Official 2010 Baseball Thread

[Article 15]

Last night's game was just ... just ...

 

[Nosmo King]

18 YEARS!


18 YEARS!


18 YEARS!


18 YEARS!

That's how long since the Pittsburgh Pirates fielded a team capable of NOT losing at least 82 games a season! I was there to witness history last night. The Mets had four count 'em, four consecutive two out base hits in the top of the first.

And yet, paid attendance? 23,487.

 

[Missourian]

We're getting Braves/Cubs here...Chicago is lookin' good.

5-0 Cubs, mid 4th.

 

[2Parties]

NLCS: Padres vs Reds
ALCS: Twins vs Rangers
World Series: Padres vs Rangers
Champions: San Diego Padres

 

[Paulie]

NLCS: Padres vs Reds
ALCS: Twins vs Rangers
World Series: Padres vs Rangers
Champions: San Diego Padres

You must be a Padres fan because only a padres fan would think this.

They don't match up against this now healthy Phillies team. The only 2 teams besides the phils that have a decent shot at getting somewhere in the NL are St Louis and SF, and that's because they have the rotations to win playoff series'.

It's all about the pitching come playoff time, and SD's rotation is a bunch of 'who the fuck is that!?!" with zero experience and there's no reason to automatically assume they can handle the playoff pressure.

Let me see here...

Latos/Garland or Wainright/Carpenter...

Latos/Garland or Halladay/Oswalt...

 

[2Parties]

That's just what I want to see based on teams that will realistically be in the playoffs. It will probably be Yankees and Phillies...

 

[Paulie]

That's just what I want to see based on teams that will realistically be in the playoffs. It will probably be Yankees and Phillies...

I hope you're right about Texas though. I'd love to see Hamilton win a WS as long as it's not against my phils.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Assuming that it is physically impossible for the ball to do that, then the ump blew the call and it was a fair ball.

Assuming that is IS physically possible, then there doesn't need to be any "provision" in the rule. The rule clearly states that the ball would be considered foul, simply because it passed third base in foul territory.

You still don't seem to be getting that part. You're making no sense when you keep saying the rule needs to be amended.

It doesn't matter how whacky of a movement the ball potentially takes, the ruling is simple: Ball is in fair territory while passing bag: FAIR ... Ball is in foul territory while passing bag: FOUL. It's friggin black and white, dude.

I see you SAYING you understand the rule, but calling for rule provisions because of this type of play tells me that you don't.

The only thing I can take from this is that you think they need to make a provision where if a ground ball swerves around the bag through foul territory but bounced fair before and after it, that it should be considered fair.

I can't agree with that if that's what you're saying, and it's really a ridiculous request on your part because it clearly skirts the rule. You're talking about a round ball that has laces on it, and is spinning wildly...it's going to occasionally do some crazy things when it's in motion. That's part of the game. It's ridiculous to go amending the rule to accomodate all the different crazy things the ball might do while in motion. The only thing that should matter is what territory the ball is in.

You're only saying this crap because you feel robbed of a game and want a special rule that would have potentially had you tied with us in the WC race at the moment instead of down a game

I don't think it's unreasonable at all to say that if a ball starts and finishes fair it should be fair. So a provision makes sense. Not to you because you're the beneficiary. You'll find that if I were in your shoes I'd be agreeing with someone like me. I believe in getting the call right. You believe in allowing bad calls. I think my rep is better than yours based on that alone.
I do understand the 3rd base rule. But it should be amended to give a guy a hit when he deserves one.

So you think if a ground ball manages to swerve around a bag foul during a bounce, it should be actually be ruled fair, simply because it started and ended the bounce in fair territory?

You're going to have to enlighten me on why the rule should be completely skirted just because the ball happened to do something strange while in motion.

It's the same principal that goes into the ruling of a fly ball that starts foul and remains foul past third base but curves back and lands fair. Nobody seems to have a problem with that one. That's been done many times before. Why should it be different?

 

[Truthspeaker]

That's just what I want to see based on teams that will realistically be in the playoffs. It will probably be Yankees and Phillies...

Los Padres will get zero respect until they stick it through October. They're still the Padres and that's a heavy burden.

That being said, they're freakin annoyingly good this year.

 

[Paulie]

I don't think it's unreasonable at all to say that if a ball starts and finishes fair it should be fair. So a provision makes sense. Not to you because you're the beneficiary. You'll find that if I were in your shoes I'd be agreeing with someone like me. I believe in getting the call right. You believe in allowing bad calls. I think my rep is better than yours based on that alone.
I do understand the 3rd base rule. But it should be amended to give a guy a hit when he deserves one.

So you think if a ground ball manages to swerve around a bag foul during a bounce, it should be actually be ruled fair, simply because it started and ended the bounce in fair territory?

You're going to have to enlighten me on why the rule should be completely skirted just because the ball happened to do something strange while in motion.

It's the same principal that goes into the ruling of a fly ball that starts foul and remains foul past third base but curves back and lands fair. Nobody seems to have a problem with that one. That's been done many times before. Why should it be different?

