Jeff Passan @JeffPassan 35s36 seconds ago
David Ortiz suspended one game for bumping umpire John Tumpane.
David Ortiz suspended one game for bumping umpire John Tumpane.
David Ortiz suspended one game for bumping umpire
- Thread starter Corsi
- Start date
Brian MacPherson @brianmacp 3m3 minutes ago
David Ortiz has been suspended one game for making contact with an umpire. He has appealed.
David Ortiz has been suspended one game for making contact with an umpire. He has appealed.
geoduck no quahog said:
...or whenever it would be Craig's day regardless.
Edit: it might just be that he's appealing to get to face Archer, with Holt and Nava in for Bogaerts and Napoli already.
I know this is Union and CBA related but these suspensions and appeals need to be stronger and less flexible. In this case, Ortiz can actually try and time his appeal to a more convenient time. (Or maybe he is serving it today after all)?
How about pitchers? They usually try and time the appeals for off days and stuff. Wanna suspend a player, donit efective immediately, and choose the dates. That way it has teeth.
How about pitchers? They usually try and time the appeals for off days and stuff. Wanna suspend a player, donit efective immediately, and choose the dates. That way it has teeth.
M
MentalDisabldLst
Guest
Aside from all the discussion around timing, and gaming the system: Papi's suspension was probably deserved. The call was probably wrong, but it was close, and didn't deserve anything close to the tirade he delivered. Frankly, 1 game is kinda him getting the benefit of a "veteran call" from the league.
Do they silently fine umpires, the instigator Meals was beyond bad and it is evident he carried a grudge into Sunday's game.
trekfan55 said:
How do you propose giving the suspension teeth while still allowing for appeals (and you absolutely can't suspend without opportunity to appeal)? And bear in mind it's the commissioner's office that sets the appeal schedule, so it's not like the Sox have any control over how long they get to "work" the suspension timing. And once the appeal is heard, if it is heard, all control of when the suspension is served is gone. It happens immediately.
I don't think a one game suspension is supposed to have a whole lot of teeth to begin with, anyway. It's a routine slap on the wrist for the infraction he committed. While Ortiz appears to have the luxury of choosing his "day off", it's still going to be a day where the Red Sox have to play with a short bench.
Have an extra penalty if appealed and lost (along with not being able to drop appeal). E.g., it's a 1 game suspension but if you lose the appeal its 2 games. Or word it the other way around. It's a 2 game suspension, but if you serve it right away and don't appeal they'll drop a game off it.
They do that here with speeding tickets all the time. Fine is $200 but if you pay within a a week or whatever and don't challenge it, you only have to pay $150.
Seems like an easy enough solution.
They do that here with speeding tickets all the time. Fine is $200 but if you pay within a a week or whatever and don't challenge it, you only have to pay $150.
Seems like an easy enough solution.
No matter when he takes it he still loses pay for that game IIRC. There is always the possibility it gets take at the "wrong time". He takes the suspension on what would have been an off day but the Sox play a long extra inning game that day. His bat off the bench in a key situation isn't there when the Sox need it.
Yes you can game the system to make the suspension convenient but that can also backfire.
Yes you can game the system to make the suspension convenient but that can also backfire.
Rice4HOF said:
Is this a serious suggestion? It would never pass the laugh test with the union.It's an incentive for players to waive a right enshrined in the CBA.
It's all in the wording. They can word it something such as "Mr. Baseball Player is getting a 5 game suspension. But if he chooses not to appeal and save some of our time, we can reduce it to 3 games". The alternative (now) is he just gets a 5 game suspension and can try to appeal. The union isn't losing anything by agreeing to this modification. The player can still appeal and it's no different than before. But if he decides not to appeal he can shave some days off the suspension. Is it an incentive to waive their right to appeal? Sure, but nobody is forcing them to do so. Players who appeal end up the same way as now. Players who don't have their suspension reduced. Don't see how that's not a win for the players and union.Otis Foster said:
So you have to pay a $40 fee to challenge a $150 traffic ticket, assuming 20% of challenges are successful? It's almost as if there is an incentive to create fees to increase municipal revenues. Oh, wait.Rice4HOF said:
I agree the current appeal system is non-optimal, but judgments are handed down knowing they can be moved. If they really wanted to punish Ortiz they'd give him 10 games. This is just a warning. If you really want to make appeals served at random times, just fix the date of suspension at the time the appeal is filed, and if the appeal is dropped the date stays the same. You'll still get some appeals filed to push back suspensions, and players near retirement might use appeals to delay, but that system will discourage appeals to change timing.
Jim Palmer to the Baltimore Sun, following up on Papi's ejection last Sunday:
"I’m still waiting for somebody from Boston or David to come out and apologize for throwing his team under the bus, because that’s what he did that day."
So arguing a call and getting ejected is throwing his team under the bus now? Interesting perspective.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/schmuck-blog/bal-jim-palmer-and-david-ortiz-still-estranged-after-twitter-dustup-20150424-story.html
"I’m still waiting for somebody from Boston or David to come out and apologize for throwing his team under the bus, because that’s what he did that day."
So arguing a call and getting ejected is throwing his team under the bus now? Interesting perspective.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/schmuck-blog/bal-jim-palmer-and-david-ortiz-still-estranged-after-twitter-dustup-20150424-story.html
Palmer is a bit gutless in all this since he apparently makes it a habit to visit the opposing team's clubhouse at the start of a series and was conspicuously absent yesterday. If he wants Ortiz to man up here, maybe a face-to-face conversation might be in order.Section15Box113 said:
I'll say this about MASN. At least Palmer talks about baseball during the game...which is a hell of a lot more than I can say for a certain beloved color commentator we know.
During the broadcast last night, I thought Palmer actually made it a point to compliment Ortiz and his accomplishments. His biggest criticism was reserved for Machado when he popped out in the 9th and emphatically threw his bat down. However, I think a quick behind the scenes conversation between Palmer and Ortiz would put the matter to rest, which is where it belongs.
...and his point stands. Ortiz helps no one by getting thrown out of the game, unless you think the fuss results in more leeway on the next checked swing, which I doubt very much.
geoduck no quahog said:
Nobody is arguing otherwise. Sometimes people lose their temper and do things that are counterproductive. People who aren't as pretentious and douchebaggish as Jim Palmer understand this.
...I'm a charter and long time member of the Jim Palmer is a Douchebag Club.
Until they raised the dues.
Until they raised the dues.
I lived in DC for 13 years and I think Palmer is pretty good. Ortiz has his share of haters. So it goes.
grimshaw said:
Probably. I think the two biggest A-Rod challengers were probably Youk and Price before they moved on. Watch out for a hard-charging Adam Jones, though. It's a shame Showalter himself isn't eligible, but he sure does seem to rub off.
If he's getting today off anyway why not just drop the appeal? Yeah they lose him as a PH off the bench but I'd get this over with rather than let MLB dictate when he has to sit out, assuming he doesn't win the appeal.
Really, what are the chances that the suspension is reduced below a single game when he made contact with an ump? I know some players involved in brawls have had suspensions removed on appeal, but this is a simpler case--you fight the law and the law wins.
Why didn't he just serve it for a game vs. a lefty or a day he was going to sit out? He bumped the ump, did he REALLY think he wasn't going to get one game for that? Sanchez is the type of pitcher he should be facing. Ack. Nice start to the New Look Red Sox.Corsi said: