criminal? no....stupid, yes....this issue could have died, but shelley decided the best way to make the team is to risk injuring another player on what should have been a single.

AAA skills, rookie-ball approach, and a woman's name. I give you Shelley Duncan.

Is he the biggest idiot ever?

Is he the biggest idiot ever?

Yes, I believe he is. The deranged forearm smashes last year raised the suspicion and this pretty well confirms it.

Maddon is at least as big of an idiot.

Maddon is at least as big of an idiot.

Maddon is could only be as stupid as Girardi in this case. I happen to think JoeG comes off as dumber than Maddon, but let's let both managers share the blame for not letting this die out.

Duncan announced his intentions to the media and then went out and pretty obviously attempted to make good on those intentions. Now that we have his response I'm questioning whether or not his reading level is high enough that he should be allowed to check out the Encyclopedia Brown series from the library.

Maddon is could only be as stupid as Girardi in this case. I happen to think JoeG comes off as dumber than Maddon, but let's let both managers share the blame for not letting this die out.

I disagree because this was Maddon's second questionable, at best, incident. The Astros' strongly objected to Carl Crawford's take out of their catcher on a play that was reportedly similar (I haven't seen it) to the one that injured Cervelli.

That should have motivated Maddon to put an end to that type of recklessness in ST games. He failed to do that. To the contrary, he lauded it.

As a result, I think calling Maddon an idiot is being way too kind.

Rich, the play at the plate by the Rays' runner (or both plays if you want to include this Astros play) are the types of plays we see all the time, and are not only accepted but standard practice. Now, I don't watch spring training games, but I imagine such a play is not out of the ordinary in spring training. But even if it is, Duncan's play was far worse, in that his play is not acceptable either in spring training or during the regular season.

Note how the umpire didn't throw the Rays' runner out -- but he immediately ran Duncan from the game. Note how no Yankee came racing to home plate to attack the Rays' runner -- but Gomes immediately did (not that Gomes was right either).

Duncan behaved like a thug. That's dumber than anything Maddon did.

What a doucheclown.

That should have motivated Maddon to put an end to that type of recklessness in ST games. He failed to do that. To the contrary, he lauded it.

Of course that only holds if you agree with the Girardi/Astros pov; running over the catcher is being defined as a bad play in spring training. Spiking a guy sliding into 2B is dirty no matter when it's done.

Girardi didn't exactly come out against Duncan spiking someone. "Well if the tape looks bad, maybe I'll mention it..."?

Rich, the play at the plate by the Rays' runner (or both plays if you want to include this Astros play) are the types of plays we see all the time, and are not only accepted but standard practice. Now, I don't watch spring training games, but I imagine such a play is not out of the ordinary in spring training.

I wish some enterprising writer would consider doing a comprehensive review of such plays.

As I have said on other threads, if winning ST games mattered, there wouldn't be so many of that end as 9 inning ties. Since winning doesn't matter, I don't see how barreling into a prone catcher in a meaningless game, particularly when it's a pattern, is justifiable.

Of course that only holds if you agree with the Girardi/Astros pov; running over the catcher is being defined as a bad play in spring training. Spiking a guy sliding into 2B is dirty no matter when it's done.

Girardi didn't exactly come out against Duncan spiking someone. "Well if the tape looks bad, maybe I'll mention it..."?

It's dirty if it was intentional. I can't say with certainty that it was. I acknowledge that like the Johnson play, it was reckless.

I would think Girardi may be conflicted about the play. When you lose a promising young catcher for 10 weeks because of a reckless play, it's reasonable to be angry. How best to address it is open to debate.

I don't see how barreling into a prone catcher in a meaningless game, particularly when it's a pattern, is justifiable.

Then why don't all catchers just concede the run and not stand anywhere near the plate?

Running over the catcher, whether you like it or not, is part of the game. Saying it's not allowed in spring training, but acceptable in real games raises the possibility that it's going to happen in ST. Sh!t happens.

