User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.6638 seconds
50 querie(s) executed
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Thursday, May 27, 2010
ESPN1500: Gardenhire steamed about Yankees’ stall, calls on baseball for change
Weren’t the The Steamed Garden Hires on Highs in the Mid-Sixties, Volume 228 (Hackensack: The Ruckus Era)?
Nick Swisher gave the Yankees the lead with a two-out home run in the top of the ninth, leaving Rivera limited time to warm up. So, Girardi sent starting pitcher Andy Pettitte back out for the bottom half, let him go through his warm-up routine and then walked to the mound to summon Rivera as Gardenhire had a verbal exchange with crew chief Brian O’Nora, who was working behind the plate.
...Asked if he ever thought Pettitte actually would throw a pitch in the ninth, Gardenhire said, “No, he wasn’t going to throw a pitch. That was kind of tired, to tell you the truth. You don’t know normally get that long between innings to do all that, but we know what’s going on there.
“That’s a situation major league baseball needs to take care of when stuff like that happens. You don’t have a guy ready in the bullpen, if your starter goes out there, he should have to face a hitter. That’s just the way it should be. If you don’t get a guy up, that’s the way it should be, unless the other team makes a change.”
“But that’s not what lost the game for us. That’s stuff that just gets old right there.”
Login to submit news.
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: OT - NBA Bubble Thread
(2721 - 8:24am, Sep 20)
Last: PJ Martinez
Newsblog: OT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (September 2020)
(21 - 1:55am, Sep 20)
Last: ckash
Newsblog: Expanded playoffs beyond 2020? Inside the MLB push — and the pushback
(15 - 1:11am, Sep 20)
Last: The Gary DiSarcina Fan Club (JAHV)
Newsblog: Is 2020 finally the year for a DH to win MVP?
(30 - 12:42am, Sep 20)
Last: Ron J
Newsblog: Weekend OMNICHATTER for September 19-20, 2020
(22 - 11:15pm, Sep 19)
Last: The Yankee Clapper
Newsblog: OT - August/September 2020 College Football thread
(29 - 11:10pm, Sep 19)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!
Newsblog: Minnesota Twins' Josh Donaldson ejected for kicking dirt at plate after homer
(19 - 10:33pm, Sep 19)
Last: Howie Menckel
Newsblog: White Sox Promote Garrett Crochet
(9 - 9:14pm, Sep 19)
Last: The Yankee Clapper
Sox Therapy: The Imperfect Schedule - Games 152-162
(4 - 8:54pm, Sep 19)
Last: Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert
Newsblog: Clint Frazier’s Patience Pays Off For the Yankees
(6 - 6:33pm, Sep 19)
Last: Walt Davis
Newsblog: Jason Heyward is a Superstar Again
(15 - 5:18pm, Sep 19)
Last: Tin Angel
Newsblog: Roger Angell Turns One Hundred
(6 - 3:48pm, Sep 19)
Last: Howie Menckel
Newsblog: OT - Soccer Thread - Brave New World
(112 - 12:08pm, Sep 19)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale
Hall of Merit: 2021 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(349 - 10:53am, Sep 19)
Last: kcgard2
Newsblog: OMNICHATTER has got that herd mentality, for September 18, 2020
(37 - 9:56am, Sep 19)
Last: Crispix Attacksel Rios
(2721 - 8:24am, Sep 20)
Last: PJ Martinez
Newsblog: OT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (September 2020)
(21 - 1:55am, Sep 20)
Last: ckash
Newsblog: Expanded playoffs beyond 2020? Inside the MLB push — and the pushback
(15 - 1:11am, Sep 20)
Last: The Gary DiSarcina Fan Club (JAHV)
Newsblog: Is 2020 finally the year for a DH to win MVP?
(30 - 12:42am, Sep 20)
Last: Ron J
Newsblog: Weekend OMNICHATTER for September 19-20, 2020
(22 - 11:15pm, Sep 19)
Last: The Yankee Clapper
Newsblog: OT - August/September 2020 College Football thread
(29 - 11:10pm, Sep 19)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!
