Cal Ripken can eat my asshole

[batmagadanleadoff]

dinosaur jesus wrote: Keith called it late (after reviewing the play a few times), but IIRC stopped just sort of calling it dirty on Saturday's SNY post game show. He agreed with the rest of the (biased?) SNY team that the umps should have called a double play. Cool. Seems reasonable to me.

Cool. Me and Keith see it the same way: illegal, but not dirty.

[Vic Sage]

he said it was a football tackle, a rolling block that was illegal and should've been a DP.
I'm disappointed in Ronny for letting Cal spew stupid stuff without ever raising a counter argument. He doesn't have to say "Jane, you ignorant slut", but he could say "well, there's breaking up a double play, and then there is tackling a guy by throwing yourself into his legs from behind, without even attempting to touch the bag."

[Fman99]

Vic Sage wrote: he said it was a football tackle, a rolling block that was illegal and should've been a DP. I'm disappointed in Ronny for letting Cal spew stupid stuff without ever raising a counter argument. He doesn't have to say "Jane, you ignorant slut", but he could say "well, there's breaking up a double play, and then there is tackling a guy by throwing yourself into his legs from behind, without even attempting to touch the bag."

I would like Ronnie to ask him how he feels about chowing down on warm CPF anal meat.

[Elster88]

Throwing the word warm in there is what makes you Fman. Beautiful and elegant

[Fman99]

Elster88 wrote: Throwing the word warm in there is what makes you Fman. Beautiful and elegant

Aw shucks

[seawolf17]

I think Ernie Johnson is starting to get tired of Cal's crap. He "joked" last night about Cal and Ronnie switching seats.

[Lefty Specialist]

Well, Ernie's pretty annoying all by himself. If I hear 'Iron Man' one more time, I'm going to get Robert Downey to beat him up.

[Edgy MD]

THE RIPKEN WAY

MISSION STATEMENT
Inspire through remarkable experiences - The Ripken Way.

VISION
Elevate every player's potential - on the field, and in life.

THE RIPKEN WAY
The Ripken Way is about perseverance, integrity and the unwavering commitment to be, and do our best. The Ripken Way shapes every experience with our brand - we celebrate the customer, we keep it simple, we make it fun and we align every experience with our purpose to forge the future of baseball.

CORE PILLARS
Keep it Simple: Simplicity empowers the message.
Explain the Why: Purpose drives the human spirit (us).
Celebrate the Individual: Fuel their willpower to succeed.
Have Fun: Joy shatters the limits of what we can achieve- the game is supposed to be fun.

VALUES
Family
Passion
Integrity
Innovation
Teamwork
Community
Perseverance
Commitment to Excellence

WE ARE BASEBALL
Baseball was, is and will be excellence on and off the field. Baseball was, is and will be teamwork. Baseball was, is and will be community. Baseball was, is and will be family. One big family. The Ripken Family. This will radiate through everything we do on the field.

THE RIPKEN EXPERIENCE
We challenge ourselves to create breakthrough experiences aimed to empower each athlete with The Ripken Way. The goal is to leave every kid, every parent and every coach better than when we first met. The Ripken Experience is about inviting everyone to be a part of the Ripken Family.

WHAT'S NEXT
We respect baseball's past but ask ourselves every day what's next. We innovate how kids train for, think of and play baseball. That's the Ripken Way.


INTERESTED IN PLAYING BASEBALL THE RIPKEN WAY?
CLICK AROUND THIS SITE AND LEARN ABOUT ALL THAT RIPKEN BASEBALL HAS TO OFFER.

[Lefty Specialist]

Well, there's a 'breakthrough experience' for ya.

[Edgy MD]

WE ARE BASEBALL Baseball was, is and will be excellence on and off the field. Baseball was, is and will be teamwork. Baseball was, is and will be community. Baseball was, is and will be family. One big family. The Ripken Family. This will radiate through everything we do on the field.

