Flatinals?

(Reuters Photo. Jim Riggleman is the only one scratching his head over the lack of effort by his Nats. Losing will do that to you, Jim.)

"We just were flat, and that's not acceptable."
(Jim Riggleman, via Washington Post, 9/20/2009)

"We've played one-hundred-and-x amount of games. Why would we decide on Sunday, whatever the day is, to not play hard? That's (crap). I don't care how we're winning or losing. We do play hard. I think the energy was the same as any other game."
(Adam Dunn, via Chatter/Washington Times, 9/20/2009)

Riggles calls out Nats' effort.

Dunn calls bullsh*t.

Mets 6, Nats 2(Sunday): Loss number 98. Jim Riggleman is starting to sound like a guy who realizes he won't be back next season. He lost his team weeks ago, folks.

Mets 3, Nats 2(Saturday): Tim Redding's beard is more manly than John Lannan's. Ian Desmond in right, wrong.

Befriend The Nationals Enquirer on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.

Comments

[Keith]

Riggs said it was a lackluster performance, but later went on to say, "If that is a meaningful game in the future, he (Mock) might have to be pinch-hit for." So if the manager is working with an assumption that it's not a "meaningful game", how should he expect his players to perform? Loss #100 coming Wednesday. Mark it, Dude.

[The Nationals Enquirer]

Consider Wednesday marked down, Keith. It won't be long now...

[ckstevenson]

I'm pretty sure most of the Natinals were watching the Redskns game...

[The Nationals Enquirer]

That would certainly explain the lack of offense, cks...