Good post - I was watching the MASN broadcast last night when Thorne said this. I was tired from the day's work, so I thought I misheard and I sat there for a few minutes thinking everything I loved about Schilling was a lie. Then I got on the interwebs and Googled for all combinations of "bloody", "sock", and "hoax". Couldn't find anything. Had to convince myself that Thorne had said something else, and just kept watching the game.

Maybe he was trying to make a joke.

Couldn't agree more. Gotta love good, responsible multi-sourced journalism stirring up trouble, right?

I STILL haven't seen any quotes from Thorne where he says Dougie actually said this to him personally.

Everything is, "he confessed to it after."

What does that mean?

Or is Thorne just regurgetating that oft-repeated Yankees fan conspiracy theory?

I have no idea whether Schilling wore a sock with fake blood or not and I couldn't care less.

That said, while this post certainly suggests that Thorne can be sloppy (and whiny about stat providers), I'm not sure what any of it has to do with this particular instance.

Thorne said that Mirabelli told him something; Mirabelli denied it, which he would certainly do even if he did say it.

So someone's intentionally lying. A sloppy broadcaster or an athlete. Sloppy broadcasters say falsehoods on the air all the time and athletes lie all the time to the press.

I fail to see how Thorne's STATS/Elias whining has anything to do with who's telling the truth here, though.

I didn't know Yankees fans discussed the Sock, but I read an article where Curt's old Diamondback teammates were sure it wasn't blood. "Funny how the stain didn't get bigger," was what they said.

Thorne's lack of specificity as to whom, the statement was made, or when, etc. strongly suggests that he was repeating urban legend. The story has resonance, because we all notice a certain penchant for self-promotion in Schilling -- but really, is it more likely that it was actually blood, or that they had red paint at hand to doctor the sock with? There is no reason to think it wasn't blood, and Schilling is hardly the only ballplayer in this sport who would have played through some blood.

C'mon, would this face lie to us?

I like the Thorne/Palmer combo as one of the best I've seen/heard on MLB.TV. A few others: Bremer/Blyleven, Kalas/Wheeler (though these guys apparently ain't bosom buddies), Orsino/Remy, Cohen/Hernandez.

As for the sock story, Thorne isnt the first to express skepticism, and he won't be the last.

As for the Elias trivia, does David Pinto seriously expect anybody to care about this?

I think it is possible that Doug Mirabelli made a joke suggesting that it was just paint and this moron ran with it.

As to why it didn't get any bigger - that is simple. Blood does clot. The fibers from the sock probably helped form a temporary scar. And it probably opened up again when he removed his sock. I had that happen to me just last week when my feet were cut from walking too much in new shoes.

This all you need to know about Gary Thorne. "The fans are saying Louuuuuu for Paul Lo Duca" Note to Gray...its pronounced Low-Dooka..They're saying Doooook..what an idiot..

Oh heaven forbid the legendary bloody sock wasn't real - Sawx fans' heads would explode...

Personally? I think it was blood, but I also believe the stain was from earlier in the day and Curt left the sock on for effect. No way he wouldn't have been properly bandaged up by the trainer for game time.

Schilling just probably watched 'The Natural' one too many times.

Agree that the stain was from earlier in the day. Come on, it's impossible to believe that they couldn't or wouldn't have competently bandaged the incision before the game - and rebandaged it immediately if any blood seeped through.

Anyway, ESPN is running a vote - I'm not kidding - on whether the blood was real. So far real is winning but not overwhelmingly. Something like 57-43 last I checked. There's always been a lot of skepticism, not all of it from Yankee fans.

I do like the idea of DNA testing on the sock. If DNA can nail Thomas Jefferson for diddling Sally Hemmings, it's time to check Cooperstown.

Did I mention that I love this story?

God's truth - I'm listening to the Astros radio broadcast, and they're talking about this story.

This is great.

It could be from earlier in the day, but the sock was probably stuck to the wound. Removing the sock would cause the cut to open up and begin bleeding again. He had to keep it on.

this is stupid. first of all, big f'n deal about bleeding and still pitching! seriously!!!! what is the big deal?!?!?!?

secondly, Mike and Mike this morning talked about how the sock was put into the baseball HOF 10 months after it allegedly happend, byt Curt's family who literally walked it in. YOU DON'T PUT EVIDENCE IN THE HANDS OF THE DEFENSE!

it very well could've been created at a later time and let to sit and appear to be real.

I'm sorry, but that's exactly what I don't believe. If the incision was bandaged at all properly, the sock couldn't have been sticking directly to the skin. In any case, the sock and bandage could heve been easily removed, with local anaesthesia if necessary, and a new bandage applied.

My pet conspiracy theory is that there was some minor bleeding onto a couple of socks well before game time - maybe even before game day. The incision was quickly rebandaged, which stopped any further bleeding. Schilling then wore the bloody socks for effect during the two games.

