tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post5488983314009693898..comments2024-02-23T20:49:09.057-08:00Comments on obsessivegiantscompulsive: 2007 San Jose Giants Playoffs: Game 1 Division Championshipobsessivegiantscompulsivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-5698712354327131642007-09-10T17:13:00.000-07:002007-09-10T17:13:00.000-07:00Man, Fairley sounds like a real great guy. Everyo...Man, Fairley sounds like a real great guy. Everyone makes mistakes but he seems to be a "red flag" type of player.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-60335748335156797422007-09-09T22:29:00.000-07:002007-09-09T22:29:00.000-07:00Game 2 was pretty much the same story. Adam Cowart...Game 2 was pretty much the same story. Adam Cowart, called up from Augusta went 8 shut out innings and Taylor Wilding took the ninth. Home runs by the Travises (Ishikawa and Denker) provided the bulk of the offense. <BR/><BR/>I will give you a report from Visalia tomorrow night.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-74598458473934104902007-09-09T21:00:00.000-07:002007-09-09T21:00:00.000-07:00No problem, thought since I'm local, I would post ...No problem, thought since I'm local, I would post on this since it's in my daily newspaper, plus it was good news :^). But really, it was Denker with the homer and the pitching staff's nice game that got me to post it, it's a nice story. I'll continue to post, though, during the playoffs for the Giants, good or bad.<BR/><BR/>It's OK to ask anywhere, particularly in the latest post, there's no better way to do it. And I'm happy to try to answer any question anybody asks, to the best of my abilities.<BR/><BR/>Fairley had two blemishes that I know of, which was covered in the SF Chronicle: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/08/16/SPNERJ0IF.DTL<BR/><BR/>He participated in some sort of prank (seemed like hazing to me, not that it makes it right) of a teammate that brought charges initially but were later dropped. I assume that's the smaller mishap, though if you were the kid he did it to, it wasn't so small, just read the link on what exactly he did, I would be pretty pissed.<BR/><BR/>The other charge was a complaint that Fairley continued to see a 16-17 year old girl when the parents told him not to. He apprently later gave her a phone (I would guess to get around the rule of not seeing her), resulting in the parents filing a complaint that led to a misdemeanor conviction for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. According to what I read somewhere else, he's already a father, so I would have to assume that this girl is not the mother of his child, else the article would have noted that.<BR/><BR/>Not to be mean or to cast aspersions, but to recognize reality, now that he's a millionaire, I wonder if the charges will be ultimately dropped and the parents will allow their daughter to see Fairley. That's just how life works sometimes.obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-39917510438340879182007-09-09T20:12:00.000-07:002007-09-09T20:12:00.000-07:00Nice to know.I know this isn't the place to ask th...Nice to know.<BR/><BR/>I know this isn't the place to ask this but do you have any idea what brushes with the law Wendell Fairley had exactly? I know there was a small mishap and one larger one. Any ideas? I tried searching and couldn;t find anything. Not sure if you knew.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com