With deGrom on the mound and his doppelgänger onstage tonight, how can we lose?
Most of the time, my day job–a seasonal one–does not overlap the baseball season by more than a month or so on either end. Citi Field in April is often freezing, so any disappointment I have about missing games here and there because of performances I must play at the Met is mitigated by at least knowing that I’ll be warm and dry in the pit that day or evening. With “meaningless” games in September being pretty much a Queens hallmark, and with the start of school for my daughter and the resumption of work for me demanding our attention, being obligated to perform at the Met and having to miss a game in September has often been something of a relief.
This year, it’s different. Way different.
Once it was determined that Citi Field would see its first ever post-season game this past Monday, I was both ecstatic and crushed. While there can be some flexibility in my schedule, Monday’s opera was Wagner Tannhaüser with Maestro James Levine conducting. It had probably been scheduled as such five years ago.
As accommodating and sympathetic as our Orchestra Manager is in general and to this dilemma in particular, he basically told me that my “team” needed me at the Met. As disappointed as I was, I reminded myself that–just as with relief pitchers–fine musicians are “specialists” at what we do: not just anyone can be “called up” to replace us, even with advance notice.
Like all Mets fans, I was thrilled that the Mets beat Kershaw in Game 1 in Los Angeles. For me, the win took on even more significance: I now knew that I would be able to attend at least ONE post-season game at Citi Field–Game 4 of the series.
I’m glad I was there, but they didn’t win and the series would not be decided in four games. A return to Los Angeles and an additional game would be required. And, wouldn’t you know it, Game 5 will be played while I am involved in playing–you guessed it: Tannhaüser at the Met.
As on Monday night, the curtain for tonight’s performance of Tannhaüser is 7PM. The three acts with intermissions (during which I can find out what’s going on at Dodger Stadium), total about four and a half hours.
I couldn’t be at Citi Field for Game 3, and I cannot be near a television tonight for Game 5. That said, a repeat of last Monday’s performance–both baritone Peter Mattei’s heart-rending portrayal of Wolfram von Eschenbach and the Mets stellar offense and victory–will be most welcome nice again.
When I hear Mattei’s meltingly gorgeous rendition of O du, mein holder Abendstern (Ode to the Evening Star)in Scene II of Act III, I’ll be offering my own inward prayer that there will be a star shining over Chavez Ravine to guide my Mets to victory and a trip home to play Chicago–whether I’m in attendance for Game 1 of the NLCS at Citi Field or not!
Ideally, the New York Mets would learn a lesson from last night’s public relations fiasco. I doubt that will happen, but it’s possible.
Unconfirmed news of Wilmer Flores’ and Zach Wheeler’s imminent departure from the Mets and their subsequent replacement in the form of the Brewers’ Carlos Gomez spread like wildfire on social media during the game–in which Wilmer Flores was playing. If you’re a Mets fan, you’ve caught wind of most aspects of this farce, but here’s the latest in case you had not heard: Carlos Gomez is rumored, repeat RUMOREDto have been traded to the Houston Astros.
But don’t quote me on Twitter. Please.
Look, anyone who’s spent any amount of time on social media has penned at least one post or Tweet that he or she regrets and has had to then suffer whatever subsequent fallout came of the impropriety. “Tweet and delete” or suffer the consequences should be the admonition, I suppose.
But if you are a business or professional organization, just as damning are the social media posts that you do NOT make.
In the aftermath of last night’s widespread misinformation and the toll it took, a whole lot of outrage and fingerpointing ensued–at reporters, at social media itself, and at the Brewers. I contend that the blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the New York Mets themselves.
No doubt there were leaks from insiders who should’ve known better than to open their mouths just yet. Perhaps overzealous reporters and bloggers enthusiastic to be first with a story neglected to underscore the “pending physicals” part of the narrative. Perhaps exuberant fans were just as impetuous in swiftly retweeting the “news” of the not-quite done deal. And perhaps Brewers management jumped the gun in informing Gomez himself that he had been traded.
One could even argue that Terry Collins was culpable in the debacle by not sending Geren or someone else to find out what the heck was going on off the field, what with his shortstop crying on the field and the fans cheering wildly for the same player’s next plate appearance, even though said player had not started a game since the previous Thursday and, thus far in the game, had garnered only a single and a strikeout.
The fact that Collins later stated that he had been oblivious to his player’s emotions and the strange crowd reaction furthers my belief that Terry Collins’ knowledge and management acumen are incommensurate with those required for his position.