Spiking is not acceptable, ever. I'm sure the guys who came in high on Jackie Robinson didn't think they were doing anything dirty, either.

I don't see how barreling into a prone catcher in a meaningless game, particularly when it's a pattern, is justifiable.

And you think that's worse than Duncan going hard into the second baseman with his leg two feet in the air?

It's dirty if it was intentional. I can't say with certainty that it was. I acknowledge that like the Johnson play, it was reckless.

Given Duncan's comments before the game, and then his actions during it as soon as he got the opportunity, I think it's pretty likely. How is it an accident that his foot was two feet in the air as he crashed into the second baseman despite being out by 10 feet on the play? Besides, Duncan _acknowledged_ after the game that his foot being there was intentional; he said he was going for the glove.

Then why don't all catchers just concede the run and not stand anywhere near the plate?

Running over the catcher, whether you like it or not, is part of the game. Saying it's not allowed in spring training, but acceptable in real games raises the possibility that it's going to happen in ST. Sh!t happens.

Spiking is not acceptable, ever. I'm sure the guys who came in high on Jackie Robinson didn't think they were doing anything dirty, either.

Perhaps for the same reason that not all base runners barrel into catchers. In today's game v. the Pirates, Jason Bay opted to slide into the plate in a similar situation.

The Sh!t happens defense can be the jumping off point to a slippery slope that leads brawls.

That's why I think ST games are very different.

If Jackie Robinson wasn't being spiked because of the color of his skin his reaction may well have been contra.

And you think that's worse than Duncan going hard into the second baseman with his leg two feet in the air?

I think they are very similar plays when viewed in context, i.e., a major injury to a Yankee player, and a pattern of this recklessness by the Rays. The Rays were on notice as a result of the play against the Astros that what they were doing was objectionable, yet they decided it was a badge of honor. The result is, as ocd ss said, Sh!t happens.

Given Duncan's comments before the game, and then his actions during it as soon as he got the opportunity, I think it's pretty likely. How is it an accident that his foot was two feet in the air as he crashed into the second baseman despite being out by 10 feet on the play? Besides, Duncan _acknowledged_ after the game that his foot being there was intentional; he said he was going for the glove.

Pretty likely isn't an unfair description, but that still leaves open the possibility that he was merely trying to knock the ball loose from the infielder's glove, albeit in a very aggressive way.

I haven't seen the first play, but, under Rule 7.06 B, if the catcher was blocking the plate in any way at all before he received the ball, then the play was just as illegal as a baserunner trying to spike an infielder. But generally this sort of thing is overlooked.

I thought that Moeller blocked more of the plate today with Bay running than Cervelli did during the play in question. Johnson had room to go around Cervelli.

You don't want to #### with the Devil Rays during Spring Training - it comes back to haunt you in the regualr season...

EH JOHHNY GOMES LEARN HOW TO ###### PUNCH YOU DOUCHE

Let's be clear: the outcome of the game doesn't mean much for the Yankees and Rays, but the outcome of that play means a heck of a lot to Elliot Johnson. If I were in his position, a long shot to make the team coming off a poor year in AAA last year, I'd be trying to make the most out of every play.

Teams can afford to call games ties, because the results don't matter. Jason Bay can afford to slide, because he's going to be starting this year, and anything he does to change that won't have to do with this spring training. Elliot Johnson only has so many shots to impress with the whole major league coaching staff watching, and if that means he goes through a catcher like it's the regular season, I'd expect him to do it.

I don't mean this in a rah rah "He better be willing to go through Hell in a gasoline suit" kind of way. But if a guy is given possibly his one shot to really make an impression on a team, I don't begrudge him for refusing to lolligag into home because it's March.

As I have said on other threads, if winning ST games mattered, there wouldn't be so many of that end as 9 inning ties.

It's not about winning the game. It's about impressing your bosses when you want them to notice and hopefully promote you. That means blocking the plate for a catcher even in a meaningless spring training game. It means going hard into home. In Shelley's wierd mind it means trying to spike a Tampa Bay player because Girardi gave you a rah rah speech how his yankee's aren't going to take any more crap.