And I thought Phil Jackson got away with obscuritanism-as-guru philosophy bullshit.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

RIPKEN BASEBALL: IT'S PRETTY SERIOUSLY RADIOACTIVE

[batmagadanleadoff]

[fimg=744:1u8o7ftb]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/ripken.jpg[/fimg:1u8o7ftb]

You people don't think Utley's slide was a good solid baseball play? Then you're fucking nuts. Utley got away with it, because the illegal takeout slide is [crossout:1u8o7ftb]rarely[/crossout:1u8o7ftb] usually not ever called as interference. And Utley knew that, as did every baseball player. The Dodgers stole a game. Otherwise, this series would've been over days ago. The Mets would've swept. And today, they'd be resting and setting their pitching rotation for optimal use in the NLCS. Instead, they have to play an elimination game on the road against a rested Greinke and use deGrom, probably guaranteeing that deGrom won't get three NLCS starts should the Mets advance to the next round.

It was a good solid baseball play. And, so far, the key play of this NLDS.

Edited October 14, 2015 by Guest

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: It was a good solid baseball play.

Sure, and if they pinch hit Eric Goeddel and he just went up there and shanked Clayton Kershaw, it would've been a good solid baseball play. Gets him out of the game. Eric is expendable. Mets might win the game against relievers.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: It was a good solid baseball play. Sure, and if they pinch hit Eric Goeddel and he just went up there and shanked Clayton Kershaw, it would've been a good solid baseball play. Gets him out of the game. Eric is expendable. Mets might win the game against relievers.

If by shanked, you mean, I dunno, Goeddel approaches the mound and knocks out Kershaw, that's moronic. That would be so beyond the pale of baseball, Kershaw would actually have grounds to sue Goeddel. [OE -- And the authorities might even arrest Goeddel and charge him with a crime. There'd be grounds.] That wouldn't be solid. It'd be obviously, unquestionably dirty, even if the Mets gained an edge.

(But it'd be interesting to see).

Edited October 14, 2015 by Guest

[Guest d'Kong76]

That picture above is the wrong angle to use. Where's that picture with
his arm photoshoped with a 2 1/2 foot extension.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: It was a good solid baseball play. Sure, and if they pinch hit Eric Goeddel and he just went up there and shanked Clayton Kershaw, it would've been a good solid baseball play. Gets him out of the game. Eric is expendable. Mets might win the game against relievers. If by shanked, you mean, I dunno, Goeddel approaches the mound and knocks out Kershaw, that's moronic. That would be so beyond the pale of baseball, Kershaw would actually have grounds to sue Goeddel. That wouldn't be solid. It'd be obviously, unquestionably dirty, even if the Mets gained an edge. (But it'd be interesting to see).

It's an exaggeration, but not much.

but if you want to keep it along the 'pretend it's baseball' lines.. he could drag bunt down the first baseline and just barrel into Kershaw when he goes to field it.

[metsmarathon]

in the 90's, taking steroids was also a good solid baseball play.

[Guest d'Kong76]

And greenies and other assorted goodies before that! Solid.

[Edgy MD]

Greeenies taste better than assholes. Trust me on this.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Tastier than you'd think, though? Fielder poop served in Escupidor ear.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: It was a good solid baseball play. Sure, and if they pinch hit Eric Goeddel and he just went up there and shanked Clayton Kershaw, it would've been a good solid baseball play. Gets him out of the game. Eric is expendable. Mets might win the game against relievers. If by shanked, you mean, I dunno, Goeddel approaches the mound and knocks out Kershaw, that's moronic. That would be so beyond the pale of baseball, Kershaw would actually have grounds to sue Goeddel. That wouldn't be solid. It'd be obviously, unquestionably dirty, even if the Mets gained an edge. (But it'd be interesting to see). It's an exaggeration, but not much. but if you want to keep it along the 'pretend it's baseball' lines.. he could drag bunt down the first baseline and just barrel into Kershaw when he goes to field it.

I'd need to know what the bunter's intent was before I could characterize your hypothetical. Intent is everything here. If the bunter's only intent was simply to try and get a hit or to bunt to advance a runner or runners, and the play simply unfolded the way you described it by happenstance, then the play wouldn't be dirty at all, and whether or not it was a solid baseball play would depend on the quality of its execution. OTOH, obviously, a batter who plans that bunt out ahead of time with the main purpose of positioning the opposing pitcher so that he's exposed to an injury that's supposed to look accidental or natural to the game would be executing a very dirty play. This is an easy one.