However, in this particular case, I actually felt badly for Collins. Terry Collins had been “had” just as much as his player..
Through their mis-, or rather, non-communication, management essentially hung Collins out to dry: by not alerting him to the viral communications that were sure to reach his players at some point during the game–communication that they had to know might very well engender a reaction by the unsuspecting Flores himself; by not contacting Collins to request that he pull Flores since the trade was at the very least a remote possibility and the possibility of pulling out a win at this point in the game seemed highly unlikely anyway; by not contacting Collins immediately requesting Flores’ removal from the game the moment that it became obvious that everyone at Citi Field knew what had supposedly transpired except for Flores himself, thereby at least affording him the opportunity to process the information in the the clubhouse instead of under the scrutiny of millions of television viewers; and by making Terry fend for himself in the post-game interview, causing him to appear more bollixed than usual in his nightly interrogations by the media.
Leaks happen. In sports organizations, in big business, in the White House. Any expectations an organization might entertain of silencing loose lips entirely are probably delusional. And, in fact, business leaders and managers have been known to intentionally float rumors themselves to test the response, drum up interest, or to otherwise serve their own interests.
Reporters are often leaked information. In the absence of verification, each reporter must then choose whether to disseminate the message immediately or to wait for confirmation. This is nothing new.
What IS relatively new is the speed with which any message may be disseminated and the sheer volume of disseminators of that message. Some reporters and bloggers possess thousands of followers, and each one of those followers has the technical capabilities to further disseminate the message just as expediently to his or her own cadre of followers.
For those of us of a certain age, a certain Faberge shampoo commercial comes to mind:
For better or worse, we live in an age where a message may go viral regardless of its validity, its decency, or the number of people who may agree with its sentiments.
Smart business owners and managers are aware of and respect social media’s influence and are pro-active in the forming of their own narrative…or counteracting a negative one. One cannot simply sit back and blame social media; businesses must now work actively not only to circumvent misinformation and negative publicity but they must also work to ENGAGE those so passionate about their product, in this case the New York Mets.
A public statement by the Mets, indicating that the deal was not in place, disseminated to those reporters and bloggers, could have squelched the rampant inaccuracies. Or, at the very least, if the Mets did not want to go public during the game, they should’ve been proactive in alerting the unsuspecting player and manager about the possible trade as well as the out-of-control social media messages. It would have been the only decent thing to do.
The Mets’ lack of communication meant that the crowd at Citi Field was privy to what would prove to be misinformation, unrefuted, that Flores had been traded. How shocking it must have been to Flores to come to the realization that thousands of people had known about what, had it transpired as reported, would have represented a profound change in his professional and personal life. And he and his manager had been the last two individuals to know.
Mets management’s offense last night was an act of omission, not commission, but as such was just as heinous.
Mets management’s silence resulted in embarrassing and humiliating two of its valued employees in a very public way.
Businesses ignore advances in data communications at their own peril.
“It’s a whole new world,” some would say. “Who would’ve known that something could’ve gone viral like that?” It’s not new, and many have experienced first-hand social media’s potential for negative fallout. There are many cautionary tales out there–businesses large and small that have made missteps as well as individuals publicly shamed on social media for a contentious tweet or a public action, sometimes to the point of the individual having to go into hiding. A certain dentist that shot a beloved lion comes to mind.
Not only are there lessons to be learned from others’ mistakes, but businesses and professional organizations are now investing time and money to learn how best to harness social media’s power for good as well as how to limit its potential for adverse messages. It is not uncommon for a company to hire additional personnel to serve as a social media team or for companies to hire consultants to coach existing public relations personnel on employing this method of audience engagement.
One does not even need to hire a consultant, though. Advice and detailed blunders abound on the Internet.
Here are just a few relevant articles I found in a quick Google search:
Social media experts will tell you: having a social media presence is not just about promoting your product. And, believe it or not, it’s not just about having a megaphone through which to refute inaccuracies (although that tool could definitely have been employed to the Mets’ benefit last night about this time.)
It’s about ENGAGING your audience or customers.
I say “audience” because I am a contributor to the Met Orchestra’s Social Media Team and, as such, have worked diligently with my colleagues to generate interest and enthusiasm about our ensemble as well as to create a DIALOGUE with our listeners and fans in the creation and upkeep of our website, Facebook page, and Twitter account.
