User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.6151 seconds
53 querie(s) executed
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.
i guess it is some kind of penis waving ritual i don't get
That was pretty cool.
Not sure why you'd need a reason to hit that little bastard, personally.
If it makes you feel better, it's a penis waving ritual I don't get either. Must be because I am comfortable with the size of mine...
Sam, if everyone had this attitude, you would never leave the hospital.
I flipped to the game just in time to see that. I just started laughing. Despite his obvious cockiness, its going to be next to impossible for a real baseball fan not to like him.
2. If there was any doubt how Harper's National teammates would handle his lightning-rod personality, this game put an end to it. Throwing at Cole Hamels, as opposed to Hunter Pence, was a shot in the air from Nationals' pitchers.
Yes.
If it makes you feel better, it's a penis waving ritual I don't get either. Must be because I am comfortable with the size of mine...
This, too. ;-)
Yeah, that you're a jerk.
There's a lot of folks one might feel this way about. I am not sure why pitchers feel entitled to act on an impulse that ordinary folks manage to contain.
Agreed. I wanted to dislike the kid. Heck, I was halfway predetermined I didn't like the kid from the news reports I had read. Instead, I love the way he plays the game with aggressiveness, fire and passion (Mystique and Aura's 2nd cousins, twice removed).
Stealing home, taking extra bases, cannon for an arm, all hustle, hell, right now he even says the right things (Points at his comments re Hamels)-color me 1/2way to falling for the kid
But what about Zimmermann? What's interesting is that if Hamels had kept his mouth shut, presumably both he and Zimmermann would have floated under the radar. But now that Hamels has admitted what was afoot, it goes a long way toward forcing MLB to recognize what was already pretty obvious- that Zimmermann threw at Hamels. So will he get a vacation as well?
I don't understand what you mean by this. Are you saying the Nationals like Harper, or don't?
McCutchen in Pittsburgh is the same.... so much fun to watch guys who love to play.
I assumed that throwing at a guy who can throw back at you is more ballsy and carries more weight than throwing at some random hitter.
The fact that you don't seem to have ever played the game of baseball doesn't mean Cole Hamels has not.
Regardless of what you think about Hamels throwing at Harper, he took his own getting hit in stride so at least he adhered to the "code".
So far, I'm liking Harper, the player.
That you find the idea of threatening those who disagree with you acceptable is hardly a shock.
Not linking to Skip Bayless, Rick Reilly or Peter Gammons is one thing, but this is Gelb, who was in here talking baseball when he was in high school!
Agreed. You have to love that instead of complaining, glaring at Hamels, or charging the mound, he stole home. The kid's a throwback in the best possible way.
Is there an MLB OF with a worse arm than Pierre?
Same here. Unfortunately, most women aren't.
Concur. I'm really starting to like Harper.
Also, Harper has just been an absolute thrill, and hopefully will get more people to the park. I've enjoyed the hell out of having him here, and I think I've been to the only three games where he hasn't gotten a hit!
Now that Damon is back in the big leagues, yes. But he's probably the only one.
What the hell does that mean, coming from an executive who's lobbying for MLB to suspend someone for a purpose pitch? What's Rizzo going to do, trade us a bad player?
The players handled it on the field, and the Commissioner's Office will suspend Hamels for a start, which he deserves. It should have ended on the field with Zimmermann's hitting Hamels. Instead, Rizzo's comments will likely turn this from something that's basically over into an ongoing beanball war. Way to go, champ.
I don't get this. You can't play hard unless you've reached a certain production threshold?
I went on Friday just to watch Strasburg pitch and Harper hit, and the first ####### gave up 2 home runs and the second ####### didn't put a ball in play, ####### it!
Hamels' unexpected candor made me think of this.
Frenchy is clever, he doesn't pull that card now, he bribes the fans with pizza and $100 bills instead.
Not sure MLB ihas been 100% consistent or that there have been that many cases on point, but I think In the absence of a similar confession, Zimmerman skates on any suspension. Which makes Hamels' "honesty" kind of puzzling. He could have conveyed pretty much the same message by saying "In the Big Leagues you pitch inside and sometimes it gets away. The kid better get used to it". Not that he really needed to say anything. Still, shouldn't a veteran pitcher have been aware of MLB's record of fines and suspensions of pitchers who admit to intentionally hitting batters? Maybe it's just an old school ploy to get a midseason vacation.
Oh yes. Mike Rizzo. An unbiased source for this event, I'm sure.
I mean don't get me wrong: Zimmermann totally wanted to hit Hamels there. But unlike Hamels he didn't do it in a stupid fashion. Hamels may get a suspension (I honestly don't really care whether he does or not, as a Nats fan - I actually sort of agree with Hamels about the whole thing being delightfully old-school...especially when Harper responded by taking his base politely and then STEALING HOME ON HIM), but Zimmermann should skate.
Also: happy to see that Sam Hutcheson is covering himself with glory in this thread. We're coming for your Braves, Sam. They're going to be a puddle of sick by the time the Nats are through with them, even if the Nats are reduced via injury to running out AAA fielders for our batting lineup by the time the two teams meet. How's that young superstar pitcher Jair Jurrjens looking?
