delusions of grandeur

New MLB Wildcard Rule

Recommended Posts

Then draw a line or shut the hell up. Because you're the one who apparently hasn't read the rule.

 

I saw the play. Dude didn't go charging out at full speed. He trotted out, mostly back pedaling until he and the LF got confused and both backed off. Sure, they were both standing in the grass. And that would mean they were both in the outfield. However, the rule is pretty clear to the effect that doesn't meant dick.

 

So, which one of us is confused?

 

 

You are. They weren't standing, they were running towards each other.

 

So hey, you think the infield extends over 35 feet into the outfield. That would make...one of you.

 

And who's hell bent on fighting Mr. "Shut the Hell Up" ? :lol: Go (the really bad word) yourself and take a chill pill you miserable (the really bad word).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are. They weren't standing, they were running towards each other.

 

So hey, you think the infield extends over 35 feet into the outfield. That would make...one of you.

 

And who's hell bent on fighting Mr. "Shut the Hell Up" ? :lol: Go SNICKERS yourself and take a chill pill you miserable SNICKERS.

 

I may have crossed the line with the "shut the hell up" bit, but I was a bit put off by your smug "you are seriously confused" bit that you then followed up with referencing some magical line that establishes what is and isn't the outfield but, that, at least in the infield fly rule DOESN'T EXIST. Something that you then punctuated with "It's why there's not an outfield fly rule."

 

OK genius, where's the line? It's certainly not at the grass line, which is a handy visual marker. Because a pop up to there could very, very easily be turned into the sort of play the rule was put in place to avoid. OK, so how far back? Another 10 fit? 10 yards? Where is it? You guys seem so certain that there's a place where the outfield starts that anyone who sees otherwise must be "seriously confused". So, what's the magical line? And why doesn't MLB either draw it in the grass or even make any reference to a particular distance from the grass line in the wording of the rule?

Edited by detlef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have crossed the line with the "shut the hell up" bit, but I was a bit put off by your smug "you are seriously confused" bit that you then followed up with referencing some magical line that establishes what is and isn't the outfield but, that, at least in the infield fly rule DOESN'T EXIST. Something that you then punctuated with "It's why there's not an outfield fly rule."

 

OK genius, where's the line? It's certainly not at the grass line, which is a handy visual marker. Because a pop up to there could very, very easily be turned into the sort of play the rule was put in place to avoid. OK, so how far back? Another 10 fit? 10 yards? Where is it? You guys seem so certain that there's a place where the outfield starts that anyone who sees otherwise must be "seriously confused". So, what's the magical line? And why doesn't MLB either draw it in the grass or even make any reference to a particular distance from the grass line in the wording of the rule?

 

We (or at least I) get that you think it wasn't a bad call....but the fact that you don't know where the outfield starts says volumes...and yes, the rule can be applied in the outfield grass, we haven't said that it couldn't...just that we don't think trying to field a fly ball in shallow left field back of 3rd base along the foul line is routine...and just to help you out with the line of where the outfield starts...its where the grass starts after the infield dirt (note I said dirt because the actual infield is the grass area surrounding the pitchers mound. Here you go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We (or at least I) get that you think it wasn't a bad call....but the fact that you don't know where the outfield starts says volumes...and yes, the rule can be applied in the outfield grass, we haven't said that it couldn't...just that we don't think trying to field a fly ball in shallow left field back of 3rd base along the foul line is routine...and just to help you out with the line of where the outfield starts...its where the grass starts after the infield dirt (note I said dirt because the actual infield is the grass area surrounding the pitchers mound. Here you go

 

:rolleyes: Gee thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't asking where the outfield starts. I was asking where this magical line exists that all of you are so certain this ball fell outside of. You guys are banging pretty hard on that argument, so surely there must be a clear threshold, right? As pope says, "they don't call it the out field fly rule", right?

 

Hmm. Let's have a look at what the rule itself says...

 

On the infield fly rule the umpire is to rule whether the ball could ordinarily have been handled by an infielder—not by some arbitrary limitation such as the grass, or the base lines. The umpire must rule also that a ball is an infield fly, even if handled by an outfielder, if, in the umpire’s judgment, the ball could have been as easily handled by an infielder.

 

Now, the rules also address the timeliness of the call, and I agree that it should have been quicker. But you guys are also really trying to paint this as the shortstop blazing out at top sprint, trying to make some miraculous play. He wasn't exactly walking, but he was, in fact, running at a moderate clip, not entirely turned in the direction he was going. And, by the time the ball fell, he was actually taking a few steps away from it, having thought the guy in left had it.

 

So, here's a question for you. Say the outfielder slipped and fell and was nowhere near the play. So, there's no confusion. Given that the SS got to the spot of the ball before he stepped away (and no, I'm not saying he was camping there but rather that he'd arrived and it wasn't like he had to dive for it or anything). Had he failed to make the catch, would it have been an error? Do you think the play was so hard that they'd give him the benefit of the doubt?

 

 

 

Edited by detlef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes: Gee thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't asking where the outfield starts. I was asking where this magical line exists that all of you are so certain this ball fell outside of. You guys are banging pretty hard on that argument, so surely there must be a clear threshold, right? As pope says, "they don't call it the out field fly rule", right?