Those who would blame reporters and/or social media for Wilson Flores’ tears miss the point: generating buzz about the team and getting fans excited and engaged and joining in the conversation on potential trades or other team or player news is a good thing.
It was decidedly not a good thing that the New York Mets either vastly underestimated the power of social media or had heretofore been blissfully ignorant of its immediacy and power. In this day and age, it is simply not enough to wait until the next business day for a carefully crafted “statement” to be issued. All the Mets would have needed to do was tweet a simple reminder that the deal was in fact not yet done and something to the effect of, “We appreciate your interest and your enthusiasm, fans! We will verify the trade here on Twitter just as soon as it happens! Stay TUNED!” They could have gone even further and generated their own attention-getting hashtag, e.g., “#MetsMarket”.
Face it, Mets owners and management, you blew it: you were silent when you should’ve provided some clarification–to your fans, to your manager, and to Wilmer Flores. Well before the news came that there would in fact be no trade, you had managed to make Mets fans feel positively crummy about a transaction that we would otherwise have had every reason for which to be ecstatic. Following a game that the team had won and in which Lucas Duda had homered three times, your inability or unwillingness to respond appropriately to the situation that had transpired had managed to effectively suck all of the “feel good” out the evening for a lot of us.
Wilmer Flores was not the only one feeling miserable at the end of the evening.
“Words – so innocent and powerless as they are, as standing in a dictionary, how potent for good and evil they become in the hands of one who knows how to combine them.” –Nathaniel Hawthorne
Tonight’s the night all Metsdom has been waiting for: the Major League debut of top prospect, pitcher Noah Syndergaard. He arrives on the Major League stage at Wrigley Field accompanied by much fanfare and already in possession of a nickname: “Thor”.
The genesis of the nickname was Syndergaard’s Halloween costume this past October, a photo of which he tweeted and which was then retweeted widely. Naturally, the blogosphere is having great fun with the nickname and its associations with the Marvel Comics superhero and subsequent movie of the same name as well as the character’s original incarnation in Nordic mythology as the God of Thunder.
However, as an opera lover, “Thor”, conjures up something different to me. At the mention of “Thor”, I hear softly murmuring arpeggios in the cellos. Then, I hear the Violas joining in. Then the Second Violins. And, finally, the First Violins. The undulating sextuplets I hear in my mind are the magical introduction to Thor and his sorcery as written by Wagner in his opera DasRheingold.
But I’m getting ahead of myself.
First, I should mention Wagner’s god has a slightly different name: Donner. The Old German equivalent of the Norse “Thor” is “Donar”. Donar’s name day, as it were, became Donnerstag “Donar’s day”, otherwise known to us English-language speakers as “Thursday”.
But I digress.
Arthur Rackham’s depiction of Donner.
German composer Richard Wagner spent years composing a Ring Cycle comprised of four operas, based upon Donner and other gods of Norse mythology. The first opera, Das Rheingold, is performed as one act–with no intermissions. The four scenes of the opera meld seamlessly into one another, and there is no break in the music or drama from the beginning until the end, about two hours and forty minutes later.
During the opera, a lot of action has taken place in this amount of time. The viewer has watched the Rheinmaidens extol the virtues of their gold, a character steal the gold from them, a god and his accomplices descend to that character’s underworld to claim the gold for themselves, two giants subsequently lay claim to the gold, and finally, one giant bludgeoning his giant brother in order to seize his brother’s share of the gold. Oh, and before the grisly murder, there is an appearance by Erda, the earth goddess, who forecasts gloom and doom for those who are consumed by this gold (more specifically, a ring forged from said gold, but you get the idea.)
Towards the very end of the opera, there is an exhilarating moment for Donner, a role for bass-baritone. After all of the mayhem and madness following a goddess coming up out of the ground unannounced and a bloody fratricide, Donner decides that it is time to, literally, clear the air. The god of thunder and storms conjures up a thunderstorm meant to dispel the fog and general discontent.
Donner’s glorious invocation to the heavens, summoning the cleansing mists, is stirringly answered by four French horns, playing in unison. The ensuing winds and storm rage as the string arpeggios morph into an ascending scale, by the whole orchestra, gradually increasing in intensity and dynamic until, [ding], Donner wields his hammer to dispel the storm and, how operatic, a rainbow then magically appears.
I happen to really like this video interpretation of the scene, set to an *audio recording of the opera excerpt:
*Eberhard Wächter with the Vienna Philharmonic, conducted by Georg Solti.