Newsblog: Minnesota Twins' Josh Donaldson ejected for kicking dirt at plate after homer
(19 - 10:33pm, Sep 19)
Last: Howie Menckel
Newsblog: White Sox Promote Garrett Crochet
(9 - 9:14pm, Sep 19)
Last: The Yankee Clapper
Sox Therapy: The Imperfect Schedule - Games 152-162
(4 - 8:54pm, Sep 19)
Last: Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert
Newsblog: Clint Frazier’s Patience Pays Off For the Yankees
(6 - 6:33pm, Sep 19)
Last: Walt Davis
Newsblog: Jason Heyward is a Superstar Again
(15 - 5:18pm, Sep 19)
Last: Tin Angel
Newsblog: Roger Angell Turns One Hundred
(6 - 3:48pm, Sep 19)
Last: Howie Menckel
Newsblog: OT - Soccer Thread - Brave New World
(112 - 12:08pm, Sep 19)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale
Hall of Merit: 2021 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(349 - 10:53am, Sep 19)
Last: kcgard2
Newsblog: OMNICHATTER has got that herd mentality, for September 18, 2020
(37 - 9:56am, Sep 19)
Last: Crispix Attacksel Rios
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2014 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
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.
1. Koot Posted: May 27, 2010 at 11:26 AM (#3544215)The Yankees are pretty smart about finding ways to shamelessly do things that are not against the rules to their advantage. I haven't seen this one before, but, I'm very familiar with the "send Posada out to talk to the pitcher, and now Dave Eiland... and now Girardi can come out and take him out, since the bullpen is now ready".
Last year's playoffs, where they only had to use 3 starters, was another good example. Although, the extra days off were really stupid, and I'm glad someone took advantage of it. Maybe someday MLB will actually put some thought into these things before they just let FOX tell them how things are going to be.
I get the general frustration with the pace and length of games, and I certainly understand Gardenhire's frustration after two tough losses in a day. But I'll never understand why people seem to want rules that will prevent teams from putting their best players in positions to play their best. Stalling to give relief pitchers time to get ready has been part of the game since the it first occurred to someone to use a relief pitcher.
No big deal, and I doubt the Yankees employ the tactic any more than other teams.
I don't think I've ever seen a team send a pitcher out at the beginning of an inning to warm up and then remove him before he's faced a batter. Seems pretty ridiculous to me.
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure I've seen it more than once, the rules allow it, and if you have a situation like this (insufficient time to warm your closer, you've just taken the lead) WHY WOULDN'T YOU DO THIS?
Well then, get your head out a spreadsheet and watch a game once in a while.
For the latter case, just have a rule that pinch hitters must be announced before a pitcher goes to the mound to warm up.
Don't give Joe West any ideas.
<cue dramatic hamster clip>
That seems counterproductive. You'd be guessing on whether there was going to be a pitching change at the start of the inning. Besides, it takes time to wake up a pinch hitter and get him ready.
However, with pitchers, I say force anyone brought into the game (including at the start of the inning) to throw to one batter (not one pitch, one full plate appearance) and if he doesn't he automatically goes on the 15 day DL - that'll stop most of this type of stuff. If he is really hurt then a 15 day DL stint makes sense. If not then the manager won't do it as he won't want to lose his pitcher for 2 weeks.
After all, what is to stop a manager from bringing in his starter from 2 days ago, get him to warm up, then pull him as well to give his closer more time? Mix in a few time limits too in order to cut back on the silliness that managers do for delays.
I don't see how it would be worse. If a player reports to the field of play, then require that they be present for at least one batter. That is not very dissimiliar to existing replacement rules.
You can still have an exemption for injury. If players are then faking injuries to circumvent the intent of the rule, you can create a new rule that deals with that situation. (IMHO, if you start getting into fradulent tactics like faking injuries to get the benefit of a rule, its beyond gamesmanship and its time to start fining people).
Girardi figured out a way to game the rules. We can pat him on the back for this, but its probably now time to change things. I don't think anyone is arguing this is a scenario that people want, just that its one that is not expressly against a subset of the rules.
Some teams (some managers) do it more often than others. I don't see it very often, but I don't watch many Yankee games.
Oftentimes, I've seen teams warm up both their closer (in case they take the lead) and another pitcher (in case they don't). Obviously the Yankees didn't want to dry-hump Rivera, so they pulled these shenanigans.
I'd be fine with a rules change that forced a pitcher that goes out to warm up to start an inning to face at least one batter, unless the opposing team announced a pinch-hitter.
To be fair to Gardy, this doesn't seem to be an Elia/Guillen rant. It just bugged him and he mentioned it. It's clearly legal, and most managers would do the same thing in the same situation. But there are plenty of rules designed to keep the pace of the game moving (whether they work or not) that lend themselves to suboptimal performance and maneuvering....there's no reason there couldn't be a rule for this situation to do the same thing. Anything to keep the game moving, I say. If Petitte is ok to pitch in a tie game, let him pitch to a batter with a one run lead.
Would have zero effect as the Yankees would just pay the fine and tell Girardi to keep doing what he needs to do to win games.