Yeah, and I'm sure people should go to jail for cross checking or something. Good ####### lord.
That's just silly.
Headhunting should be strongly discouraged, but plunking a guy in the ribs, or the ass is no big deal.
Wrong. It's exactly as I describe. It's like someone shooting at you just for fun, no intent to harm. It's like a bully at school melvining and nooging the nerd.
Spoken like somebody who has never taken a 90+ mph baseball to the ribs.
Well, only because I never played against anyone throwing 90. I took plenty of 75-85 MPH fastballs in the ribs, arms, legs, etc., and never once ####### or charged the mound. Hell, I tried to get hit sometimes (a la Hunt, Baylor and Biggio); a baserunner is a baserunner.
I've also taken a thrown bat, and a one-hop liner to the face, so I'm pretty sure I have a good idea what it feels like.
Getting hit by the pitch is an inherent risk in baseball, though in reality, a very tiny one. You're talking one death in the history of MLB (none post helmet) and a tiny, tiny number of life altering injuries (Piersall, and...?).
If your control is that good, you should be able to "send a message" by getting the batter out on a regular basis.
What's the next level of justifiable offense going to be? Plunking players because you don't like the team mascot and find their antics an affront to the unwritten rules of the game?
Yes, and if up were down we'd all be falling! OH! MY! GOD!
Comparing a thrown baseball to a bullet is laughable. The danger involved is off by orders of magnitude; being hit by a bullet in the head is thousands and thousands of time more likely to kill or do serious harm than a baseball.
If you think a bean ball is assault, then you have to be in favor of outright bans on tackle football, hockey, rugby, boxing, MMA, etc., etc.
There is nothing magical about a baseball field, which turns criminal behaviour into lawful behaviour.
What's the next level of justifiable offense going to be? Plunking players because you don't like the team mascot and find their antics an affront to the unwritten rules of the game?
Oh, I think in this case Hamels was totally out of line in hitting Harper. I'm just saying guys are going to pitch inside, with a purpose, and guys are going to get hit. As long as the pitchers keep those pitches below the letters, I don't see it as a big deal.
Any other treatment of the issue, and you're saying pitchers can't ever pitch inside.
Yes, there is, otherwise every boxer, martial arts practicioner, football, rugby and hockey player would be in jail.
Serious questions Bob. Did you ever throw at anyone, either by choice or upon request of your skipper/teammates? If so, did you hit him/them and where? Do you think there is any context where throwing at a guy (sign stealing/retaliation for yoru guys getting hit/punishment for coming in spikes high on your second baseman, etc.) is acceptable? How does your attitude on these things compare to fellow pitchers/position players, and do differences of opinion on the subject of intentional plunkings come up in the clubhouse?
Since the rest of us are just projecting here, I'd love to hear what someone who played at the big league level has to say on these things.
*pours gasoline*
Only if the pitcher is black.
*lights match, drops it*
But almost no pitcher can control the pitch every single time. If you're trying to make a pitch 4 inches off the inside corner, sometimes it's going to be 12 inches inside, and the batter's getting hit if he doesn't move.
If pitchers could control a 90+ MPH pitch to that level of accuracy and precision, no one would ever get a hit.
I guess Cole is to be applauded for honesty, but sometimes you are much better off not saying anything.
Bob - thanks for your input on this, always cool to have your thoughts.
Morty - I guess I disagree, but I do see what you are getting at. I think it is a bit less black and white though.
There's a difference between actions that are part of the game, which can lead to hurting/injuring somebody, and actions outside of the game, which do the same.
Nobody here thinks every time a pitch gets away from a pitcher, it should be assault. Intent matters. Similarly, tackle football football can be done reasonably, but a lot of behaviour that does go on should clearly be curtailed (e.g. bountygate behaviour, intentional late tackles, horse collars, intentionally hard tackles with outlawed techniques like leading with the helmet... you know, strangely enough pretty much all the stuff they have been trying to cut down on).
The problem here is that, with few exceptions (such as cases when the dumbass pitcher admits it) it's damn near impossible to tell the difference between a fastball that got away and a fastball that was thrown with actual malice. In fact, it's that inability to tell the difference that leads to (and will continue to lead to), the esclation of these things, regardless what steps MLB might take.
Oh, completely agreed. And pitchers should get the benefit of the doubt. But when there is no reasonable doubt, e.g. this case, then why shouldn't it be treated as assault? If pitcher's thought there might be the possibility of some actual consequences, wouldn't that cut down on them doing it. And wouldn't it send a clear message that it is in fact not acceptable, and change many pitcher's cavalier attitude towards it?
Nobody here thinks every time a pitch gets away from a pitcher, it should be assault. Intent matters. Similarly, tackle football football can be done reasonably, but a lot of behaviour that does go on should clearly be curtailed (e.g. bountygate behaviour, intentional late tackles, horse collars, intentionally hard tackles with outlawed techniques like leading with the helmet... you know, strangely enough pretty much all the stuff they have been trying to cut down on).
I'm sorry, I don't see the difference.
Every time a lineman or a LB has a QB in his sight, he has much more intent to injure than the avg. pitcher who tries to put one in a guy's ribs. Boxers and MMA guys are trying to knock each other out. If that's not intent, what is?
The problem here is that, with few exceptions (such as cases when the dumbass pitcher admits it) it's damn near impossible to tell the difference between a fastball that got away and a fastball that was thrown with actual malice. In fact, it's that inability to tell the difference that leads to (and will continue to lead to), the esclation of these things, regardless what steps MLB might take.
Exactly. Even with most pitches thrown "at a batter", the pitcher is usually equally happy if the guy hits the dirt, and avoids the ball.
It's assault. Players only consent to physical contact that the rules of the game allow and baseball players consent to getting hit by pitches by accident. Hamels's assault was no more justified than if he'd gone up to Harper in the on-deck circle and punched him in the face. That would have "welcomed" him to the big leagues, too.
There was some other thread on this, but the Dale Hackbart/Boobie Clark NFL spearing case is probably the best precedent.
but i think it's a little douchey of hamels to be just throwing at harper on some sort of veteran/rookie dynamic and then crowing about what he did ... harper's reaction in the quote is pretty cool. this is an impressive rookie. he knows he's going to get plenty of opportunities to do some payback on the basepaths.
It's not the intent to injure that matters; it's the intent to create physical contact outside the scope of the sport. The assault lies in the physical contact, not the injury.
Not that it would matter anyway, but there is in fact no ritual by which a pitcher automatically throws at a rookie in the rookie's first AB against a team. It was a gutless assault by Hamels, one that makes baseball look silly.
The legal standard (which will vary depending on where you are at) is typically set such that all contact or interaction that falls within the ordinary "custom of the game" is contact that the participants consent to. Whether the specific act is permitted by the rules of the game is substantially irrelevant. Otherwise, every reach-in foul in every basketball game would be a battery as its impermissible contact generally and the rules of the game specifically prohibit it. But the "custom of the game" assumes that such contact will occur and it is therefore not actionable nor criminal.
In baseball, intentionally thrown balls to the body- whether you agree with them or not- are quite clearly within the custom of the (major league) game. Head shots could be a legal issue in a proper circumstance, and repeated pitches at a hitter might cross the line, but a single thrown pitch in the back allows virtually no chance at a criminal or civil sanction.
(EDITS)
but i think it's a little douchey of hamels to be just throwing at harper on some sort of veteran/rookie dynamic and then crowing about what he did ... harper's reaction in the quote is pretty cool. this is an impressive rookie. he knows he's going to get plenty of opportunities to do some payback on the basepaths.
I think I agree with this 100%.
In baseball, intentionally thrown balls to the body- whether you agree with them or not- are quite clearly within the custom of the (major league) game. Head shots could be a legal issue in a proper circumstance, and repeated pitches at a hitter might cross the line, but a single thrown pitch in the back allows virtually no chance at a criminal or civil sanction.
When you step into the batters' box, you don't consent to the pitcher intentionally throwing the ball at you. Occasionally it happens, but there's no reasonable claim to make that it's become a legally-recognized custom of the game. It's like intentional spearing in football; players sometimes do it, but it isn't a custom for legal purposes.
How far away is Morty? Can I throw at him?
Yes you do.
The hilarious thing is that I was chatting with Gelb during the last inning of the Orioles game, and didn't realize it.
Also, while hitting a rookie for being a rookie sounds and smells "old school," it's not a practice I recall ever hearing anything about.
If Harper tried to sue, or the local DA tried to prosecute Hamels (neither of which seems like a legitimate concern) I suspect Cole's attorney could bring up thousands of witnesses to testify to the contrary.
In MLB, guys get thrown at. In MLB, position players expect their pitchers to throw at guys to retaliate if they get hit (and get pissy when the pitchers don't.) Intentional throws at an opposing batter happen all the time and such is well known within the industry.
Hippie.
It wasn't outside the scope of the sport, Hamels was charged with an HBP and an earned run. If he had drilled Harper as he sat in the dugout between innings I could understand the hissy fit you guys are throwing. You're acting like this is the first time a pitcher has intended to hit someone.
Late 90s, some asshat from the Cubs system threw at guy in the on deck circle (in college before being drafted.) That guy deserved some serious comeuppance, including legal fees. That's not this.
Wichita State's Ben Christensen hit Evansville's Anthony Molina.
He was charged with an earned run for a HBP? That's news to me.
That aside, the fact that there was a penalty applied does not somehow automatically make it within the "scope of the sport". If harper had in return walked out to the mound, and taken Hamels' kneecaps out with his bat, he would have been ejected. That doesn't make it part of the scope of the sport either.
oh cr@p. i'm doing something wrong ... :p
Hey, any day you can agree with me, and Sam H, that's quite a day.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main