The following narrative and news item comes my way via a professional journalist (cue the oxymoron jokes) friend. Emphasis mine:
Now, when you’re in the sports information business, you generally highlight the exploits of your own team, not your opponents. With very, very, very rare exceptions. I’d say the eighth Division I perfect game in the last half-century might be one of those rare exceptions.
But nope, I’d be wrong. Because here is the George Washington write-up of the game:
The George Washington baseball team held No. 1 Virginia to just two runs on Tuesday evening at Davenport Field but were unable to compliment the strong pitching performance at the plate, falling 2-0.
GW (7-18) pitchers Tommy Gately, Kenny O’Brien and Craig Lejeune combined to hold Virginia (25-2) to just two runs on six hits. The top-ranked Cavaliers entered the game batting .297 as a team and averaging over seven runs per contest.
Hmmm. Ok. Tell me more.
Gately got the start for GW and pitched three innings, allowing just three hits and two earned runs with one strikeout. He worked his way out of a bases-loaded jam in the bottom of the third by inducing two pop outs.
Both Virginia runs were scored in the bottom of the fourth inning after Gately exited the game. Ryan Levine led off the frame with a single and Kenny Swab followed with a walk to put two on with no outs.
Gotcha. How about the Cavaliers? Did they do anything interesting?
Virginia would score their first run after Reed Gragnini reached on a fielders choice. Another run would score via a balk but O’Brien escaped the inning without any further damage and allowed just two hits over the next three innings.
Oh. Ok. And, uh, nothing else noteworthy? Wait, what’s this is the seventh paragraph?
The two runs were all the Cavaliers would need as starting pitcher Will Roberts was perfect on the mound, striking out 10 batters en route to the eighth nine-inning perfect game in NCAA Division I (since 1957) history and the first since 2002.
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.