That is the issue, the pitcher returning to warm up is a "loophole".
Also, it is incorrect that a pitcher has all the time in the world when he enters due to an injury of the current pitcher. The pitcher has as much time as the umpire deems necessary.
Works, no? Any unintended consequences?
I'm surprised that nobody's pointed out that the Yankees themselves were the victim of a similar tactic just last Tuesday, when Josh Beckett was suddenly removed from the game in the middle of an inning without any prior indication of injury, giving the incoming relief pitcher unlimited time to warm up. The Yanks played the game under protest, and the protest was disallowed.
No way in hell the MLBPA lets this happen. It would force an injured pitcher to decide between pitching with an injury or allowing a batter to reach base.
Works, no? Any unintended consequences?
I'm sure Arod could find some unintended consequence.
Not at all. It would be just like pinch-hitting mid-inning. The poster I was replying to stated that a manager might use the pitcher warm-up tactic to see if the other team will pinch-hit against the pitcher currently in the game, and then that manager will make the appropriate pitching change to get a better match-up against the pinch-hitter. If you announce the pinch-hitter before anyone goes to the mound to warm up, a manager can then make a pitching change at the start of the inning without having to warm up two pitchers before anyone throws an actual pitch.
In this case, the pitcher in question had already thrown 94 pitches. Anyone "brought into the game" would have had to face one batter unless injured.
Girardi figured out a way to game the rules.
Girardi didn't figure anything out. You can play all the word games you want with synonyms for frequent or rare, but this was surely not among the first several hundred (possibly thousand) instances of the use of this tactic in MLB history.
the Yankees are one of the slowest teams in baseball
Right. That would explain why the Twins have played 3+ hour 9-inning games against the Angels, Indians, Tigers and Royals this season. Yesterday's games were 2:39 and 2:41. The earlier Yanks-Twins series were all longer games because there were more runs being scored and more pitching changes.
But it's all on the Yankees. Cervelli must have gone out to talk to Pettitte a dozen times an inning, but Butera never visited the mound once.
Different situation, Beckett was lifted for an injury, Pettitte was lifted for tactical reasons. Also, no one is saying the Yankees did anything wrong here.
I don't think I would be that harsh. There are plenty of injuries that warrant removal from a game but don't require a DL trip that I wouldn't want to see someone injured pitching through. I would suggest a 6 day ineligibility for the pitcher removed. He doesn't go on the DL but he cannot pitch for 6 days (maybe a 4 day period for relievers). This would set up a scenario where there would be a tactical issue at hand but at the same time not so limiting as to cause someone to pitch with a minor, though potentially significant injury.
I'll say it again. MLB is never, ever going to implement a rule where a player is penalized for leaving a game with an injury. It just isn't going to happen.
And in retrospect, it's clear that the Red Sox did nothing wrong, either. I realize the slight difference of the two claims, and that's why I said "similar" rather than "identical." But as I noted before, there was no prior evidence of any injury to Beckett, which is why the Yanks immediately filed a protest. Turns out that Beckett's injury was real, but if it hadn't been, how could anyone at the time have told the difference?
It would be difficult, but the reason the Yanks lost the protest, IMHO, is not determinative of whether Beckett had an injury or did not have an injury. The issue is the rules leave that determination to the umpire's discretion, and you cannot appeal the judgment of the umpire. (See Rule 3.05 above)
If the umpire ruled that Beckett did not have an injury and then allowed the new pitcher to have more than 8 warm up pitches, then the Yanks have a protest. If the umpire determines that the pitcher has been incapicitated then the umpire chooses how many warm up pitches to allow to the new player.
Its the difference between awarding first base on ball 3 and whether a pitch was a ball or a strike.
Because it is unmanly. The pace of the game is already a catastrophe. Managers should not be allowed to intentionally delay the game to bring in a reliever. Girardi is the worst for this. Catcher, comes out, pitching coach comes out, Jeter walks over, finally Girardi crawls out to the mound. All of this bullshit should be banned. My rule proposal would be to ban anyone from talking to the pitcher in the middle of the inning.
Just to clarify, the Yankees did not protest because there was no prior evidence of injury to Beckett. They protested because the coach called for a reliever prior to informing the umpire of the injury. So, in the Boston-Yankees game, there was an actual violation of a technical rule. I'm presuming the repeal was rejected on the basis that the violation of the rule didn't prejudice the Yankees.
In this case, there was no violation of a procedural rule. Therefore, the debate is whether there should be such a rule for situations like last night's game.