Who knows? I love this story.

The ESPN vote is now 65-35 in favor of real blood. I voted real blood, too, though I have my doubts on exactly when the real blood got onto the socks.

Almost 50,000 votes when I last checked. I love this story.

I know there are several of you who appear to be practicing surgeons, but this is from Edes' Globe blog today:

Dr. Bill Morgan, the orthopedist who performed the innovative procedure on Curt Schilling's ankle that allowed him to pitch in the 2004 postseason, was dumbfounded to learn that Orioles broadcaster Gary Thorne, citing Sox catcher Doug Mirabelli as his source, said the blood on Schilling's game socks were not real.

"C'mon," Morgan said today from the Fallon Clinic in Worcester, "we all know what the reality is. I don't know where that comes from.

"I drilled a whole bunch of holes in the guy's ankle when we put the sutures in, we put a dressing on them, and the blood soaked through the dressing. The sock is like a sponge. It doesn't take a whole lot of blood, but there's like a capillary effect.''

I really think Thorne shoud be fired - why can he on the air, just lie like that. Were is the professionalism we depend on?
I say he should be fired...
anyone agree?

I really think Thorne shoud be fired - why can he on the air, just lie like that. Were is the professionalism we depend on?
I say he should be fired...
anyone agree?

Hm, the doc's story is interesting, he said conspiratorially. The doc seems to be saying the blood got through the bandage right after it was applied - or at least pretty quickly. So just when did that blood get onto the sock(s)? During the game, or well before, when the doc did the surgery?

I love this story.

Blood soaks through a dressing very quickly. A dressing isn't like a plastic Band-Aide; it's basically gauze with some white tape wrapped around the edges.

There's a reason why dressings need to be changed frequently. They allow blood to SOAK THROUGH.

Agree with Casey though. Fun stuff. A bit stupid, but fun.

So just when did that blood get onto the sock(s)? During the game, or well before, when the doc did the surgery?

Why would Schilling be wearing socks during ankle surgery? :)

Okay, I'm kidding, but it seems a somewhat unlikely explanation that Schilling would put socks on -- much less his game socks -- right after surgery. Quite the contrary, it strikes me as much more plausible that he would probably go sockless until the last possible minute, to make it easier to change the dressing. Then he puts on the socks, he stretches, he goes out to warm up, he pitches the first, some blood leaks through. After the first, they change the dressing in between innings, so the stain doesn't keep spreading.

Now, it's plausible to me that he might have worn the same sock in both games, and the stain might have been left over -- someone who has the DVDs handy could check to see whether the stains appear similar.

Personally, I think whatever was on Schilling's sock changed colors and somehow traveled to Kenny Rogers pitching hand last post-season.

I think the greatest mystery of all is why the Yankees didn't try to bunt on him, or at least make him throw some pitches, as I distinctly remember Jeter making an out on his first pitch of the night.

I am contacting the FTC to get Thorne fired and the Orioles fined.... He should be banned from all major league press boxes. He is clearly a compulsive liar and needs to be banned from the sport.

The people calling for Gary's career (or worse) are a complete joke. Thorne made a stupid mistake. You people are being completely childish about this NON EVENT.

Oh gosh. Red paint? Who applied it? The doc? The trainer? A private contractor? Vinny Van Gogh? How did they get the color so close? How'd they manage to get it just right, so's you could see part of that stain, but not ALL of it? This clown in Baltimore deserves to be fired.

You would want to contact the FCC, first of all. The Federal Trade Commission would just be confused.
I don't see the big deal over Thorne's comments, unless it was a complete lie, which I don't see how that can be proved. Even then, to fire him would seem to be excessive. It's a lot of promotion over something that was simply promotion to begin with.
The real lesson is that Curt Schilling is fantastic at PR; however, rarely have his efforts paid dividends three years later.

The fact is the blood stain did get bigger throughout both games.

Watch the 2004 World Series DVD and you'll see what I mean.

If it was paint, then when was he getting it applied? By an angel who magically swooped in while he was sitting in the dugout.

Puh-leaze.

Plus, I've seen people shot with blood coagulated on their clothing, and the sock in the Hall definitely has blood on it.

People who don't believe it's blood are idiots.

I've looked at the FOX broadast of this game very carefully and if you put it on super slo mo, you can very clearly see a SECOND bloody sock just beyond the grassy knoll of the pitcher's mound.

Broadcasters make mistakes all the time. I remember reading this blog which stated that Curt Schilling's bloody sock from Game 6 of the 2004 ALCS was in the Hall of Fame, when, in fact, that sock was tossed in the hamper, and the sock from Game 2 of the World Series is actually the one in the Hall of Fame.

I am calling for that blogger's immediate dismissal. Mistakes like this cannot be tolerated.