RandyMarsh Posted October 8, 2021 Share Posted October 8, 2021 2 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Am I the only one who feel like they've flown under the radar all season? Don't get me wrong, all the AL East teams and NL West teams are impressive and deserve the coverage they have gotten, but the Astros are still kinda sitting there and they seem as well built to win the pennant and make a WS run as anyone Yeah i definitely feel they have, people love to mock Dusty Baker but here he is again managing in the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted October 8, 2021 Share Posted October 8, 2021 whoo hoo! one more game to go and it will be happy white sox elimination day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Cowan Posted October 8, 2021 Share Posted October 8, 2021 Hey you guys Fiona Hill is on Judy Woodruff right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandyMarsh Posted October 8, 2021 Share Posted October 8, 2021 Aside from 05 the white Sox and Twins always embarrass the Central when they make the playoffs. Since we been in the Central We of course made 2 WS and 4 LCSs, the Royals made multiple World Series and the Indians made a World Series and a few LCS's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted October 8, 2021 Share Posted October 8, 2021 4 hours ago, RandyMarsh said: Agree, if you're going to have wild cards you have to put an incentive out there to winning division. I suppose they could do a best of 3 series with just the one travel day in between game 1 and 2. The higher wildcard team would host games 2 and 3 while the lower game 1. This way both teams get atleast one playoff game at home and the money that comes with that. The division round would only be delayed a day or 2 at most in this scenario. I think the main problem with a best-of-3 wild card series is the delay you refer to. Right now Baseball has the season end on Sunday, with Monday open for tiebreakers. One league has their one-and-done on Tuesday and their LDS starts on Thursday, while the other league has their wild card game on Wednesday and they start theirLDS on Friday. In a wild card best-of-3 scenario, they would still need to keep Monday open for tiebreakers, so the first league’s series starts on Tuesday. If there’s a travel day built in, that means Tuesday through Friday would need to be set aside for the series. Then a day off on Saturday, then the LDS starts Sunday. That means all the division winners would have to sit for an entire week waiting to play their first LDS game. I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t start one LDS while the wild card series is going on at the same time. And that’s just for the first league that plays. The second league that plays would start a day later, on Wednesday, because TV, meaning their LDS wouldn’t start until a week from Monday after the season ended. We Tiger fans remember when OBT wiped out their opponents in the LCS in both 2006 and 2012, then had to wait seven days the first time and six days the other to play their opponents in the Series. Some blame the long layoff for our listless performance in each Series. I think the prospect of such a long waiting period for division winners cooling their jets will prevent a move to a wild card series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted October 9, 2021 Author Share Posted October 9, 2021 There is something to be said I think for long layoffs. From March to October these guys are playing every day nearly. At the end you give them 5-7 days off I think that introduces rust. I firmly believe that’s why the Tigers were so listless in game 1 of the 2006 SS, especially hitting. The timing gets thrown off. Baseball is so reactionary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 Randy Arozarena... man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 Tampa just got robbed. Guy on first, ball bounces off wall, hits outfielder and bounced into bullpen. Ruled a ground rule double (runner was rounding third)…. Next batter strikes out….third out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordstanley Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 (edited) 3 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said: Tampa just got robbed. Guy on first, ball bounces off wall, hits outfielder and bounced into bullpen. Ruled a ground rule double (runner was rounding third)…. Next batter strikes out….third out. Boston radio announcer calls it “a big break”. I’d say, and then some. 2019 precedent gives “no reason to give anything other than two bases” even when it hits a fielder. To their credit, Boston announcers find that hard to believe but consensus in press box is that for some reason there must not be any discretion. One suggests that if that’s the case, train fielders to kick balls out of play when necessary And sure enough, Red Sox just walk it off Edited October 11, 2021 by lordstanley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 Doesn’t matter in the long run, Boston wins on a two run homer… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted October 11, 2021 Author Share Posted October 11, 2021 Once I saw the rule as written it seems clear cut. