About 90 MPH this year according to fangraphsJaylach said:
89MPH, so probably a change up? I don't know what Workman hits on his fastball off the top of my head.
Andrew said:
This keeps getting repeated as fact, but you're intentionally leaving out that it was a breaking ball and, though it was high, it wasn't at his head. I just watched it again to be sure, it was much closer to his back than his head. You can get all holier-than-thou if you want, but don't criticize someone for being willfully obtuse and then doing the same. Workman wasn't headhunting.
He obviously took a little off the fastball to make sure he had proper aimMakMan44 said:About 90 MPH this year according to fangraphs
EDIT: For comparison, they have his change up at about 83 MPH
Average Reds said:
To say that Workman did not throw the ball there on purpose is to expose yourself as a fool.
Perhaps he let up because he didn't want to actually hurt anyone - I can't know his motivation or his specific intent - but let's not pretend he didn't throw that pitch exactly where he wanted.
Andrew said:
This keeps getting repeated as fact, but you're intentionally leaving out that it was a breaking ball and, though it was high, it wasn't at his head. I just watched it again to be sure, it was much closer to his back than his head. You can get all holier-than-thou if you want, but don't criticize someone for being willfully obtuse and then doing the same. Workman wasn't headhunting.
I am away from my TV so if you can recap that would be greatSnodgrass'Muff said:MLB's MLB Now is opening up with this story, for those interested.
Andrew said:
I mean, it's right there in front of you. Someone just posted it. It's not higher than his shoulders. There's no way that could have hit his head. Keep calling people idiots and fools all you want if that's all you have. It doesn't change that he clearly wasn't going to hit Longoria in the head.
joe dokes said:
It was behind his head. Which is worse. (the one thing Price did right was throw at Ortiz exactly where you are "supposed to" throw at a guy. His ass, more or less).
Under the circumstances, I think its more than reasonable to conclude that Workman intentionally threw at Longoria. (he did a really shitty job of it). Do I KNOW that? No. The issue to me is Price, not Workman.
If this was a replay situation,
joe dokes said:
It was behind his head. Which is worse. (the one thing Price did right was throw at Ortiz exactly where you are "supposed to" throw at a guy. His ass, more or less).
Under the circumstances, I think its more than reasonable to conclude that Workman intentionally threw at Longoria. (he did a really shitty job of it). Do I KNOW that? No. The issue to me is Price, not Workman.
If this was a replay situation,
Andrew said:
I mean, it's right there in front of you. Someone just posted it. It's not higher than his shoulders. There's no way that could have hit his head. Keep calling people idiots and fools all you want if that's all you have. It doesn't change that he clearly wasn't going to hit Longoria in the head.
Average Reds said:
Thank you for self-identifying so I can build out my ignore list.
Jaylach said:
I just posted a gif, and it wasn't really behind his head. It was more behind his upper back (around where the letters are). I'm not sure he could back into that pitch with his head, unless he squatted.
garlan5 said:Verducci saying it was fair
soxhop411 said:I am away from my TV so if you can recap that would be great
Average Reds said:
You are not taking into account the camera angle. It goes right behind his head.
Jaylach said:
I just posted a gif, and it wasn't really behind his head. It was more behind his upper back (around where the letters are). I'm not sure he could back into that pitch with his head, unless he squatted.
EDIT - Not trying to say I think Workman threw at Longoria on purpose or not (I don't know, no one here knows). I'm just pointing out it wasn't this thing that just missed his head by inches. It wasn't all that close, really.
The number is valid. I just called and voiced my concerns regarding objectivity, fairness and potential bias. Worth nothing I realize, but the complaint was taken down by someone (intern). I asked for a reply via email as well.joe dokes said:
You could call Bud:
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/about_mlb/index.jsp Allan H. (Bud) Selig, Commissioner Address: 245 Park Avenue, 31st Floor City: New York, State: NY Zip Code: 10167 Phone: 212-931-7800 Fax: 212-949-5654
Jaylach said:
I'm actually looking for a second angle now because I'm not convinced it was that close to his head. It looks a good foot (well, maybe 10 inches) away, to me.
joe dokes said:
He's not as good at throwing at hitters as Price is. Under the circumstances, he's gonna lose that argument 100 out of 100 times.
That sort of pitch has always been a major no-no.
soxhop411 said:
Nick Cafardo @nickcafardo 3s
Ortiz said MLB wants to speak to him about incident with Price next couple of days.
joe dokes said:
Yes he would have...because the natutral reaction of a hitter is to duck and back up. EVERY player would say that the ball below and behind his head is the most dangerous one. You can argue day and night, but nothing suggests that concluding that it was intentional is a ridiculous conclusion.
soxhop411 said:
Nick Cafardo @nickcafardo 3s
Ortiz said MLB wants to speak to him about incident with Price next couple of days.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
Everyone but Verducci agreed the Red Sox got short changed on the exchange. Verducci defended Price as having "Done it the right way" which implies that he believes Price was right to be angry about Papi watching the fair/foul home run until it was called. So 3-1 in favor of the Sox on the panel.
