14 Jan 04
Originally posted by ianpickeringSurely, you don't understand the game and leave it at that! Different strokes for different folks. I myself love the game of baseball
I think you are reading too much into this basically simple (and tedious) game. When all is said and done it's still just a glorified version of rounders.
By the way - what sort of a rule is it that allows the pitcher to deliberately thow 'no balls ' without penalty? Surely that should be regarded as cheating!!
Regards,
Charlie
14 Jan 04
1 edit
Originally posted by ianpickeringFirst off, the pitcher did throw the ball. It is up to the catcher to decide if he should throw to Second or Third. He fakes a throw to keep the third base guy running. Guess what... He did and is now out.
I think you are reading too much into this basically simple (and tedious) game. When all is said and done it's still just a glorified version of rounders.
By the way - what sort of a rule is it that allows the pitcher to deliberate ...[text shortened]... s ' without penalty? Surely that should be regarded as cheating!!
Had he stopped the catcher might have thrown to second... considering the runner had slowed down during the fake. He had his head down and was dashing as fast as he could.
You are missing more than I read into it.
P-
Edit! Who's your team, chaswray?!
14 Jan 04
P-Hi P
Edit! Who's your team, chaswray?![/b]
Since the late 50's I have lived and died with the Pirates! Although in the American League I'm partial to your Sox. As a matter of fact I was in Boston the fall of '67 when they clinched the pennant. What a party town that was for a young man of 19😛
Regards,
Charlie
14 Jan 04
Originally posted by chaswrayYeah, we talked about Pirates in another thread.
Hi P
Since the late 50's I have lived and died with the Pirates! Although in the American League I'm partial to your Sox. As a matter of fact I was in Boston the fall of '67 when they clinched the pennant. What a party town that was for a young man of 19😛
Regards,
Charlie
I was a kid when I liked the Pirates in the 70's. I liked them for the uniform. They had the box-top hat, and almost prison looking uniforms. I thought it was very cool.
Glad you like the Sox... with any luck you hate the Yankee's. 😉 I use the term "hate" lightly... They are a great team and great fans... but I just want to beat them for 70 years in a row!!!
P-
14 Jan 04
Originally posted by PhlabibitTo me the Yank's represent what's wrong with baseball, but I don't really hate them. Why, one of my fondest memories in baseball involves the Yanks. Fall, 1960 Yogi Berra can only watch as Maz's bottom of the ninth homer clears the left field wall at Forbes Field in Pittsburgh and the Pirates beat the Yanks for the title:😵
Glad you like the Sox... with any luck you hate the Yankee's. 😉 I use the term "hate" lightly... They are a great team and great fans... but I just want to beat them for 70 years in a row!!!
P-
14 Jan 04
Yup, chaswray... at least Yankees drive prices of players up.
What do you think of Free Agency? That is a big change in baseball, heh?
I don't really remember the change, since it happend as I grew up... but it is so different now with people switching teams.
But I guess big trades have always gone on... I hear the Yankee's got some guy named Babe Ruth from the Red Sox around 1919 or so. 😉
P-
14 Jan 04
Originally posted by PhlabibitYou've lost me there! I'm talking about a situation where the pitcher deliberately walks a batter (maybe because he's 'too good'😉 by throwing wide.
First off, the pitcher did throw the ball. It is up to the catcher to decide if he should throw to Second or Third. He fakes a throw to keep the third base guy running. Guess what... He did and is now out.
Had he stopped the catcher might have thrown to second... considering the runner had slowed down during the fake. He had his head down and was ...[text shortened]...
You are missing more than I read into it.
P-
[b]Edit! Who's your team, chaswray?![/b]
14 Jan 04
Originally posted by PhlabibitHi p
What do you think of Free Agency? That is a big change in baseball, heh?
P-
I think free agency served a purpose, as the owners had all the leverage. The owners' greed got them in this situation and having said that, I truly believe that baseball needs a salary cap like the NFL.
I mentioned the '67 Red Sox earlier, that was a great team and a great pennant race that summer. There were 4 teams within 2 games of each other (if memory serves me correctly) going into the last weekend of the season! It's just too bad the Yaz and Lonborg and company had to meet my favorite pitcher in the Series...Bob Gibson the most dominant pitcher I have ever seen bar none🙄
Regards,
Charlie
15 Jan 04
Originally posted by ianpickeringThat's not cheating and usually it's the managers' decision. It's called an intentional walk. Usually happens with men on base and a good hitter at the plate. Or maybe a batter who "owns" the pitcher on the mound...ie. is able to hit him well
You've lost me there! I'm talking about a situation where the pitcher deliberately walks a batter (maybe because he's 'too good'😉 by throwing wide.
Regards,
Charlie
15 Jan 04
Originally posted by chaswray...and you believe that should be allowed? Seems to make a mockery of the game to me!
That's not cheating and usually it's the managers' decision. It's called an intentional walk. Usually happens with men on base and a good hitter at the plate. Or maybe a batter who "owns" the pitcher on the mound...ie. is able to hit him well
Regards,
Charlie
15 Jan 04
Originally posted by ianpickeringIt's part of the strategy of the game and has been since the game was invented more than 150 years ago. How do you figure it makes a mockery of the game? It can backfire and often does when the next batter drives one out of the park!
...and you believe that should be allowed? Seems to make a mockery of the game to me!
15 Jan 04
So then it must be a mockery of the game in Soccer when an opponent goes down with an injury and your team puts the ball out of bounds to stop play and then when play resumes the opposing team throws the ball into your team.