 

Hmm. Let's have a look at what the rule itself says...

 

On the infield fly rule the umpire is to rule whether the ball could ordinarily have been handled by an infielder—not by some arbitrary limitation such as the grass, or the base lines. The umpire must rule also that a ball is an infield fly, even if handled by an outfielder, if, in the umpire’s judgment, the ball could have been as easily handled by an infielder.

 

Now, the rules also address the timeliness of the call, and I agree that it should have been quicker. But you guys are also really trying to paint this as the shortstop blazing out at top sprint, trying to make some miraculous play. He wasn't exactly walking, but he was, in fact, running at a moderate clip, not entirely turned in the direction he was going. And, by the time the ball fell, he was actually taking a few steps away from it, having thought the guy in left had it.

 

So, here's a question for you. Say the outfielder slipped and fell and was nowhere near the play. So, there's no confusion. Given that the SS got to the spot of the ball before he stepped away (and no, I'm not saying he was camping there but rather that he'd arrived and it wasn't like he had to dive for it or anything). Had he failed to make the catch, would it have been an error? Do you think the play was so hard that they'd give him the benefit of the doubt?

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Atlanta it is most likely scored a hit and if it was in St. Louis I still think they score it a hit, but wouldn't be shocked to see it as an error...yes home cooking like that does exsist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have crossed the line with the "shut the hell up" bit, but I was a bit put off by your smug "you are seriously confused" bit that you then followed up with referencing some magical line that establishes what is and isn't the outfield but, that, at least in the infield fly rule DOESN'T EXIST. Something that you then punctuated with "It's why there's not an outfield fly rule."

 

OK genius, where's the line? It's certainly not at the grass line, which is a handy visual marker. Because a pop up to there could very, very easily be turned into the sort of play the rule was put in place to avoid. OK, so how far back? Another 10 fit? 10 yards? Where is it? You guys seem so certain that there's a place where the outfield starts that anyone who sees otherwise must be "seriously confused". So, what's the magical line? And why doesn't MLB either draw it in the grass or even make any reference to a particular distance from the grass line in the wording of the rule?

 

 

Common sense you argumetative twat. You want a line. Should the groundscrews come out for evey batter to redraw the line if the infield plays in to cover a potential bunt?

 

Watch the play again, he ran over 15 paces at probably a 60 degree angle away from the plate - he was 35 feet into the grass at a place where in some parks th LF makes that catch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In Atlanta it is most likely scored a hit and if it was in St. Louis I still think they score it a hit, but wouldn't be shocked to see it as an error...yes home cooking like that does exsist.

 

Then again, you've also pointed out that even catching a pop-up without having to move a step is a hard play.

 

You guys keep bringing up how far he had to run. You do realize that it matters a whole lot how high the ball is hit. If that ball isn't skied, then, sure, it's all dude can do to even get there, let alone make a play. But that wasn't the case. He was not sprinting, but tracking the ball down. He actually got to the spot and certainly could have made the play but for the bit about taking a few steps back away from it.

 

Are you saying that if a player can get under a pop fly without even needing a dead sprint to get to it and fails to make the catch, it's a hit? Because that's what happened. Dude absolutely got there and, as of that moment, was in position to very routinely catch the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Common sense you argumetative twat. You want a line. Should the groundscrews come out for evey batter to redraw the line if the infield plays in to cover a potential bunt?

 

Watch the play again, he ran over 15 paces at probably a 60 degree angle away from the plate - he was 35 feet into the grass at a place where in some parks th LF makes that catch.

 

You do realize that the rule specifically says that, even if an outfielder makes the catch, infield fly rule can still be in effect?

 

None the less, because "in some parks" that's a place where the LF makes the play, then it is so cut and dry that infield fly should not be called in this particular case, that anyone who sees this as a grey area and not aboslutlely, positively a horrible call is "seriously confused". Nice to know.

 

ETA: What's more? 18 of the 30 MLB ballparks have a shorter left field than Turner. That means, that even if in "most" rather than "some" parks, that's a play for the left fielder, then it would be reasonable to say that is not the case in Turner, where the deeper than average fence would mean that the outfielders have more ground to cover and may play a step or two deeper than they do in parks where they don't have as deep a field to cover.

Edited by detlef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 game series I'd agree, but sudden death for a playoff spot that was right fully yours in year's past, and even if you win (largely contingent on if your ace is better), you get set up at a huge disadvantage for the next series. Playoff teams should get advantages like better seeding, but not to have the opposing team not be able to use their best rotation... It only adds to the BS of making a series game a 1-and-done thing.

 

I know I should just drop it and not repeat myself, but I still don't understand how this is just.

 

Agree with 3 game series

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Road teams are 12-8 thus far in the playoffs. Just sayin'...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Road teams are 12-8 thus far in the playoffs. Just sayin'...

