedly that there isn't. 75.6.243.251 (talk) 00:33, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unless he can run much faster than anyone ever has and beat the throw to second, I doubt it. Any mistake made by the fielding team which allowed a regular runner to reach second would be ruled an error. --Daniel 00:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing in the rules prohibiting a double being scored on an infield hit, but as noted, I don't think that the physical limits of the human body would allow it. Just like a 3-second hundred-meter dash would be legal, but will never happen, I wouldn'e expect your scenario to every work out without an error. --Jayron32 01:11, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I googled [bunt double] and the first item that came up was this:[1] I haven't checked the individual entries at all. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:25, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That source actually links to a game description that says Furcal hit a "push bunt" over the head of the third baseman.[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:33, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrosheet for the first item specifically states that Furcal hit a bunt double to shortstop.[3] I wonder if any source elaborates on it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ESPN calls it a bunt double to left.[4] Most likely the shortstop was playing in and Furcal managed to bunt it over his head. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:31, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Novel use of a bunt; it's rare for a bunted ball to reach the outfield, but it seems a skilled player can place it over the head of an infielder and get a lucky roll, you could stretch it to a double. --Jayron32 02:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the Furcal case, and likely most of the others, the batter was trying to bunt his way on. If it were a sacrifice bunt, it seems very unlikely that the batter-runner would get to second without an error somewhere in the play. But I haven't checked any of the other cases. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:45, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't look at all of them, but in each case I looked at, the bunt was either leading off the inning or with first base otherwise open, so no one would have been expecting a bunt. One of the more interesting ones is this,[5] from 1997, in which there was a runner on second and the batter bunted a double which scored the run. I would have to think someone was napping on that play, but "mental errors" aren't in the box score. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that uncommon; I remember

Endy Chavez doing it twice within the space of a couple of weeks early in the 2003 season; the third baseman was playing very close, expecting a bunt to be dropped in front of him; instead Chavez bunted the ball over his head down the left field line for an easy double. Opposing teams quickly adjucted and did not bring in their third baseman quite so much after that. These days, a lot of teams are using extreme defensive shifts against left-handed power hitters, with the third baseman playing at the normal shortstop position. A bunt down the third base line could be an easy double in that situation as well. --Xuxl (talk) 07:51, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

That might also account for discrepancies in the accounts: shortstop vs. third base vs. left field. When I score a game I specify who picked it up rather than whatever field it was hit to, but I don't know if that's conventional. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lowell Harris is trying to rape Olivia, but Fin manages to save Olivia's life. Fin manages to arrest Harris. In the Interrogation, Harris's lawyer shows up. Olivia says, "Harris tried to rape me." Harris lies, "I wasn't trying to rape Olivia."

Does Harris's lawyer believe that Harris was trying to rape Olivia?(Sean Archer123 (talk) 01:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Did anyone see Frequency? Isn't it a cool movie?(Sean Archer123 (talk) 07:22, 20 September 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Sorry but this is not the place to discuss your views on the film Frequency. Find a forum or something. --Viennese Waltz 07:25, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have lots of cool movies, but maybe that's because I store them in the refrigerator. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is someone able to answer my questions about the movie called Frequency? When Frank goes to the Nightclub, Detective Jack Sheppard knocks out Frank. Jack's none other than a killer. When Detective Satch finds Frank's license at a crime scene, Satch has to take Frank to the Police Station. Inside the Interrogation Room, does Frank tell Satch that he got knocked out by Jack in a Nightclub? How come Satch refuses to interrogate Jack?(99.88.78.94 (talk) 14:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Sean, you're close to getting blocked for these kinds of questions. You should take them to a forum somewhere, which this ain't. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk, I posted questions about Superhero Movie. Why I can't post questions about the movie called Frequency?(Sean Archer123 (talk) 20:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Most of these questions are only answerable if some either had just watched the movie/show, had repeatedly watched it many times, or had an uncommonly specific memory. You obviously know much more about the movies/shows than we do, so why don't you know the answers to your own question? Also, repeatedly badgering users on their talk pages to watch things for you is coming across as rude and annoying. —Akrabbim^talk 20:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a child in the early 90's I saw a feature film for kids on video. From the characters' names in it (which I can't exactly remember) I guess it was American, but had been dubbed into my mother tongue (Hungarian).