In today's game v. the Pirates, Jason Bay opted to slide into the plate in a similar situation.

Are you a retarted moran? Oh, wait, I've read your posts... It's not right or wrong to slide around or go through the catcher. Each runner decides on their own based on their own circumstances. In Bay's case I'm guessing he already made the team, and was worried less about hurting the catcher than hurting himself.

Girardi and Duncan should be suspended.

Perhaps for the same reason that not all base runners barrel into catchers. In today's game v. the Pirates, Jason Bay opted to slide into the plate in a similar situation.

Bay isn't fighting for the 25th roster spot on his team. Plus, he's had knee issues in the past and I wager that he wouldn't have knocked the catcher over in a real game either (though, to be fair, Pirates regular season games don't mean much more than ST games right now.) You said earlier that you had more a problem with a runner barreling into a "prone" catcher than a runner trying to spike a MI who can apparently defend himself. Those catchers are not in anyway prone. They are set to recieve a charge and it's really more likely that the runner is going to get hurt than the catcher. I mean, seriously, can you imagine trying to knock over Varitek or John Buck by running into them? What I really can't understand is how Girardi can get worked up about it when Cervelli himself said it was a clean play and he had no hard feelings about it. Most players that felt that they had been hurt in a dirty play would be ######## and whining to the media about it.

I haven't seen the first play, but, under Rule 7.06 B, if the catcher was blocking the plate in any way at all before he received the ball, then the play was just as illegal as a baserunner trying to spike an infielder. But generally this sort of thing is overlooked.

Your interpretation of that rule is incorrect. The catcher can block the plate if he's in the process of fielding the ball. This means he doesn't have to be holding the ball, otherwise, they would not make the distinction "holding the ball OR fielding the ball."

You can look it up!

I would think that "fielding the ball" means dealing with a batted ball, not catching a thrown ball.

RED SOX SUCK!

-Shelley Duncan

Rich, let me explain to your feeble brain the difference between the Johnson play and the Duncan play.

The Johnson play, was made in an attempt to show the higher ups that he will lay his body on the line for the teams chance to win. Which is the exact same reason why the "promising young catcher" was blocking the plate. If it is Posada and Carlos Pena you likely don't see that.

The Duncan play was done with the intent to injury. Period. I wouldn't say that nearly as strongly if 1) Duncan didn't come out in the press and run his mouth. 2) Didn't attempt to "stretch" on a play where there was ZERO chance he would actually be safe and CLEARLY only wanted the chance to mame.

Johnson, should be patted on the back. So should the "promising young catcher". Duncan should be suspended for 40 games.

Johnson had room to go around Cervelli.

the fact that Cervelli sucks at blocking the plate doesn't shift the blame to Johnson. I'm on record as thinking that plowing into the catcher is usually the wrong play. MLB catchers are good at holding onto the ball. The only way to dislodge it is to hit the guy as, or just before, he's catching, in which case a well executed slide makes you safe anyway. A blocked plate is rarely completely covered by the catcher and spikes into the leg, even a leg covered by a guard, will move the catcher and possibly injure him (if you're into that). Thus, running into the catcher is just a macho remnant of an older game. However, it is definitely both accepted and expected - it's the way the game is played for better or worse. As others have said, if the Yanks don't want their catchers being plowed over, order them not to block the plate (serioulsy, that might not be a bad idea - wasn't it Bench that refused to block the plate? worked out okay for him). But once that catcher is in front of the plate, the opponent has no obligation to avoid a collision.

I would think that "fielding the ball" means dealing with a batted ball, not catching a thrown ball.

Doc, I can't recall; are you a lawyer? This is a really dumb way of viewing that rule. It's the same rules as at first base. The first baseman has to stay out of the baseline...unless he's going into it to catch the ball, in which case the runner can legally run into him. Catching a thrown ball is definitely considered to be fielding it.