I realize that gauging a player's intent isn't easy, and umps should never be in a position where their calls depend on how they perceive intent. It's not as reliable a method as we'd like it to be. An ump can't prove intent with a video review and an accused player, even one with bad intent will still always have plausible deniability because umps aren't mind readers. But umps still have to make those judgments all the time. It's unavoidable. They're always, for example, gauging a pitcher's intent when a pitch is too close for comfort, or decks the batter.

But as I wrote in another post, I believe Utley when he said he didn't intend to injure Tejada. So to me, it was a solid play. Because under those playoff circumstances, I believe that almost every single player would've attempted to take out the second baseman. Tejada's injury is obviously unfortunate and, really, a terrible thing. But I'm not gonna factor Tejada's injury in deciding for myself whether or not the slide was dirty because Tejada's injury is a risk that's natural to the game he plays and Utley's intent shouldn't be based on Tejada's injury. It's not as if Utley pulled out a knife and stabbed Tejada in the eyeballs. It was a screwy play as everyone knows because the umps blew the interference call and Utley never touched the base but that's on the umps and the review system that's in place, not on Utley. The slide was clearly illegal. But not dirty. Utley likely played to the existing rules and the existing protocol and the way umps do things. Or don't do things. Interference isn't usually called, even when it ought to. So in my book, it was a solid play.

[Ceetar]

yeah, no. Utley didn't intend to injure Tejada in the same way a boxer doesn't intend to injure his opponent.


But baseball isn't boxing, and it's not meant to be a full-contact sport.

And by deviating from the baseline to intentionally hit a player, and sliding AFTER you're out, you're intending to hit him. Sure, Utley didn't mean for him to get hurt. Might as well have said "I hope you land on your feet!"

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: yeah, no. Utley didn't intend to injure Tejada in the same way a boxer doesn't intend to injure his opponent. But baseball isn't boxing, and it's not meant to be a full-contact sport.

Not entirely true. Plays at second base are inherently dangerous and frequently involve full contact, even when the runner's slide is legal. Especially when the runner's slide is legal. Plays at the plate where the runner tries to score on a catcher who already has the ball -- even more so. Those plays often result in full contact. The neighborhood play is an attempt to mitigate the risks of injuries from plays at second base and it's existence essentially confirms the danger of that play. Baseball isn't boxing, but its players are exposed to serious injury from the natural and expected play of the game, just the same.

Ceetar wrote: And by deviating from the baseline to intentionally hit a player, and sliding AFTER you're out, you're intending to hit him. Sure, Utley didn't mean for him to get hurt. Might as well have said "I hope you land on your feet!"

I dunno. It seems that you're saying that all illegal plays are dirty. We agree that Utley thought he was out before coming into contact with Tejada. That's why his slide was illegal. No one's saying the slide was legal. Except the Dodgers, their fans and Cal Ripken. Utley assumed he'd be out and was concerned solely with preventing the double play so that the lead runner could score and the inning could continue. It was a smart play because interference plays are enforced weakly and inconsistently and Utley knew that. That's a problem that baseball made, not the players. So long as the umps don't call that play, the players'll continue to make illegal take out slides, especially in the post-season. And it'll be easy to rationalize: "How could that slide be dirty if the umps hardly call it"? This'll all probably change soon enough because of the Utley slide, because of the injury Tejada sustained, because it happened in the playoffs, on National TV between a game involving the two largest markets, and because everyone knows that the final result was unjust even though the replay umps followed the rules precisely.

[Edgy MD]

The egregiousness with which an act is performed can subtly or obviously indicate intent, or depraved indifference. And umps have been in the position to judge in such cases forever.

[Centerfield]

Depraved indifference being the key.

I have no doubt that Chase Utley didn't go into that slide thinking "Break his leg".

I think he went into that slide thinking "Take him out", with a depraved indifference over whether he broke his leg or not.