In a 2-1 game against a hated divisional opponent a second year reliever who happens to be one of our best is going to intentionally put someone on base and get thrown out because both sides had already been warned to prove a point? Talk about obtuse...Average Reds said:Jesus H. Christ, did I really take you off ignore for this?
I'll wait to pass judgment on whether this is an outrage or not when I see what MLB does to Price - if anything. But to pretend that Workman had the ball slip from his fingers is to flaunt the fact that you are willfully obtuse.
Throwing behind a batter's head is about the worst thing a pitcher can do - certainly worse than plunking someone in the midsection like Price did to Papi. A ball behind the head preys on the player's natural inclination to back up when he sees the ball coming at him. This is how a player gets beaned and this sort of thing will always provoke a suspension. Properly so.
JimD said:
Great - sounds like MLB is buying the whole 'the Red Sox lost control' narrative hook, line and sinker.
I could buy that. They want to make their point but they don't want to risk hurting someone to do so.NDame616 said:One of the announcers (forget which) essentially said "some players will purposely throw behind a player because some pitchers just don't like hitting guys"
Never really heard of that, but that's what they said.....
Maybe appeal, drop it after his start and call up Webster to take Workman's next turn while playing with a short bench for that one game? They have a lot of options here, thankfully.benhogan said:
Appeal. Then after he pitches drop the appeal, and when they get an off day all the starters go on normal rest? or appeal and really try to get it down to 5 games?
glennhoffmania said:I could buy that. They want to make their point but they don't want to risk hurting someone to do so.
garlan5 said:I just hope Alex Wilson is nice and warmed up and we're up big. I hope he hits that fucking SS
Thanks so much for providing this information. I called, and got the impression that I was heard. I emphasized that for fans it's important to believe in the fairness and impartiality of the umpires and the commissioner's office, and that right now my belief has been shaken. Yes, who cares, but at least it was something I could do.joe dokes said:
You could call Bud:
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/about_mlb/index.jsp
Allan H. (Bud) Selig, Commissioner Address: 245 Park Avenue, 31st Floor City: New York, State: NY Zip Code: 10167 Phone: 212-931-7800 Fax: 212-949-5654
So you're totally discounting Price's comments afterwards?E5 Yaz said:Let's focus on what MLB apparently has decided:
The ump believed (based on the comments from the crew chief) that the Ortiz HBP was intentional, thus used his discretion to issue warnings. In effect, MLB is saying the the "punishment" for Price consisted of being put on notice.
Farrell, who apparently wasn't fine or suspended, was throw out for arguing that, in his own words, "the ball was taken out of our hand," meanina a chance to retaliate.
MLB is ruling, apparently, that they considered the incident closed at the time of the warning. That Farrell wasn't punished would seem to infer that MLB wasn't all that thrilled with the ejection.
The umps did not believe the Carp HBP was intentional. The Sox were steamed, of course, and Luvollo was tossed for arguing the intent of that pitch.
The Workman and 3B coach ejections were do to the intent ruling on the pitch to Longoria -- which to the umps, and to MLB, was the only intentional action after the Ortiz HBP.
In essence, MLB made its ruling in regards only to the on-field happening AFTER in its mind the umpires had issued the initial warning.
You can hate it all you want. But it all turns on the HP ump decision to issue a warning to Price instead of immediate ejection. There's no reason in their minds to punish Price, given their thought process.
glennhoffmania said:So you're totally discounting Price's comments afterwards?
E5 Yaz said:
Yes, because what we need is more players suspended
E5 Yaz said:Let's focus on what MLB apparently has decided:
The ump believed (based on the comments from the crew chief) that the Ortiz HBP was intentional, thus used his discretion to issue warnings. In effect, MLB is saying the the "punishment" for Price consisted of being put on notice.
Farrell, who apparently wasn't fine or suspended, was throw out for arguing that, in his own words, "the ball was taken out of our hand," meanina a chance to retaliate.
MLB is ruling, apparently, that they considered the incident closed at the time of the warning. That Farrell wasn't punished would seem to infer that MLB wasn't all that thrilled with the ejection.
The umps did not believe the Carp HBP was intentional. The Sox were steamed, of course, and Luvollo was tossed for arguing the intent of that pitch.
The Workman and 3B coach ejections were do to the intent ruling on the pitch to Longoria -- which to the umps, and to MLB, was the only intentional action after the Ortiz HBP.
In essence, MLB made its ruling in regards only to the on-field happening AFTER in its mind the umpires had issued the initial warning.
You can hate it all you want. But it all turns on the HP ump decision to issue a warning to Price instead of immediate ejection. There's no reason in their minds to punish Price, given their thought process.
Isn't there some sort of syndrome where a victim bonds with his attacker?garlan5 said:Verducci saying it was fair