 

I was trying to find a trend or something to point to how a home team got hosed by the new format and couldn't see it. Mind you, only 1 of them advanced, but Cinci certainly couldn't blame the format. The As were the only ones to have it work against them as badly as it could, having Detroit win both their home games and put Oakland against the wall, but in the end, they won two, leveled it out, and were simply beaten by a great pitcher who was on fire. Does that series end any differently if you just swapped the two sets of two home games to begin it?

 

As far as Washington is concerned, those teams went back and forth and they had them in the end before St. Louis pulled it out.

 

I guess I'm wondering if anyone can make a compelling argument for how any of the teams with 3 home games got hosed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they didn't get hosed this year. But assume Detroit beats Oakland in Game 3 to complete the sweep. It doesn't seem fair to me that the higher seed had one game at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The playoffs are getting too cumbersome when played after a 162 game season. We all know a five game series should be 2-2-1 with the higher seed getting the first 2 at home and the final game if necessary. Unfortunately MLB can't set it up that way because of an additional travel day. I would rather have fewer playoff teams and the series set up the way they should be.

 

The current playoff set up is insane. The intention is to keep as many teams in the hunt as long as possible. Worshipping the almighty $$$$.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, I prefer the 2-2-1. And, honestly, don't get why baseball can't figure out a way to not have to rush the play-offs, even if they want to continue with the 1 gamer wildcard thing.

 

After all, the Yankees didn't even get a day off between their two series. That seems crazy to me. I was driving home from work and happened upon it on the radio and couldn't believe that they just went right into the next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they didn't get hosed this year. But assume Detroit beats Oakland in Game 3 to complete the sweep. It doesn't seem fair to me that the higher seed had one game at home.

 

 

Travelling twice is bogus. There's nothing wrong with a 2-3 format. They play the same game with the same rules, just different people yelling for different reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current playoff set up is insane. The intention is to keep as many teams in the hunt as long as possible. Worshipping the almighty $$$$.......

 

 

As opposed to all those other previous baseball seasons where money in the pocketbooks of the game and its participants and owners had absolutely nothing to do with it. :fool:

 

For the record, I prefer the 2-2-1. And, honestly, don't get why baseball can't figure out a way to not have to rush the play-offs, even if they want to continue with the 1 gamer wildcard thing.

 

After all, the Yankees didn't even get a day off between their two series. That seems crazy to me. I was driving home from work and happened upon it on the radio and couldn't believe that they just went right into the next.

 

 

It's that way during the regular season, why change things up? I like it way better this way, where it just keeps rolling, and I'm sure the players like it too, not having to travel so much and not the change in routine the way there would be with 2-2-1, or breaks in series and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As opposed to all those other previous baseball seasons where money in the pocketbooks of the game and its participants and owners had absolutely nothing to do with it. :fool:

 

 

 

It's that way during the regular season, why change things up? I like it way better this way, where it just keeps rolling, and I'm sure the players like it too, not having to travel so much and not the change in routine the way there would be with 2-2-1, or breaks in series and such.

 

I think it's worth changing it up because 1 out of 5 or 7 means a hell of a lot more than 1 out of 162. So, you're not resting guys here and there, trying out some rookie pitcher to see what he's got. Things like that. Some random day game in July? Sure, give me Shoey Shoemaker vs Dingle Berry on the mound. But I'd prefer that teams aren't mining the bullpen or pitching a guy on short rest just to get someone on the bump in October.

 

When it comes to the play-offs, I want to see the best hitters against the best pitchers, not some war of attrition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to the play-offs, I want to see the best hitters against the best pitchers, not some war of attrition.

 

 

How is the current format keeping the best hitters and pitchers on the bench?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that the rule specifically says that, even if an outfielder makes the catch, infield fly rule can still be in effect?

 

None the less, because "in some parks" that's a place where the LF makes the play, then it is so cut and dry that infield fly should not be called in this particular case, that anyone who sees this as a grey area and not aboslutlely, positively a horrible call is "seriously confused". Nice to know.

 

ETA: What's more? 18 of the 30 MLB ballparks have a shorter left field than Turner. That means, that even if in "most" rather than "some" parks, that's a play for the left fielder, then it would be reasonable to say that is not the case in Turner, where the deeper than average fence would mean that the outfielders have more ground to cover and may play a step or two deeper than they do in parks where they don't have as deep a field to cover.

 

 

Wait a second, what happened to your brilliant "draw a line idea"? I missed your addressing that in your diatribes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait a second, what happened to your brilliant "draw a line idea"? I missed your addressing that in your diatribes.

 

I wasn't the one making absolute statements about how how many steps into the outfield or how far from the plate or whatever distinctions you guys were trying to make.

 

Of course, the best distinction of all is, "since in some parks, that's a play made by the left fielder..." That's just brilliant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't the one making absolute statements about how how many steps into the outfield or how far from the plate or whatever distinctions you guys were trying to make.

 

Of course, the best distinction of all is, "since in some parks, that's a play made by the left fielder..." That's just brilliant.

 

 

The only absolute statement I made was "use common sense" nice try though, putz.

 

That was a short answer from you - you out of your 8 ball?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only absolute statement I made was "use common sense" nice try though, putz.

 

 

 

liar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are like ARod and the bikini model passing balls back and forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.