Because the rules for each type of batted ball are different. With a fly ball it's ruled based on where it lands, with a ground ball it's ruled based on where it is in relation to the bag. That's just the way it is. You only think it needs to be changed because it has now had a personal impact on your team's position in the race.

The ground ball can swerve in and out of foul territory a million times before it passes the bag. It isn't ruled until it either stops, passes the bag, or touches a player. The friggin rule has to stop somewhere otherwise theoretically the ball can just move forever and never be ruled upon.

That's the main reason for the bag being used. It gives the ball a point at which an official ruling can now be made. If the bag wasn't used, then in your scenario that ball could just keep bouncing past the bag in and out of foul territory all the way to the wall. Is that where the ruling should be made? Where it last touched before it hits the wall? I mean come on dude, be reasonable here.

 

[Truthspeaker]

That's just what I want to see based on teams that will realistically be in the playoffs. It will probably be Yankees and Phillies...

I hope you're right about Texas though. I'd love to see Hamilton win a WS as long as it's not against my phils.

Dam Phillies! Dam Cardinals! Dam Giants!!!!!!!
Giants suddenly can't pitch. Great.

 

[Truthspeaker]

So you think if a ground ball manages to swerve around a bag foul during a bounce, it should be actually be ruled fair, simply because it started and ended the bounce in fair territory?

You're going to have to enlighten me on why the rule should be completely skirted just because the ball happened to do something strange while in motion.

It's the same principal that goes into the ruling of a fly ball that starts foul and remains foul past third base but curves back and lands fair. Nobody seems to have a problem with that one. That's been done many times before. Why should it be different?

Because the rules for each type of batted ball are different. With a fly ball it's ruled based on where it lands, with a ground ball it's ruled based on where it is in relation to the bag. That's just the way it is. You only think it needs to be changed because it has now had a personal impact on your team's position in the race.

The ground ball can swerve in and out of foul territory a million times before it passes the bag. It isn't ruled until it either stops, passes the bag, or touches a player. The friggin rule has to stop somewhere otherwise theoretically the ball can just move forever and never be ruled upon.

That's the main reason for the bag being used. It gives the ball a point at which an official ruling can now be made.

If they're gonna use the bag that way they should have an electronic call on that because it's beyond the umpire's capability to accurately call that from the side. Either way I don't see why such a ball should be punished for it's weird spin. It's pretty easy to say that if a ball both starts and finishes fair and NEVER bounces foul(to hell with 3rd base) it should be fair. I don't care if my team loses because of it. I would rather have the honest victor. I prefer to say "they won because they performed better." Not "they won because the call was blown and they were gifted the game."

 

[Paulie]

It's the same principal that goes into the ruling of a fly ball that starts foul and remains foul past third base but curves back and lands fair. Nobody seems to have a problem with that one. That's been done many times before. Why should it be different?

Because the rules for each type of batted ball are different. With a fly ball it's ruled based on where it lands, with a ground ball it's ruled based on where it is in relation to the bag. That's just the way it is. You only think it needs to be changed because it has now had a personal impact on your team's position in the race.

The ground ball can swerve in and out of foul territory a million times before it passes the bag. It isn't ruled until it either stops, passes the bag, or touches a player. The friggin rule has to stop somewhere otherwise theoretically the ball can just move forever and never be ruled upon.

That's the main reason for the bag being used. It gives the ball a point at which an official ruling can now be made.

If they're gonna use the bag that way they should have an electronic call on that because it's beyond the umpire's capability to accurately call that from the side. Either way I don't see why such a ball should be punished for it's weird spin. It's pretty easy to say that if a ball both starts and finishes fair and NEVER bounces foul(to hell with 3rd base) it should be fair. I don't care if my team loses because of it. I would rather have the honest victor. I prefer to say "they won because they performed better." Not "they won because the call was blown and they were gifted the game."

Have you seen a replay angle that proves that the ball didn't swerve foul between those 2 bounces? Because I haven't.

I understand that it seems unlikely, but if it DID happen, the rule is clear.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Because the rules for each type of batted ball are different. With a fly ball it's ruled based on where it lands, with a ground ball it's ruled based on where it is in relation to the bag. That's just the way it is. You only think it needs to be changed because it has now had a personal impact on your team's position in the race.

The ground ball can swerve in and out of foul territory a million times before it passes the bag. It isn't ruled until it either stops, passes the bag, or touches a player. The friggin rule has to stop somewhere otherwise theoretically the ball can just move forever and never be ruled upon.

That's the main reason for the bag being used. It gives the ball a point at which an official ruling can now be made.

If they're gonna use the bag that way they should have an electronic call on that because it's beyond the umpire's capability to accurately call that from the side. Either way I don't see why such a ball should be punished for it's weird spin. It's pretty easy to say that if a ball both starts and finishes fair and NEVER bounces foul(to hell with 3rd base) it should be fair. I don't care if my team loses because of it. I would rather have the honest victor. I prefer to say "they won because they performed better." Not "they won because the call was blown and they were gifted the game."