I'm curious: are there any non-Yankee fans that think Giradi has a legitimate gripe or that Duncan's play wasn't far more out of line than Johnson's? (And I'm not talking Yankee haters - I'm looking for an objective view that thinks the Yanks are justified in the behavior in this exchange. Perhaps there are some, I really don't know).

i don't blame girardi. i'd be pissed if somebody ran over my cervelo. those things are expensive!

Doc, I can't recall; are you a lawyer? This is a really dumb way of viewing that rule.

No, I'm not a lawyer. (Not sure if that's a good thing in your eyes.) It's not dumb. The first baseman can be in the baseline to field a bunt. That's what the rule is saying. It is a stretch to say he can plow into the batter-runner just to catch a throw.

Edit: we might be agreeing, but disagreeing on what #27 is saying.

No, the first baseman can't "plow into the runner". But, if a throw goes up the line, he's entitled to go there to field it. The runner can avoid him, or not, either way. You see this almost as often as a catcher blocking the plate. It often results in collisons but no one is out or safe based on interference; if the first baseman catches the ball and applies a tag, the runner is out, otherwise he's safe.

My point was that "fielding the ball" doesn't just mean fielding a batted ball. It includes any effort to retrieve a loose, thrown or batted ball. It's always been interpreted thus, whatever the original intent was (and I have a hard time imagining that it was anything other than that). Same for the catcher: catching a thrown ball is included in "fielding the ball".

My question about being a lawyer wasn't clear, I'll grant. It just seemed you were making a far too literal interpretation (not just too literal, an absurd (IMO) parsing of language) of a rule in order to benefit an already established point of view (you know, lawyering).

I don't really blame Giradi for standing up for his team. Maybe it's a good move for a new manager. But if he really is angry or thinks Johnson's play was out of line, he's wrong. Likewise, if he instructed Shelley to take his slide, he's way, way out of line. HOwever, I doubt he did this. I would guess Shelley is just a dumbass with a bit of a mean streak.

No, the first baseman can't "plow into the runner". But, if a throw goes up the line, he's entitled to go there to field it. The runner can avoid him, or not, either way. You see this almost as often as a catcher blocking the plate. It often results in collisons but no one is out or safe based on interference; if the first baseman catches the ball and applies a tag, the runner is out, otherwise he's safe.

If you agree (as you seem to in your first sentence) that the fielder has limits on what he can do to retrieve a thrown ball, then the rest of your paragraph falls apart. There definitely are some unwritten rules that tend to honor 7.06(b) in the breach, but the rule (and what passes for my common sense) still seems to me to preclude blocking the base when merely taking a throw.

And in the specific case of the catcher vs. the first baseman, the analogy doesn't hold anyway. The catcher is usually <u>choosing</u> to block the plate, and strictly speaking almost never <u>has</U> to do it merely to receive the throw. IOW it's not <u>necessary</u> as it might be in the case of the hypothetical 1Bman we're talking about.

My question about being a lawyer wasn't clear, I'll grant. It just seemed you were making a far too literal interpretation (not just too literal, an absurd (IMO) parsing of language) of a rule in order to benefit an already established point of view (you know, lawyering).

I kind of don't think it's absurd, is all. You do have to define your terms. It seems to me to be well within the bounds of reason to wonder what exactly constitutes "fielding" in this context.

but the rule (and what passes for my common sense) still seems to me to preclude blocking the base when merely taking a throw.

You'll never see that play called the way you interpret the rule. You are just wrong. Period.

I don't even think the majority of Yankee fans think Girardi and Duncan are in the right. It's just Rich. He posts so much as to make it seem like there are others who agree with him.

It is a stretch to say he can plow into the batter-runner just to catch a throw.

It certainly is a stretch. It's such a stretch that it never happens. At the very least, it didn't happen in this situation.

It's the RUNNER who plows into the FIELDER, not the other way around. And, it's legal!

Johnson, should be patted on the back. So should the "promising young catcher". Duncan should be suspended for 40 games.

Since you are fond of name calling.

You are an idiot.