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted October 11, 2021 Author Share Posted October 11, 2021 Best part of working from home is not having to listen to Lions fans in the office on mondays. this is one of the things that will change. No more “water cooler” talk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 9 hours ago, lordstanley said: Boston radio announcer calls it “a big break”. I’d say, and then some. 2019 precedent gives “no reason to give anything other than two bases” even when it hits a fielder. To their credit, Boston announcers find that hard to believe but consensus in press box is that for some reason there must not be any discretion. One suggests that if that’s the case, train fielders to kick balls out of play when necessary And sure enough, Red Sox just walk it off That was a huge break but I don't know how that could be ruled anything else other than a double. It was obviously nothing intentional on the players part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 (edited) It's a simple question. If most runners on 1st score on an actual double, then the rule should reflect that and give home plate to all runners on any ball ruled a ground rule double. If you had asked be before I did a search on this I would have said it's a slam dunk that the runner usually scores. Well - not so much - at least not up through 8 yrs ago. It's actually close enough to 50/50 that the only fair way to call it is to make it one of the umpires' responsibility to make a call about where the runner is when the ball goes out of bounds. There are 4 of them on the field, it seems one of them could be doing that. https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/4/21/5631146/chicago-white-sox-adam-dunn-score-from-first-on-double Edited October 11, 2021 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted October 11, 2021 Author Share Posted October 11, 2021 11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: It's a simple question. If most runners on 1st score on an actual double, then the rule should reflect that and give home plate to all runners on any ball ruled a ground rule double. If you had asked be before I did a search on this I would have said it's a slam dunk that the runner usually scores. Well - not so much - at least not up through 8 yrs ago. It's actually close enough to 50/50 that the only fair way to call it is to make it one of the umpires' responsibility to make a call about where the runner is when the ball goes out of bounds. There are 4 of them on the field, it seems one of them could be doing that. https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/4/21/5631146/chicago-white-sox-adam-dunn-score-from-first-on-double What's the numbers look like with 2 outs and the runner presumably going on contact? Is it cool to have a rule based on # of outs like that? I'm not sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted October 11, 2021 Author Share Posted October 11, 2021 I'm not a fan of rewriting rules due to extreme examples. Kind of like "We have to make the standards extremely high beause there's a 1:15M chance of possible fraud. Nobody's going to start throwing balls over the fence. If they think that happens then they will say the fielder had 'posession' and that means the runner advances 2 spots from where he was when the fielder touched the ball. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said: It's a simple question. If most runners on 1st score on an actual double, then the rule should reflect that and give home plate to all runners on any ball ruled a ground rule double. If you had asked be before I did a search on this I would have said it's a slam dunk that the runner usually scores. Well - not so much - at least not up through 8 yrs ago. It's actually close enough to 50/50 that the only fair way to call it is to make it one of the umpires' responsibility to make a call about where the runner is when the ball goes out of bounds. There are 4 of them on the field, it seems one of them could be doing that. https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/4/21/5631146/chicago-white-sox-adam-dunn-score-from-first-on-double I would've thought it had been a lot higher than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Cowan Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 I would have said 85% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 The MLB Rulebook is remarkably air tight. I was actually pretty impressed this exact play was right there. So many saying that it "should be" changed are just projecting their ignorance of the rules onto the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 The announcers were certain the rule would be looked at in the off season. Tampa wasn't happy with it but it looked like the best and only ruling they could make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 The announcers don't know jack about the rules. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Edman85 said: The MLB Rulebook is remarkably air tight. I was actually pretty impressed this exact play was right there. So many saying that it "should be" changed are just projecting their ignorance of the rules onto the situation. Yeah - the rules are fine. Unfortunately, it often seems the Umpires are maybe a little tight when they are calling them.... 🍷🍷🍷 Edited October 11, 2021 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Yeah - the rules are fine. Unfortunately, it often seems the Umpires are maybe a little tight when they are calling them.... 🍷🍷🍷 They nailed both of the controversial calls last night. Luis Garcia's motion on the other hand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 I think the main issue with the call last night is that, left to its own devices, the ball would have bounced back into play. It’s not as though it one-bounced over the fence on its own. It went over because a player pushed it over. So I could envision Baseball revisiting the rule on that basis. On the other hand, when a ball bounces off a fielders head and over the fence, it’s ruled a home run, even though left to its own devices the ball would have bounced off the fence or warning track. So there’s that precedent, too. I don’t have a strong opinion on it either way. I’d be fine with it bring either 100% ground rule double or replay umpire discretion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.