The rule does not define that as being a visit. It only indicates that once the manager leaves the 18 foot circle that it ends the visit (so if he goes back, its a second visit.) It also prohibits the manager from going to a another player who then goes to the pitcher. I would imagine that this tactic woudl be considered a visit.
Moreover if not a visit, it would also appear to be a balk pursuant to 8.05(h) for intentionally delaying the game.
I'm guessing that the first time a team pulled this stunt would be the last time an ump would grant their request for time when they're in the field for weeks and weeks. By the time they're done with their next foul line conference, two batters would have been granted walks and that would be the end of that strategy.
Does that mean A-Rod has to pitch to one batter?
"Any attempt to evade or circumvent [the mound visit rule] by the manager or coach going to the catcher or an infielder and then that player going to the mound to confer with the pitcher shall constitute a trip to the mound."
So by the same logic, trying to circumvent the rule by not actually physically "visiting" the mound would probably still constitute a visit.
And to clarify on Backlasher's post, a coach must request (and be granted) "Time" in order to even leave the dugout. And there the "visit" begins.
I'm surprised by the rule Backlasher quotes, I seem to remember past incidents where a manager has left the dugout but the pitcher stops them before they reach the foul line for what would otherwise be the second visit because they want to stay in the game.
It would siphon off Yankee money into the league office. I'm fine with that. Small penalty for a small infraction.
I say, on the contrary, custom and practice has allowed these palpable delays of game to become second nature to the managers. It's up to the leagues, through the umpires, to enforce things. There are ample tools to do so, as in rule 4.15, which I cited, and others that have been brought up by other posters.
There is nothing 'clear' about it at all. It's all a matter of interpretation.
I think what you are referring to as "group-think" is that most people are arguing is that there was no violation of a hard-and-fast rule.
I agree that "custom and practice" have permitted this and that 4.15 could be invoked, but this seems like one of those situations where the umpires would never, ever invoke 4.15 because it requires a forfeit and it has been allowed, so it's not worth discussing as a tool that could have been used last night.
Given the permissiveness of the prior custom and practice, I'd also have to assume that the league and/or umpires would feel the need to announce that they were explicitly enforcing 4.15 in this situation rather than enforcing it without warning at some point in the future and causing a forfeit. Alternatively, the league would have to promulgate a new rule for this situation. In either case, we're simply cutting to the chase by asking if the new rule should cover this situation.
First and foremost, rule 4.15b is a relic from days prior to artificial lighting, when pace delays had more serious consequences. In the history of baseball, there have only been 139 forfeits, the majority of which came before 1900 with only five in the last 40 years. If you really think that the sanction for Girardi's conduct is a forfeit, then there is not much else for me to discuss. I would vehemently disagree. If you don't think the sanction is a forfeit, then you need a new rule.
Second, this has not been used for this type of situation in over a hundred years. This is reserved for conduct of reprobates like Earl Weaver that pull his team from the field b/c he doesn't get his way. See http://www.retrosheet.org/forfeits.htm for forfeit information.
Wait, why is it 'cheating'? Isn't it just using a loop-hole in the rules? There is nothing stating a pitcher that has previously pitched to a batter cannot have his pre-inning warm-up throws before being taken out of the game. If there is no rule to break there is no cheating.
Giardia could make the argument that he was expecting a pinch-hitter, and when one was not announced only then decided to go to Rivera. No explicit delay of game rules breaking.
If the Yanks have to resort to Giardia, its going to be tough to prevent the runs.
MLB is willing to sacrifice the integrity of the game if they (or one of their partners) can profit from it.
One thing that I haven't seen- that seems like it's right up this alley- would be bringing in a reliever to throw his warmups, and then simply replacing him after he's done warming up. This would give the second reliever that much more time to warm up. Basically the same stunt as in this game but instead of sending out Pettite, you send out a scrub reliever first.
Is there a rule that forces a guy to pitch to a hitter if he takes warm-ups after a pitching change?
Yes. Any pitcher must face at least one batter.
This happens about has often as Tony LaRussa, his players, or his team gets disrespected.
So we've already got a rule that forces pitchers to pitch in certain situations. It wouldn't seem that extending that rule to cover this situation is that much of a reach.
Isn't there already the standard rule that a new relief pitcher must face a hitter? Doesn't that "penalize a player for leaving with an injury"?
Do you mean a situation where the relief pitcher gets injured during his 8 warm-up pitches?
I have no idea what you are getting at here. Pitcher leaves game with injury, reliever comes in and has to pitch to at least one batter, sure. I don't see how that is penalizing the player that left the game with an injury. Obviously they are unavailable for the rest of that game, but that is unavoidable.
