The Official 2015 MLB Season Thread - Congrats, Royals

[CDeacMan]

Usually that would be like "wtf its a regular season game" but that was a BOMB in such a crucial, intense, highly emotional moment. I usually hate the Blue Jays but that was just cool. Great game.

That's my thought. If ever a moment called for a reaction like Bautista's, it was that game.

 

[Shorty]

Saw this on twitter--

October 14 in postseason history:
1976: Chambliss HR
1985: Ozzie "Go Crazy"
1992: Francisco Cabrera/Sid Bream
2003: Bartman
2015: The 7th inning at Skydome

Wow. I was watching every one of those. I was in Fulton County Stadium for the Francisco Cabrera/Sid Bream game. I was watching the Chris Chambliss HR in the TV room with a bunch of fraternity brothers who were bandwagon Yankees fans. Almost as bad as bandwagon Duke fans.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

So I'm a little confused about the the "interference" debate in the game last night. I see all these rules quotes about interference but I don't see them in the actual rule book. Rule 6.03 says the batter is out when he "interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher’s play at home base." There's nothing about legal position in the box being a safe zone or intent that keeps being brought up. Are they quoting an umpire manual separate from the rule book? I don't think the batter meant to do it but his sticking the bat way out in the catcher's natural throwing lane is certainly a "movement that hindered the catcher's play." Anyway I get that it's a moot point given the outcome of the game but I still think the umpire's initial call was correct.

 

[wfudkn]

I'm a rangers fan and I don't have a problem with Bautista's reaction.

 

[Shorty]

I'm neither a Rangers nor a Jays fan and I have no problem with Bautista's bat flip, either. I would also have no problem with the Rangers drilling him in his first at bat against them next year.

 

[Frosty]

So I'm a little confused about the the "interference" debate in the game last night. I see all these rules quotes about interference but I don't see them in the actual rule book. Rule 6.03 says the batter is out when he "interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher’s play at home base." There's nothing about legal position in the box being a safe zone or intent that keeps being brought up. Are they quoting an umpire manual separate from the rule book? I don't think the batter meant to do it but his sticking the bat way out in the catcher's natural throwing lane is certainly a "movement that hindered the catcher's play." Anyway I get that it's a moot point given the outcome of the game but I still think the umpire's initial call was correct.

My understanding of the rule is that as long as the batter is standing in the batter's box, he cannot be called for interference unless it is intentional. The same thought process applies to a throw to second from the catcher. The batter doesn't have to move from the box to allow the catcher to make a throw, but he cannot intentionally obstruct a throw, regardless as to whether he is standing in the box or not. The key to this one is that Choo was standing in the box and didn't intentionally interfere.

The rest of the game was played under protest by the Jays, but fortunately they settled it on the field so the MLB couldn't muck it up even more.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

I agree with with both those statements. I mean usually you don't like a batter to admire his shot and show up your pitcher, but that was a pretty charged situation. There's nothing illegal about what he did. If they want to throw one in his ribs next spring, fine by me. Although I wouldn't be that steamed about it.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

My understanding of the rule is that as long as the batter is standing in the batter's box, he cannot be called for interference unless it is intentional. The same thought process applies to a throw to second from the catcher. The batter doesn't have to move from the box to allow the catcher to make a throw, but he cannot intentionally obstruct a throw, regardless as to whether he is standing in the box or not. The key to this one is that Choo was standing in the box and didn't intentionally interfere.

The rest of the game was played under protest by the Jays, but fortunately they settled it on the field so the MLB couldn't muck it up even more.

Yeah, I'm glad it didn't affect the outcome. My point is just that there is nothing in the rule book or comments that mention intent. And MLB keeps quoting something that does, and I'm just wondering where it comes from. Also, the box is not a safe zone and there are plenty of other situations when doing nothing in the box can still be interference. Likewise, there are plenty of times when you can interfere without it being intentional. The quotes seem to make this a special case that I don't see in the rules and just wonder where it comes from. Cue the "Reff" jokes but I umpire a lot of little league games and the rules on interference are almost identically worded. I would have called interference, just like the ump initially did. I'm just surprised it seems so open and shut today. Maybe it wouldn't be Toronto ended up losing.

 

[Frosty]

Yeah, I'm glad it didn't affect the outcome. My point is just that there is nothing in the rule book or comments that mention intent. And MLB keeps quoting something that does, and I'm just wondering where it comes from. Also, the box is not a safe zone and there are plenty of other situations when doing nothing in the box can still be interference. Likewise, there are plenty of times when you can interfere without it being intentional. The quotes seem to make this a special case that I don't see in the rules and just wonder where it comes from. Cue the "Reff" jokes but I umpire a lot of little league games and the rules on interference are almost identically worded. I would have called interference, just like the ump initially did. I'm just surprised it seems so open and shut today. Maybe it wouldn't be Toronto ended up losing.

