Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yeah, it was 2-0 at that point in the 8th. Schilling ended up giving up 2-3 hits by the end of the game with ARI winning 2-1. There was the usual argument about protocol/etiquette and earning your way onto the bag at that stage of the (near-perfect) game, as I recall. The other team is looking for a "W" just the same, though.

 

Fuck 'em. It's nobody's duty to lay down for a pitcher just because he's about to complete a no-hitter or perfect game. I don't care if it was 1-0 or 10-0 -- if you can get yourself on base somehow, do it, whether it's a bunt or whatever.

 

Otherwise, who cares about a no-hitter/perfect game? I mean, if the other team is actually collaborating in some way, why is it even an achievement?

I agree. It's still shady, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 666
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeah, I agree with cryptique -- players shouldn't be criticized for helping their team out by getting on base. That being said, it is "tradition" not to bunt for a base hit if a pitcher is near a no-hitter, but I'd always thought that it was accepted in a close game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. It's still shady, though.

How is it shady? If a guy is able to lay down a good bunt and beat the throw, then why shouldn't he try it? If that's not "earning" your way on base, I don't know what is.

 

I'm all about etiquette -- I don't believe in showing up the pitcher after a home run, for example -- but that's an extracurricular, not-in-the-box-score kind of thing. A bunt single is just that: a single, and something that could spark a rally and affect the outcome of a game. If your team needs a baserunner, why is it "shady" to lay one down? And why is the need for baserunners any less in a 10-0 game than a 1-0 game?

 

If anyone is obligated to "earn" something during a possible no-hitter or perfect game, it's the pitcher.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand why people would get worked up over someone bunting for a base hit if it's like the ninth inning and the score is 10-0 (even though I disagree). But in a close game, shouldn't a hitter be trying to win? If not, he may as well just purposely swing and miss at everything so as to speed up no-hitter result.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not suggesting it's unethical or cheating when I use the term "shady." It's shady because it crosses the unwritten rule line (or at least comes close) in many people's eyes. Ballplayers and fans alike. That's all. I remember reading in a local paper out there the next day quotes of other players saying they would not have bunted in that situation. Others were praising Davis (most Padre's players/coaches). It's just a fine line with some people believing it's a step over that line. Hence, it's shady. Just part of the often finicky nature of the game

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not suggesting it's unethical or cheating when I use the term "shady." It's shady because it crosses the unwritten rule line (or at least comes close) in many people's eyes. Ballplayers and fans alike. That's all. I remember reading in a local paper out there the next day quotes of other players saying they would not have bunted in that situation. Others were praising Davis (most Padre's players/coaches). It's just a fine line with some people believing it's a step over that line. Hence, it's shady.

That's one unwritten rule I don't much care for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
um, Brad Thompson has given up 20 hits in 4 innings

 

 

I swear it read 20 hits yesterday, oh well 10 in enough for 4.

 

does anyone watch the all-star game ?

I remember when I was a kid, I couldn't wait to see it, not now.

 

I guess cable TV ruined it. You see all the players now.

when we only had the game of the week to watch it meant something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I swear it read 20 hits yesterday, oh well 10 in enough for 4.

 

does anyone watch the all-star game ?

I remember when I was a kid, I couldn't wait to see it, not now.

 

I guess cable TV ruined it. You see all the players now.

when we only had the game of the week to watch it meant something.

 

 

The all star game lost it's luster for me that year Selig declared it a tie. I mean WTF? how can you have a tie in baseball. I know it's an exhibition and that both sides probably had no pitchers left and no one wants an injury in such a game but Jeeeezus a tie?

:pirate

 

EDIT: I mean even a coin-flip to decide it or something.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have cable, so I never get to see any baseball outside of the Fox game of the week. I'll be watching the All-Star Game, even though it's stupid that it "counts."

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't have cable, so I never get to see any baseball outside of the Fox game of the week. I'll be watching the All-Star Game, even though it's stupid that it "counts."

 

 

That is some dumb shit right there. I can't believe a team gets home field advantage because their leauge wins the all-star game. Should be the team with the best record.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still enjoy watching the All Star Game.

 

I agree that the "This time it counts" garbage is stupid though. Home field should be determined by best record. If it really "counts", then they'd change the way in which players were selected for the team. Seems dumb that a team who had the better season has to play on the road because some other team in their league has fans who are more motivated to vote for their own shitty players than for the players who are really having the best years. If it "counts", then they should be able to but the best team possible out there. If it's just for fun, which is perfectly okay with me, and definately what the fan voting system reflects, then something as important as home field advantage in the World Series shouldn't hinge on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...