The heroine (about 12-14 years old) suffered an accident during sledging, lost consciousness and almost the whole story was about her nonsense adventurous dreams with people from her real life, until she wakes up in hospital. (I seem to remember that some male relative of her also appeared in it with his woman, and a mean shop manager.) I would like to find it, but as you can see, I cannot recall any concrete information to look up in a database, so I would appreciate your help. Javorticella (talk) 15:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Javorticella[reply]

Not sure, but it sounds like a rip-off of The Wizard of Oz, where the heroine (Dorothy, about 12-14 years old) suffered an accident during a tornado, lost consciousness and almost the whole story was about her nonsense adventurous dreams with people from her real life, until she wakes up in bed. So, if we have a category "Children's films based on the Wizard of Oz", that might be a good place to search. StuRat (talk) 16:27, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Except for the part about waking up in hospital (chubby little Drew Barrymore wakes up at her home), this sounds an awful lot like Babes in Toyland (1986 film). The whole thing has been posted (in ten parts) on YouTube if you want to check. Deor (talk) 22:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! Yes, I was unsure about the hospital thing, too, but I didn't want to further increase the size of my post. :-) Bye, Javorticella (talk) 08:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the music playing in the background of this YouTube clip?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUf02rMBOZo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.216.15 (talk) 19:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The BBFC say the classification is primarily for pornography, but not that it is exclusively so. Are there any exceptions? If there are any ambiguous cases, what may they be? Thanks. --Leon (talk) 22:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to think that some violent content would be seen as being at least as unacceptable as sexual content. HiLo48 (talk) 23:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

R18s can only be sold in licensed sex shops or sold in licenced sex cinemas, so the main market is sexually-explicit films; some sources say the certificate was created explicitly for porn[6]. But whether they're all pornographic depends on your definition of pornography. Until 1997 it was illegal to show penetration even in an

BBFC does not supply consumer advice (the bad language/sex/theme/violence warnings) for R18 films. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:01, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

So I saw this back in June or so. What has become of the good Foreskin Man since then? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 23:35, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He's in hospital recuperating from a computer mishap: smegmabytes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure this wasn't a Chick tract? This sounds like the kind of evil that man peddles. --Jayron32 00:41, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Given the subject matter, I doubt he's into chicks. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:44, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's where I remember this from! I think I recall something similar to this in a Chick tract. Dismas|^(talk) 00:47, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and you can see more of Foreskin Man at http://foreskinman.com/ Dismas|^(talk) 00:49, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I googled it for a giggle, and plenty of references popped up. It does appear that June is when they started to get into trouble, by creating a character called "Monster Mohel". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:53, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so he's moved on from beating up the villainous Jews to beating up the nasty barbaric Africans then. Without reading the comic, my own knowledge would say it's probably the Massa'i people of Kenya (given that they are known for practicing female circumcision). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 01:24, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you say that from Bugs's comment? A Mohel is Jewish (at least, usually). --Jayron32 03:05, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Step 1: Click Link to foreskinman.com; Step 2: See Issue 3 of the comic at the top which has tribal Africans. :p Monster Mohel appears to be the first villain; followed by the Orthodox and then finally Massa'i. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 03:12, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding step 1: I trust you; I will not be doing that as I have no desire to increment this asshole's page view counter by my visit. I was confused merely because your response to Bugs's comment. Carry on. --Jayron32 03:22, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HAHAHA XDDD, now I don't know why, but that really made me laugh. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 03:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I bit, since I think he's confused. [7] depicts "Monster Mohel", a gross Jewish stereotype, which betrays the total ignorance of its creator as to what circumcision is about, within Judaism. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:24, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. The creator's ignorance was one of the many reasons that people were offended. That is a rather offensive description. So, I guess the answer to the question is: He (Foreskin Man) is still pissng people off and the comics are still being produced. Is it worthy of an article or at least being added to a list of items under anti-Semetism in Popular Culture (or something along those lines). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 03:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find reliable third-party sources which discuss Foreskin Man, have at it. --Jayron32 03:36, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh believe me, I got'em (YNet, The Week, Huffington Post, ABC News, NY Daily News, etc.). I'll get to work on it soon. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 03:48, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. It's worth pointing out that Jews don't lack a sense of humor about circumcision, despite the solemnity of the rite. A joke from several generations ago, mentioned in Leo Rosten's The Joys of Yiddish: "The rabbi gets the salary and the mohel gets the tips." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my, yes, but it's usually best to leave it to Jews as few goyim know how to make a good Jew joke. You're close to getting a humor barnstar Bugs. Should it use the superhero template or is there a different one that would be better or what? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 03:48, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since all of my jokes are antiques, something old and corroded would be fitting. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:56, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody could tell a Jewish joke like Myron Cohen could. Unfortunately, there is very little youtube material of his.[8] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:59, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alan King told more generic jokes, but he would talk about his Jewishness from time to time.[9] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:05, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It has been started: Foreskin Man. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 00:04, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]