The thing I'm still a little unclear on is that it looked like Choo's hand and bat were outside of the box and that's what was struck on the throw back to the pitcher. I get the idea that hitting part of the batter that is inside of the box not being interference. That makes sense. But I think that, in the spirit of the rule (whatever the hell that means), that the umpire was correct in calling it dead and leaving it at that. Most of the explanations I've seen today have been talking about the whole standing in the box and not intentionally interfering thing, which I can get on board with, but I didn't know that's how it is called until last night. I caught all through high school and I hit batters in situations like this before and it was always called dead and nobody argued it.

 

[HONDO2]

The thing I'm still a little unclear on is that it looked like Choo's hand and bat were outside of the box and that's what was struck on the throw back to the pitcher.

I've seen the replays from behind in the booth and from the center field angles. I definitely see the bat directly over the inner chalk line of the box....not out/over the plate.

BTW, major props to the base runner on 3rd. He was the only guy on the field who didn't freeze in confusion.

 

[Frosty]

BTW, major props to the base runner on 3rd. He was the only guy on the field who didn't freeze in confusion.

Agreed. That was a great heads up play by Odor to run it out despite the ball being called dead on the field.

 

[Say Hey Deac]

Throwing at batters is so goddamn lame. Bryce Harper was correct about that. Bautista's bat flip was awesome. If the Rangers had a problem with it, maybe they should not have played defense that inning like a bunch of dickheads and then served the dude a fat pitch to crush.

 

[CantStandYa]

What was the deal with Tulo losing his damn mind? Does he have a Beltre-esque thing about not being touched, except for him it's his buttcheeks? Or do we think Dyson said some weird ass shit to him?

The Royals/Astros game was entertaining as well, but a tough second act to the Jays/Rangers shenanigans.

 

[avalon]

Must be something that was said. Time to mic up the players so we don't miss this important stuff.

 

[deacphan]

Throwing at batters is so goddamn lame. Bryce Harper was correct about that. Bautista's bat flip was awesome. If the Rangers had a problem with it, maybe they should not have played defense that inning like a bunch of dickheads and then served the dude a fat pitch to crush.

+1

 

[deac29]

Jose Bautista has nothing on Rickey


[video]https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video/CRXgK9jUEAARL3u.mp4[/video]

 

[Frosty]

I, for one, welcome the bat flip arms race which is now upon us.

But seriously, if the mets gave up a huge homer to the dodgers tonight and a bat was flipped I wouldn't be mad about the bat flip. I'd be pissed about giving up a dinger, not the reaction. If you don't want to watch someone flip their bat, don't toss fucking meatballs for them to atomize.

 

[deacphan]

<3 rickey

 

[Frosty]

<3 rickey

Man, I love Rickey Henderson. My favorite Rickey story was when he called Harold Reynolds, who led the AL in steals (60) for the season. It was the only season from '80-'91 that Rickey didn't lead the AL in steals.

Reynolds telling of their conversation went like this:

"The phone rings. 'Henderson here.' I say, 'Hey, what's going on, Rickey?' I think he's calling to congratulate me, but he goes, 'Sixty stolen bases? You ought to be ashamed. Rickey would have 60 at the break.' And then click, he hung up."

 

[avalon]

Every reason why Blue Jays-Rangers Game 5 was one of the best, weirdest games ever

You see Bautista looking at the pitcher for a split second. That's him saying, "Am I pissed at this pitcher? No, man. I'm pissed at THE FUCKING UNIVERSE" and flipping the bat accordingly. Hopefully he hit the universe in the eye. Good for him.

Think of where Bautista came from. He came up with the '04 Orioles, who were garbage. They said, nah, don't need you. So they sent him to the '04 Rays, who were unimpeachable garbage. They passed. No thanks. He traveled to the '04 Royals, one of the bigger shitstorms in the last 20 years, and they traded him after a month. He was on the Mets for a day -- literally a day --- before he moved to the Pirates, who were a dirigible accident of a franchise back then.

The worst teams in baseball didn't want him. Then he became a six-time All-Star. And you're telling him that his first chance in the postseason, his first chance to play deep into October, is going to be ruined because of a technicality? He wasn't flipping the bat at the Rangers. He was flipping the bat at the technicality.

Great pic: