Farnsworth’s Suspension for Throwing Behind Manny’s Head Reduced from 3 Games to 0*
In a ridiculous decision today, an arbitrator reduced Kyle Farnsworth’s suspension from 3 games to 1 game. This was an idiotic decision on a number of levels:
First off, anyone who pays attention to baseball knows that a 1-game suspension will have almost no effect on a middle reliever. Having a reliever unavailable for one day means that he’ll be more able and ready to pitch the next day. A 3-day suspension is really the minimum suspension that has really works as a punishment for a reliever. Anything shorter is like suspending a starter for the 4 games between his starts.
Second, Farnsworth didn’t just drill someone in the ribs. He threw behind his head, a spot that is universally considered especially dangerous because players tend to back away on inside pitches.
Third, Farnsworth’s (and the Yankees’) defense was apparently that he slipped during his delivery. Looking at the context in which it happened and how it looked on video tape, this is very hard to believe. It is so hard to believe, in fact, that if you take Farnsworth at his word, it is hard to imagine ever suspending anyone for throwing at a batter.
Fourth, IF you do take Farnsworth at his word, why are you suspending him at all? You either believe that he slipped or you believe that he was throwing at the batter. If you look at the video and find it convincing that it was all just an accident, there’s no reason to punish him. If you think that the context and the video show that he’s throwing behind someone’s head, then that’s serious enough to warrant at least a 3-game suspension (which is the equivalent of costing him 1 game for the season).
Lastly, Farnsworth has very tight pants.
This whole thing reminds me of Gary Sheffield going after a fan who he thought might have hit him intentionally and getting no disciplinary action at all. It’s a unfunny joke.
Darren
Posted: May 09, 2008 at 09:52 PM |
37 comment(s)
Related News:
Boston
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
The fan's actions made Sheffield's response understandable. It shouldn't have made it acceptable.
among other things
It is certainly silly to suspend a reliever for one game
Isn't that a non-factor in the arbitrator's decision because the team no longer controls the timing?
I thought it was Farnsworth that went after the fan.
Not sure what you find hilarious sj. I suppose it's that I had the temerity to think that two rulings in favor the Yankees were wrong. But that's what I really think. If you've got a convincing argument that Farnsworth shouldn't have been suspended I'd be open to hearing it.
Comparing this to the Sheffield "incident" is what I find hilarious. The only thing they had in common was two teams on the field, it didn't involve a batter and a pitcher, he wasn't suspended, there was no appeal, it never went to an arbitor. Other than all those things, it was exactly the same.
Many, many Boston people feel the fan was out of line. I am not going to look them up, but check the Boston Dirt Dogs archives.
The fan was out of line. I can't imagine anyone arguing otherwise. He deserved to get tossed and, I believe, have his season ticket yanked.
But Sheffield's reaction, while understandable, was inappropriate. It warranted some kind of penalty from MLB, however minimal.
Sheffield pushed a fan who hit him in the face. Any fine over $1 would have been too much.
sj, for Christ's sake, will you at least state the facts correctly?
Sheffield was not hit in the face. That is laughably inaccurate. A fan waved at a ball that was in play, and may have distracted/interfered with Sheffield cleanly fielding the ball.
Criminy, that isn't even close to being forgivably misremembered.
This is what Curt Schilling said of the incident.
"I'm not sure who was watching what. Anybody with two eyes and good vision can see that he was watching the ball the whole way. He got hit in the side of the head and he reacted. He reacted probably calmer than a lot of people might have, calmer than a lot of people have in the past."
Kevin, that's not true. The fan most definitely made contact with Sheffield, and, I think, drew blood. I do agree that he appeared to be waving at the ball, but it was out of line regardless.
But just because the fan does something stupid should not give Sheffield the opportunity to respond poorly. And despite what some fans were saying at the time, it is by no means automatic. Reggie Sanders got hit in the back with Thundersticks in the World Series, and managed to restrain himself from a physical response.
As Darren states, Sheffield was in no danger when he returned to shove the fan, who, luckily though by no means was it guaranteed, was the same fan who made contact.
The NFL suspended Orlando Brown when he shoved the ref who hit him in the eye with the flag. The NBA suspended Antonio Davis when he walked into the stands when his wife was in a dispute with fans. In both those cases, the player's response was completely understandable. Yet those leagues determined that it had a responsibility to protect its officials and fans, regardless if the player's actions were understandable.
MLB, in contrast, ruled that if a fan makes contact with you, the player gets one free shot. That's not a particularly sound policy, in my opinion.
Well, Sheffield is also a whackjob so what does that mean?
It doesn't matter if there is video of the incident, it doesn't matter what Curt Schilling said. These events are only related in the mind of someone who is predetermined to cry "injustice."
Well, I do agree with that.
I'm with you there.
They were destroyed and the search function was rendered useless as part of the continuing upgrades to this site. All hail Furtado.
C'mon now, there's no shame in it.
No. No blood, no head butt. The ass hole fan was ejected and had his season tickets revoked, and nothing happened to Sheff. Those decisions were both correct, IMO.
And if Sheffield had heat-butted the fan into a pregnant lady in the third row. Or a kid.
Sheffield got lucky that A) he picked out the right fan, and B) the fan he shoved didn't result in someone else getting hurt or causing other drunken idiots to escalate it further.
Sorry, but the "He started it defense" didn't work well with my elementary school principal, and shouldn't have worked with Bud Selig.
Well, he did knock beer all over the women sitting adjacent to the offending fan. He acted like a horse's ass, if you ask me. But, of course, you're not asking me.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main