Have you seen a replay angle that proves that the ball didn't swerve foul between those 2 bounces? Because I haven't.

I understand that it seems unlikely, but if it DID happen, the rule is clear.

another reason for replay to be instituted.

 

[Paulie]

If they're gonna use the bag that way they should have an electronic call on that because it's beyond the umpire's capability to accurately call that from the side. Either way I don't see why such a ball should be punished for it's weird spin. It's pretty easy to say that if a ball both starts and finishes fair and NEVER bounces foul(to hell with 3rd base) it should be fair. I don't care if my team loses because of it. I would rather have the honest victor. I prefer to say "they won because they performed better." Not "they won because the call was blown and they were gifted the game."

Have you seen a replay angle that proves that the ball didn't swerve foul between those 2 bounces? Because I haven't.

I understand that it seems unlikely, but if it DID happen, the rule is clear.

another reason for replay to be instituted.

I'm ok with it. I think it works well in football.

The irony of this whole argument between us though, is that if there's replay reviews, then there's no need to 'amend' the ground ball rule. If the replay happened to show the ball in fact swerving around the bag foul there, then the rule is the rule and the ball would be foul.

Do you agree?

 

[Truthspeaker]

Have you seen a replay angle that proves that the ball didn't swerve foul between those 2 bounces? Because I haven't.

I understand that it seems unlikely, but if it DID happen, the rule is clear.

another reason for replay to be instituted.

I'm ok with it. I think it works well in football.

The irony of this whole argument between us though, is that if there's replay reviews, then there's no need to 'amend' the ground ball rule. If the replay happened to show the ball in fact swerving around the bag foul there, then the rule is the rule and the ball would be foul.

Do you agree?

No, In that case I think the rule should be changed with regards to balls that bounce fair and land fair. That way an ump who blows a call can't fall back on that lame excuse and claim a ball did something which is virtually impossble.

 

[Paulie]

another reason for replay to be instituted.

I'm ok with it. I think it works well in football.

The irony of this whole argument between us though, is that if there's replay reviews, then there's no need to 'amend' the ground ball rule. If the replay happened to show the ball in fact swerving around the bag foul there, then the rule is the rule and the ball would be foul.

Do you agree?

No, In that case I think the rule should be changed with regards to balls that bounce fair and land fair. That way an ump who blows a call can't fall back on that lame excuse and claim a ball did something which is virtually impossble.

Yeah but I'm assuming it did happen just for the sake of argument, and that the replay review showed conclusive evidence.

You gotta understand, the ball isn't always going to make an expected movement. It's got laces that catch wind resistance, it might hit a lump on the ground, what have you. It's part of the game. I don't see why a rule needs to be amended over an extremely rare act of god.

 

[Truthspeaker]

I'm ok with it. I think it works well in football.

The irony of this whole argument between us though, is that if there's replay reviews, then there's no need to 'amend' the ground ball rule. If the replay happened to show the ball in fact swerving around the bag foul there, then the rule is the rule and the ball would be foul.

Do you agree?

No, In that case I think the rule should be changed with regards to balls that bounce fair and land fair. That way an ump who blows a call can't fall back on that lame excuse and claim a ball did something which is virtually impossble.

Yeah but I'm assuming it did happen just for the sake of argument, and that the replay review showed conclusive evidence.

You gotta understand, the ball isn't always going to make an expected movement. It's got laces that catch wind resistance, it might hit a lump on the ground, what have you. It's part of the game. I don't see why a rule needs to be amended over an extremely rare act of god.

so that truth prevails!

 

[Paulie]

No, In that case I think the rule should be changed with regards to balls that bounce fair and land fair. That way an ump who blows a call can't fall back on that lame excuse and claim a ball did something which is virtually impossble.

Yeah but I'm assuming it did happen just for the sake of argument, and that the replay review showed conclusive evidence.

You gotta understand, the ball isn't always going to make an expected movement. It's got laces that catch wind resistance, it might hit a lump on the ground, what have you. It's part of the game. I don't see why a rule needs to be amended over an extremely rare act of god.

so that truth prevails!

If the truth is that the ball did in fact swerve around the bag foul, and replay showed this, then you're still not explaining why the rule needs to change.

The ball is judged where it was at the bag. It's so damn simple, dude!

 

[Truthspeaker]

Yeah but I'm assuming it did happen just for the sake of argument, and that the replay review showed conclusive evidence.

You gotta understand, the ball isn't always going to make an expected movement. It's got laces that catch wind resistance, it might hit a lump on the ground, what have you. It's part of the game. I don't see why a rule needs to be amended over an extremely rare act of god.

so that truth prevails!

If the truth is that the ball did in fact swerve around the bag foul, and replay showed this, then you're still not explaining why the rule needs to change.

The ball is judged where it was at the bag. It's so damn simple, dude!

Jeez. I get it. I've gotten it for 25 years!

I know what the rule IS. I'm stating that it should change. Baseball has changed rules many times before. In this case the ball SHOULD be fair if it bounces fair and lands fair. Not too difficult to understand WHY I think so.