I missed it. What did DM say?William Robertson said:Yeah that explanation for the slow hook was hallucinogenic.
I missed it. What did DM say?William Robertson said:Yeah that explanation for the slow hook was hallucinogenic.
fineyoungarm said:Carl Crawford on why the weak groundball - "The media made me sad."
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
Didn't want to respond during the game, but I think they just didn't think about that particular situation. The rule is that fair/foul is only reviewable if it happens behind the standard first and third base umpire's position. I think the reason for the rule is the peculiarity of the fair/foul rule and the limits of camera positioning. The rule, of course, is that a ball that bounces in front of first or third base is fair or foul based on where it touches a player or crosses the bag. If, however, the ball first touches the ground past the bag, it is fair or foul based on whether it is fair or foul when it first touches a player or the field. In the first case, it's going to be very difficult to make a call using video. The question whether the ball is over the base or not when it passes the base is really a 3D question. Without some fancy technology like soccer goal line technology, or cameras in the sky directly above the bag (which do not exist in many ballparks), the view of the play is going to be very dependent on camera angles. So, I think the judgment is that video is rarely if ever going to be reliable, or at least more reliable than a properly positioned umpire. On a ball that first touches down after the bag, however, it's a much more objective question -- which side of the line did it land on. That's one where video evidence in a non-negligible number of cases is likely to be more reliable than what the umpire saw. So, it's appropriate for that fair/foul call.
So, that's the rationale for the rule. My hunch is that these are really the only two scenarios they were thinking about when they drafted the rule. They really weren't thinking about the question whether or not a batter is hit in the batter's box, which video can detect reliably. The way the rule is written, though, what can you do? Wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of modification.
Around a weak bullpen?Lowrielicious said:That's true. But with so many other weapons a good manager should be able to manage around that one weakness.
That Kershaw "said he was good" and then some gibberish about how it was a "three-hitter situation."soxhop411 said:I missed it. What did DM say?
William Robertson said:That Kershaw "said he was good" and then some gibberish about how it was a "three-hitter situation."
You could have a rotation of Aces, but you have a better chance of winning a jackpot then winning a WS with a shitty BPLowrielicious said:That's true. But with so many other weapons a good manager should be able to manage around that one weakness.
It is interesting that this postseason Relief Pitching (Royals, Giants) seems to be beating Starting Pitching (A's, Tigers, Dodgers).soxhop411 said:You could have a rotation of Aces, but you have a better chance of winning a jackpot then winning a WS with a shitty BP
soxhop411 said:You could have a rotation of Aces, but you have a better chance of winning a jackpot then winning a WS with a shitty BP
It's the PR thing that blows my mind.DrewDawg said:I can't get over Don Mattingly not starting his best hitter in an elimination game.
DrewDawg said:I can't get over Don Mattingly not starting his best hitter in an elimination game.
MakMan44 said:It's the PR thing that blows my mind.
William Robertson said:My reaction to the last few days: I'm thinking about sending a thank-you note to Terry Francona.
What is the thinking on the effect of the marine layer on fly balls ? I vaguely recall seeing something on that a while back.glasspusher said:From my driveway, 9 miles due east and 1250 feet above sea level, I can see into the Giant's ballpark. Unfortunately, owing to the curvature of the earth, I can only see down to the box seats.
Tonight I can't even do that, enough haze in the marine layer to obscure the view.
I really, really like your idea but I can't think of a single manager who would do it.Remagellan said:If you have a bad bullpen and great starters you use your starters in the pen. In this case DM could have brought Jansen in when Kershaw got in trouble and then used Haren to finish the game. But take what I say with a grain of salt since I turned on the game after getting home right as Adams came to the plate.
Lowrielicious said:What is the thinking on the effect of the marine layer on fly balls ? I vaguely recall seeing something on that a while back.
It's heavier, but the wind is blowing out. Might see some balls going out.Lowrielicious said:What is the thinking on the effect of the marine layer on fly balls ? I vaguely recall seeing something on that a while back.
Amen.William Robertson said:My reaction to the last few days: I'm thinking about sending a thank-you note to Terry Francona.
In the 80s at Santa Cruz Saturday. You almost never get that in the summer.glasspusher said:
Cooler air, sometimes with fog. Would slow things down. Yesterday was warm, with the air coming off of the land. A couple of days earlier it was stronger off of the land, no marine layer to speak of. The warm season out here is Sept-Oct. I tell folks from back east that August and October are flipped here.
And Farrell.Rough Carrigan said:Amen.
You realize how comparatively great Playoff Tito was when you see Ausmus and Mattingly.