My Column & The Curt Schilling Brouhaha

This baseball column sparked some controversy when it was published in Oct. 2004. Three years later, the suggestion that Curt Schilling was not beyond embellishing his own outstanding legend continues to be a great topic of debate.

The Baltimore Sun re-ran this column on its web pages in 2007:
Does red sock on Schilling's foot pass the blood test? -- baltimoresun.com

Schilling responded to the column in an interview with the Boston Globe. Here are the choice items of the Globe's Q & A.:

"In a column on Monday, Laura Vecsey of the Baltimore Sun wrote that she thought it was doubtful that the red on your sock was not real blood. Can you give a definitive answer on what the red stuff on the sock was? Was it blood, painkiller residue, et. al?

CS: "It was blood. The blood was made to be a much bigger deal than it truly was. I had sutures in my ankle, and the sutured area was being torqued. It bled a lot more in NY simply because one of the sutures broke in the bullpen. Prior to that the sutured area was leaking due to the depth they had to go to tie the skin down. So you had a combination of blood and fluid that was slowly leaking during the game. People associate blood with pain, and most times rightly so, but not this time. There was not a lot of pain before or during the games due to the amount of Marcaine and Lidocaine they had put into the joint. The main issue for me was the numbness. Imagine putting your shoe on and only feeling like half of your foot was actually in the shoe."