It’s a magical moment in music.
I don’t know what kind of magic Mr. Syndergaard might wield on the mound this evening or in his starts to come. But this optimistic Mets fan can’t help but hope for signs of a dominating talent.
We are fourteen games in. Grandstanding seems oh so premature.
But can I just say this? How great is it to put on one’s Mets gear these days and be greeted in the grocery store, on the street, or at work with a smile and a, “How about those METS?!”
“…and I pit- y any- one who’s not a Met to- night…”
“…such a pretty pitch, such a pretty hit, such a pretty steal, such a pretty streak!”
Puts a little swagger back in one’s step…just in time for the upcoming Subway Series.
One of countless things I love about having a career as an artist is being afforded the opportunity to personally observe an individual’s perspective–my own or that of a member of my family or a friend–with regard to a particular work of art and how that perspective can change over time due to any number of reasons. With repeated viewings or listenings, and thus familiarity, it is to be expected that one’s response to and estimation of any work of art is altered. But more intriguing to me is that one’s interpretation of a work can morph for contextual reasons unrelated to the artistic experience itself: events in one’s personal life, the current political climate, or even the season in which the experience takes place.
If it’s an opera we’re talking about, one obvious catalyst for edification can simply be seeing and hearing a different cast sing the same opera. Also, because the conductor leading the proceedings can greatly influence a performance, and thus one’s response, the same could be said of seeing the opera led by a different conductor. Likewise, seeing the same opera in another production or in another opera house can elicit a revelation.
Often, as a performer, I find I am able to gain perspective from those in the audience.
*******
As I write this, I have now performed the first of seven scheduled performances of the gargantuan (time-wise, anyway) opera Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg by Richard Wagner. Anyone who knows Wagner knows that he would never use one reiteration of a theme when ten would do. “Ah, but it’s in the subtle ways he changes those themes!” say fans; detractors cite physical pain and serious time commitment as deterrents to their enjoyment of his works.
I happen to love playing Wagner. He wrote beautifully for the orchestra and, for those who delve into the score, there are all kinds of “hidden”, often humorous, asides and commentary upon the characters and actions onstage from “voices” within the orchestra. Many times the orchestra functions either as a character itself or in the role of revealing an unknown truth about a character. Fascinating stuff!
That said, Meistersinger is truly one of the most challenging works that we play as an orchestra if for no other reason than its duration. There are operas that are almost as long, Götterdämmerung for example (by Wagner…who else?), but the difference is that the first act of Götterdämmerung lasts a little over two hours. The two acts following it are proportionally not nearly as long.
In the case of Meistersinger, it is the final act that is the long one, clocking in at over two hours.
I like to compare the challenge of playing Meistersinger to the Tour de France. Ever notice how those god-awful hills are often near the very end of a day’s exhausting stage through Les Alpes? Climbs are assigned difficulty incrementally from Catégorie 4 (easiest) to Catégorie 1 (hardest). But then there are those mountain passes that are even more impossibly steep and/or the cyclists approach them at such a late time in the stage–when they are most fatigued. These climbs are considered beyond even the challenge of Catégorie 1 and are termed hors catégorie, or “beyond categorization”.
*****
I played Meistersinger my first season and have played every single performance in every revival that has taken place in my twenty-two seasons at the Met. It is not news to me that it is a marathon. But thanks to two separate events this week, I have a slightly different, and welcome, view of the challenge it presents to audience members.
(1) Prior to the 6PM curtain of Die Meistersinger this past Tuesday, our piccolo player Stephanie Mortimore, was on the subway going to work. A few violinist colleagues happened to board the same car and a discussion about the impending long evening of work ahead ensued. Eavesdropping on their conversation, a woman who was obviously on her way to the Met as well commented to the musicians that she and her companion were not anticipating that that they would make it to the bitter end. “Well, it’s not like we have a choice,” Stephanie replied with a smile. Apparently, the fiddle cases had not registered with the couple, so Stephanie explained. “We’re in the Met Orchestra. We’ll be there for the WHOLE THING.”
(2) Then today, friends of mine composed a blog post detailing their personal experiences surrounding this very same performance. It happened to be their first time to ever see the opera. I found their post witty, knowledgeable, and insightful. I particularly liked the way each of them mentioned preparations they had made in advance of the performance–professionally as well as personally–in order to maximize their stamina and longevity for the siege ahead. In spite of their precautions, however, back pains and worries of deep-vein thrombosis marred their experience at least somewhat. They were suitably proud to report that they, unlike many seated near them in the Dress Circle, had not only made it to the beginning of Act III but were still there for the climactic Festwiese at the very end.