Similar to the pitch out, a modification of the rules, not exactly the intent of the rules but certainly allowed and in no way making a "mockery" of the game as you put it.
It is allowed.
The defending team does it to IMPROVE their game situation. Intentionally walking a man to first base most often occurs when the batting team already has someone at second but no-one at first. Once the man is aboard at first, it creates a force out opportunity at first, second and third.
Really to put down a game that you so obviously have no concept how it is played just makes you look mean spirited and foolish.
But then most of your posts seem to be of the flame variety, so I guess you have to do what you do best.
15 Jan 04
1 edit
Originally posted by PhlabibitYou know, I've heard a lot of talk about how the Yankees are a just a group of all-stars and are bad for the sport because of Steinbrenner's spending practices, and I think this is what you and chaswray are driving at here. I'm not really a big fan of baseball, but I have sort of a different perspective on this. Let me lay it out for you and you real baseball fans (Plabibit, chas, rwingett, etc) can tell me if it's persuasive or not. This will be quite long, but bear with me.
Yup, chaswray... at [b]least Yankees drive prices of players up.
[/b]
Originallu posted by chaswray
To me the Yank's represent what's wrong with baseball
First, the obvious facts. The Yankees have a huge payroll. It's much higher than anyone else's. No disputing that. The Yankees (and Steinbrenner in particular) are willing to spend in a way that nobody else is. And they play in the biggest town in the country. Fair enough.
Now some more facts. Sure, the Yankees play in New York. It's a big town, the biggest in the country. *But* they split the town with another big team, the Mets. Now ask yourself: is (roughly) half the New York market bigger than, say, the whole Boston/New England market, which the Red Sox have to themselves? Is it bigger than the whole Houston market (Astros)? Is it bigger than the whole Seattle market (Mariners)? The whole Atlanta market (Braves)? The whole Dallas market (Rangers)? Is it even appreciably bigger than half the Los Angeles market (shared by Dodgers and Angels) or half the Chicago market (shared by Cubs and White Sox), two huge cities in their own right? NO. So the Yankees don't have any obvious advantage there.
Now look at the owner. Everybody hates Steinbrenner, because he spends so much. The mistake they make is that people seem to believe he's the richest kid on the block. He's not. By a pretty fair margin. Look at the many billionaire owners out there, especially given all of the corporate ownerships in baseball (the Mariners for example are mostly owned by Nintendo). Steinbrenner isn't even close to them in wealth. But he is different in that he's willing to spend *whatever it takes* to win. These other owners build a team not to win, but to turn a profit. There was a pretty serious brouhaha here in Seattle when Mariners management publically admitted that, as long as the team was profitable, they considered the franchise to be succesful. This is the attitude of franchise owners throughout the world of sports, not just baseball.
But Steinbrenner has never cared about that. He's always approached it from the other side: spend the money first, and hopefully we'll realize a profit later, whereas most owners look to realize a profit first before spending any money.
Is this really so terrible? Sure, today in 2003/2004, the Yankees are a cash cow. They draw lots of fans, they sell lots of merchandise, they even have their own televesion network. But go back 15-20 years into the 80s. They Yankees were losers. The Mets dominated New York. Look around baseball now, and look at what every team does when they're losing in the standings and in the market: they cut cash. Look at Colorado; Atlanta; Milwaukee; Texas, trying to move Alex Rodriguez; this is just the standard. But what did the Yankees do? The exact opposite. Again, following a model diametrically opposed to every other team in baseball, they poured money into scouting, into new players, into the franchise. And THAT is why they are where they are. That is why they are winning. Why? Because they play the WHOLE game better than anyone else.
So to all those people out there who hate the Yankees, take a good look at what you're hating. For the system that's been in place forever in baseball, the Yankees dominate now because they do it correctly. They take the risks when everyone else pulls back. They have an owner whose priority has always been winning first, profit second, as opposed to every other team out there. They've earned everything they've gotten. When your team can't keep up, look to your own franchise, to your own ownership group, and see why.
And to bring this full circle... it's funny to me that everyone now wants a salary cap. I think that'd probably be a good thing too, though I think I favor a much harsher luxury tax instead. Whatever. But the point is, this move often comes from complaining about the Yankees. Yet rewind 20 years, and the Yankees were no better off than any other team. They dominate now, and everyone complains now, because they've done it all in *exactly* the right way. Here's the move: we need to change the rules of the game because these guys are too good at it. Which is fine. Maybe, ultimately, that's what the game needs to survive long-term. But let's stop throwing stones at the Yankees, and be honest with ourselves about what's going on.
15 Jan 04
Seems to have been a successful takeover in this thread with the people who do like baseball.
Yes, intentional walking kinda stinks... I prefer a pitcher to throw a lot of hi or outside balls and make it look like he tried... but a good batter can get a hold of these pitches.. or a chatcher can miss them.
Japan is having a great time playing the sport, as well as Puerto Rico and Cuba. Many more I am sure. I think it would be a better world series if some day they were included in our post season for the World Series.
Yes, salary caps or something! Geesh.. Red Sox can't even get Man-Ram to run to first base when he pops one up. I think Sox should just suck it up to prove a point and make the guy sit the bench more often.
Anyone hear anything about Roger Clemens new contract? No practice if his kids play little league that day.... and no show to games if he isn't pitching is some of the stuff I heard. That is fine if it works out, he only wants 5 million. Ramirez gets 20 million a year and won't even run after a ball!
P-