Bruce and I made a friendly lunch bet before last night’s Yankees game, where I bet him that A-Rod would get at least 2 hits. A-Rod obviously sucked miserably, but that’s beside the point. In the 9th inning, as everyone now knows, Mr. Rod was pinch hit for by the miraculous Raul Ibanez, who went yard to tie the ball game and then later, in extras, hit a walk off homerun. Now, my contention is, as a result of these late game antics, I shouldn’t have to pay Bruce a dime.

Photo by Elsa/Getty Images

This bet was made with under gentlemanly assumption that A-Rod would get his full slate of at bats. It seems blatantly obvious to me that because Girardi pulled Rodriquez before his 4th at bat that this bet was voided. No slate of at bats, no legit sample size, no blood on the lunch. It’s simple deductive reasoning, really. But Bruce, the slimy, gutless swindler that he is, is trying to pinch me for “his meal” despite the extenuating circumstances that rendered our wager void. Disgusting, I know. So, after protesting the bet, the vote has come to the people: should I be responsible for buying Bruce a lunch, or are we a civilization that prides ourselves on moral righteousness and intellectual reasoning.

You tell me.