Idiots who drive 100 MPH drunk out of their minds don't do it with an intent to kill people. They do it with a depraved indifference of the lives of others.

[dinosaur jesus]

Going out of the baseline to take out the fielder does happen all the time, it's almost never called, and it's not generally considered a dirty play. That's all true, but everyone who keeps repeating that is missing the point. What makes this play dirty is that Ruben's back was turned. It was turned when Utley left his feet, and was still turned when Utley hit him. And the other defense of Utley, that Ruben was out of position (because of Murphy's poor feed and his own bad decision to try for the double play) is also beside the point. Utley could see that Ruben was defenseless, and he went after him anyway.

[Ceetar]

also, to Cal's stupid point that Tejada should've known he wouldn't be able to turn the DP (clearly up for debate) shouldn't Utley have known Tejada, with his back turned, couldn't have turned the DP and not make the extra move to take out Tejada risking both Tejada AND himself?

Yes, i'm saying all illegal slides are dirty. Even if you slide well in advance with your feet at his feet, there's still an injury risk. Neighborhood play and Posey rules are attempts to legislate that stuff out of the game. It's still against the rules, and just because it's rarely called doesn't mean it's never called. A quick google finds calls being made, and wrong ones too. I found an instance where the umps called interference merely for a guy, who beat the throw to second (running on the pitch) gently bumped the fielder while trying to maintain possession of the bag. It didn't even hinder the fielder but the umps correctly called interference. And then, despite being unable to review (because he actually threw the ball so it WAS a neighborhood play) they changed the ruling on the field to a madeup rule of 'unintentional' interference and called the guy at second out and let the runner at first stay. (ruled a dead ball)

So yeah, dirty slide. And we know Utley has seen that play called interference before, so it's not like he's unaware. willfully and deliberately interfering is dirty, whether it's a hard barrel role, a slide at the feet, or waving your arms or screaming "AAAHHHH" at a fielder.

[batmagadanleadoff]

dinosaur jesus wrote: Going out of the baseline to take out the fielder does happen all the time, it's almost never called, and it's not generally considered a dirty play. That's all true, but everyone who keeps repeating that is missing the point. What makes this play dirty is that Ruben's back was turned. It was turned when Utley left his feet, and was still turned when Utley hit him. And the other defense of Utley, that Ruben was out of position (because of Murphy's poor feed and his own bad decision to try for the double play) is also beside the point. Utley could see that Ruben was defenseless, and he went after him anyway.

I'm open-minded to all of this. Later tonight, maybe before the game, I'll take a good look at the slide in light of what you're explaining. I recorded that game, but when I went to check the result, I discovered that my recording ended in the 6th inning. So my recording didn't include the whole brouhaha and the post-game analysis. My remote control is very touch-sensitive and I figure I must've inadvertently pressed the stop record button while I was watching the game. That happens once or twice a year to me. But I still have the pre-game from the following game so I'll take another look.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Here's the whole shebang...
[youtube:2skkmm4n]iL2KsomXxbU[/youtube:2skkmm4n]

[batmagadanleadoff]

d'Kong76 wrote: Here's the whole shebang... [youtube]iL2KsomXxbU[/youtube]

Thanks. I just finishing watching the slide again a coupl'a times. In real time. And in stopping and pausing and stopping and pausing mode. It's inconclusive to me. Utley's dirtiness, that is. Utley had already begun his slide a tick before Tejada spun or pirouetted counter-clockwise. I'm not sure that Utley had time to anticipate that Tejada's would spin counter-clockwise. Had Tejada spun clockwise instead, he probably wouldn't have been exposed blindly and he'd also be positioned differently and thus might have escaped physical harm. I'm not convinced that Utley knew which way Tejada was gonna spin. I think that the conventional or typical play in that setup is for the infielder to spin clockwise until his front shoulder is in line with the first baseman for the throw to first. It was a bang bang play at high speed between athletes competing at their sport's highest level. Of course, I'm nor blaming Tejada for anything. I just think that his reverse spin might not have been anticipated.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Guest