The thought had never occurred to me, I suppose, that those in the audience do have the option of leaving before the end of the opera and that this could be either a premeditated plan or that they could fuggi on a whim.
Trust me, I am aware that audiences often high-tail it out of the opera house if they don’t like the production or the singing that night or if they become physically ill or if they just find themselves tired after a long day at the office. I get that.
But what I had failed to think of before was (1) how daunting some audience members apparently find attending this particular opera–enough so to give a disclaimer to strangers on the subway or (2) how having attended this opera in its entirety clearly bestows certain merit.
My next thought was that that sense of personal pride and accomplishment should be encouraged and even rewarded in some tangible way. Perhaps those exiting at 12:10AM or so could have their tickets stamped by ushers upon their exit. Later, these “survivors” could go to the Met Opera Shop and present their stamped ticket stubs in exchange for a pin or a T-shirt proclaiming “I SURVIVED DIE MEISTERSINGER!” or “MEISTER OPERAGOER” or some such sentiment.
Heck, why limit it to Meistersinger, though? What if those hard-core operagoers who sit through an entire opera of five hours’ length or more were to have their time, effort, and devotion acknowledged in some way? I’m imagining a Passport-like booklet to be given to audience members at performances of great length and each opera being assigned a unique stamp or sticker to be affixed that would only be made available at the conclusion of the opera.
But hundreds of words later, I must acknowledge that this is supposedly a blog devoted to baseball, and believe it or not, this post does in fact have a baseball tie-in:
This idea of a special memento being given to the most dedicated of opera enthusiasts was inspired by my knowledge of similar incentives given to die-hard baseball fans. The former ballpark of the San Francisco Giants, Candlestick Park, was infamous for its many bitterly cold games, primarily due to its proximity to the San Francisco Bay. In an effort to encourage the continued support of the team by the fans, management came up with the “Croix de Candlestick”. In the event of a night game that went into extra innings, those die-hard fans who stayed until the bitter(ly cold) end, were presented with this personal badge of honor upon exiting the ballpark.
Opera and baseball are performed/played to a fan base. Many of those fans are regulars and often make personal sacrifices to be in the house/stands for prolonged periods of time.
Shouldn’t the audience members themselves share in the accolades at the end of a long performance?
If you are in the audience at one of the Meistersinger performances in the upcoming weeks and you see me clapping in the pit at the end, please know that I am applauding YOU as well as the cast.
In the pit. In the dark. Playing the oboe. This is my “day job”.
A few of my Metropolitan Orchestra colleagues and I were featured in BLEEP magazine. You can read about the genesis of this blog as well as what my day job is like! And check out the whole article on the Met Orchestra.
How many times have we heard that expression? It has certainly proven true recently in this house of Mets fans.
The high praise recent lavished upon my husband–while certainly well deserved–is owed, in part at least, to coincidence and excellent timing.
A die-hard Mets fan basically from the infancy of the franchise, my husband never appears happier or more youthful than when attending a Mets game. He was recently rewarded handsomely for the hefty price of our Season Ticket package, not to mention the expenditure of vast amounts of his personal time spent watching the futility that is the Mets’ offense in general and with the bases loaded in particular: he got to throw out the Ceremonial First Pitch at Citi Field.
Apparently, the designated First Pitch Thrower du Jour was unable to “go on”, and a suitable “cover” had to be found. Citi Field officials need have looked no further.
While Garry showed no signs of being nervous about his assignment, as it got close to his scheduled performance, he did admit to a fear of spiking the ball. And ideally, he added, he would like to throw the ball so that Mets Catcher Anthony Recker would not need to leave his crouch in order to catch the ball. However, if either scenario were to happen, he reasoned aloud, he would be in good company: he recalled how former Mets ace Tom Seaver had thrown out the first pitch at “Shea Goodbye”–the last game at Shea Stadium–and had spiked the ball. He also recalled that when Seaver threw out the first pitch at the 2013 All-Star Game, his throw came in quite high and outside and had required former Mets Catcher Mike Piazza to leap to his feet in order to catch it.
Other than these minor concerns, Garry showed no signs of performance anxiety whatsoever. In fact, he appeared rather poised and purposeful. (See if you don’t agree from the photo!) Dutifully following the instructions he had been given to “follow David Wright” (!), he strode onto the field with aplomb. I will never forget the image of him shadowing Mets Pitcher Jon Niese.