The tactic of having the prior pitcher come out and warm up, and then pulling him for a reliever before he pitches, is a variation on that theme. And while I have seen it done, it really is not so common place as to be a blight on the game. In the modern game, with 7 inning guys, set up men and closers, the pitchers know their role and are ready.
What you had here was a confluence of circumstances, which included finishing an earlier game. Because Mo (and other relievers) had pitched a few hours earlier, Girardi was in a position where he had used Mo and other relievers, he did not want to get Mo up again, or any reliever, really, unless absolutely necessary. Given that the game was tied before the 2 out homer in the 8th, Girardi was also probably concerned about extra innings, and Pettitte may well have pitched the 9th if Swisher doesn't homer with 2 outs. He did, the situation changed, and Girardi reacted on the fly.
The practice then, while not unheard, is also not that common. I don't agree with tinkering with the rules for what is only an occasional act which is merely a variation on the time-honored "stall while the reliever gets ready" gambit.
I am not opposed to rule changes per se, but they should be made for real problems, not small crap like this.
Because Girardi has intentionally delayed the game, which is against rule 4.15.
Everybody here is justifying custom and practice to ignore intentional delays of the game. I've got no problem with this custom and practice, but to pretend that what Girardi is not covered by the rulebook is misleading. Gardenhire would be perfectly entitled to protest, under the rules, and claim a forfeit.
Judging by the Larry Yount precedent, if a reliever is injured while throwing their warm-up pitches, they can be removed from the game.
The number of pitching changes would remain the same.
The MLB rule book is not exactly the Constitution - why is it so bad to add a clause "...if a pitcher warms up at the start of the inning he shall, and here-ever after, be expected, and required, to throw baseballs to, at the minimum of, one batter, so as to proceed with said earlier described baseball 'game' and perform the action of 'pitching' to at least, but not limited to, one at-batsman..."
but then teams would have to suffer the consequence of using a scrub pitcher who is not fully warmed up in an important situation. They would probably avoid this, and just leave in the old pitcher - thereby having 1 less pitching change.
Meh. The problem in this situation isn't that you have NO reliever ready, it's that you don't have your CLOSER ready. Pettite wouldn't have pitched in that inning no matter what, it's just that the fact that the Yankees suddenly took the lead made Giarardi want to go to Rivera instead of whatever else he had.
Certainly there would be situations where the manager would just leave the starter in and thus reduce pitching changes by one, but how many pitching changes would that save over the course of the year? How many minutes would it shave off in a season?
Changing the rule seems logical enough, but I don't think the effect would be all the great.
It would have the effect of eliminating (this particular variety of) the manager's ability to subvert the spirit of the rules of the game in order to gain an advantage. That's not great enough for you?
I don't object to this behavior because it's technically against the rules or not, I object because it's bullshit, and I'm actually somewhat surprised that that isn't the 'BBTF groupthink'-approved POV. It's obviously and clearly bullshit; anyone who knows anything about baseball has to look at the stalling tactics in question and conclude that it's all a bunch of bullshit. Girardi sent Pettitte out to warm up knowing without a doubt that he wouldn't pitch to any Twins, then once he was 'warm' he had Cervelli go and pretend to talk to Pettitte about something. Then he did his own slow walk. The ESPN announcers were predicting this would go on as Teixeira was getting thrown out at second to end the previous half-inning. It's bullshit and we know it's bullshit, Girardi knows it's bullshit, Rivera knows it's bullshit, and Gardenhire is saying it's bullshit. He's right. Baseball should endeavor to keep itself bullshit-free. So.
I was sitting 4 seats away from the Yankee bullpen and I watched Rivera warmup for both games. It was apparent that he wouldn't be ready for the start of the inning in the second game. I was pretty certain Girardi was going to stall, but I wondered if that might not be enough. Leaving Pettitte in to face Morneau wouldn't have been the worst strategy. He had thrown ~95-100 pitches and had to be about as effective at that point as any lefty the Yankees would normally have brought in to face him.
I'd be in favor of a rule change that says that if a pitcher warms up to start an inning they need to complete a plate appearance. If you want to fake an injury at that point, I guess there's nothing that can be done to stop you, but at least the rule would be a step in the right direction. That said, the rule isn't in place now and it was something of a unique situation with Rivera pitching for the second time that day. Frustrating, yes. Cheating, no.
EDIT: also, what Petooter said.
So every time the batter steps out of the box to throw off the pitcher's timing, or any time the pitcher just holds the ball to discomfit the batter, the game is forfeit?
That is not what 4.15 intends.
Every change has unintended and unexpected consequences. You make changes to deal with real problems.
More simply, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. This ain't broke.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main