Wisely electing to throw from in front of the mound, Garry did one heck of a job, and I was not the only one who thought so. He did not spike the ball nor did Recker need to leave his crouch in order to catch the ball. As the two posed for a photo together, Recker even complimented Garry on his pitch.
Later that evening, sitting in our Excelsior Level seats directly in front of WOR announcers Josh Lewin and Howie Rose–with whom we delight in having as our audio accompaniment to each and every home game–Garry found himself somewhat (pleasantly) distracted from the game itself–and his usual scorekeeping ritual–as compliments kept coming in:
Friend, Mets blogger, and auteur exceptionnelGreg Prince came down from the Press Box to personally shake Garry’s hand. (Later, he would even mention Garry in his blog post about that night!) Plaudits for Garry’s efforts came over the WOR airwaves and into our earbuds as Howie Rose gave Garry a shout-out and a verbal “pat on the back”, adding that, “D’Arnaud would’ve framed it for a strike.” As a matter of fact, Howie had begun discussing Garry’s pre-game experience and, before he could finish the story, he was interrupted by the Yasiel Puig Web Gem that would become a viral .gif before the Seventh Inning Stretch. Even after that astonishing play that had left everyone in the stands momentarily speechless and, then, had even Mets fans applauding, Howie remembered having introduced Garry’s tale, and returned to the subject. Flattering, to say the least!
Yes, timing was in Garry’s favor on Thursday, May 22nd: He happened to be at Citi Field earlier than usual for that night’s game in order to sample “Nobu Night” at the Acela Club; therefore, he could assure Mets personnel that he would indeed be on-hand at the prescribed time.
But the fortuitous timing to which I refer was actually tied to a later event. A few days later.
Still “after glowing” about his unique souvenir, he came home that night to find that word had quickly spread about his special opportunity, and emails demanding explanations and details were coming in at an alarming rate. He sat down at his computer and composed a short synopsis of how the event had come about, how he thought he had performed, and the critiques he had received. He attached one of the numerous photos that my daughter and I had each taken of him from our position on the warning track. He then sent the email out to all potentially interested parties.
Initially, he received a flurry of emails in response . Friday brought more feedback. By that weekend, responses had slowed somewhat, but as the work week started on Monday, replies came from those colleagues who had taken a long weekend and not checked their work email since earlier the previous week and, thus, had just found out Garry’s news.
On Tuesday, rapper 50 Cent was given Ceremonial First Pitch honors. And he proceeded to bring dishonor on himself, frankly.
First-pitch-related emails and texts to Garry recommenced. Friends’ and colleagues’ estimation of Garry’s feat shot up even higher. It had become quite obvious, even to those not having seen Garry’s throw, how poorly 50 Cent’s performance had measured up to Garry’s highly-touted outing only a few days before. Even non-Mets and non-baseball fans saw replays of Tuesday’s farce and were all too anxious to acknowledge Garry’s far superior performance.
Comparing the two men’s first pitches later, Howie Rose would even marvel–off the air–to Garry, “Grading on a curve, you are Sandy Koufax.” High praise indeed.
50 Cent has continued to extract from this episode every ounce of media hype possible for himself. Recently, he provided an attention-getting explanation for his poor outing that night. He also lives in infamy in an hysterical video that has since been created in which Vladimir Guerrero is seen “hitting” that ill-thrown pitch. Ah, but thanks to 50 Cent’s PR machine, Garry has vicariously continued to enjoy minor celebrity status, exceeding even Andy Warhol‘s predictions.
Serendipity had provided Garry the chance to live out a dream.
Coincidence allowed him to keep the dream alive for many more days to come.
UPDATE: The infamous first pitch throw will live on into the 2014 baseball season as Topps has confirmed that it will be issuing a baseball card “honoring” the pitch:
“Timing is everything.”
While Garry showed no signs of being nervous about his assignment, as it got close to his scheduled performance, he did admit to a fear of spiking the ball. And ideally, he added, he would like to throw the ball so that 
Wisely electing to throw from in front of the mound, Garry did one heck of a job, and I was not the only one who thought so. He did not spike the ball nor did Recker need to leave his crouch in order to catch the ball. As the two posed for a photo together, Recker even complimented Garry on his pitch.
50 Cent has continued to extract from this episode every ounce of media hype possible for himself. Recently, he provided an 