Mets-Stros game

[mattmets]

Don't know if anyone saw/heard the Mets-Astros game tonight but a situation came up. 2-1 Mets, runner on first, bottom of the 7th, Cliff Floyd is 2-3 off Roy Oswalt tonight. With a 1-0 count, Phil Garner pops out of the dugout to talk to Oswalt. The next pitch is a fastball that pegs Floyd in the back. Floyd walks out towards the mound, but doesn't charge or take more than 2 or 3 steps. Catcher and HP umpire step in and diffuse the sitch. Bruce Dreckman warns both benches, which leads Willie Randolph to discuss the validity of the warning in terms of retaliation. The more I thought about the situation, I didn't like the warning. I think what I would have done was toss Oswalt and Garner IMMEDIATELY because of how flagrant the HBP was. I then would have issued warnings after the Mets retaliated (if they did). By letting them get this out of the way tonight, this avoids issues for the next 2 games of the series. I totally understand why Dreckman warned both benches, but now without payback, this thing could leech into tommorrow's game. what do you all think about this? Even if you think my logic is dead wrong, does it at least make you think about the situation? This HBP was completely obvious to anyone who saw it.

[DG]

Originally posted by mattmets
Don't know if anyone saw/heard the Mets-Astros game tonight but a situation came up. 2-1 Mets, runner on first, bottom of the 7th, Cliff Floyd is 2-3 off Roy Oswalt tonight. With a 1-0 count, Phil Garner pops out of the dugout to talk to Oswalt. The next pitch is a fastball that pegs Floyd in the back. Floyd walks out towards the mound, but doesn't charge or take more than 2 or 3 steps. Catcher and HP umpire step in and diffuse the sitch. Bruce Dreckman warns both benches, which leads Willie Randolph to discuss the validity of the warning in terms of retaliation. The more I thought about the situation, I didn't like the warning. I think what I would have done was toss Oswalt and Garner IMMEDIATELY because of how flagrant the HBP was. I then would have issued warnings after the Mets retaliated (if they did). By letting them get this out of the way tonight, this avoids issues for the next 2 games of the series. I totally understand why Dreckman warned both benches, but now without payback, this thing could leech into tommorrow's game. what do you all think about this? Even if you think my logic is dead wrong, does it at least make you think about the situation? This HBP was completely obvious to anyone who saw it.

I did not see it but wonder how obvious it was. With 2-1 game, in the 7th, and a 1-0 count on a batter who has gone 2-3, I just don't see this as a situation that is intentional, even if it was, and I can't imagine why it would be. Why would you want to intentionally put a runner on base in a 2-1 ball game in the 7th? Warning seems appropriate.

[mattmets]

It was a fastball square in the back. In my mind, the first pitch after the manager comes out is just a little suspicious. A slumping Mike Piazza is on deck with 2 out....it could have been taken a number of ways I guess.

[DG]

Originally posted by mattmets
It was a fastball square in the back. In my mind, the first pitch after the manager comes out is just a little suspicious. A slumping Mike Piazza is on deck with 2 out....it could have been taken a number of ways I guess.

Mets are winning 2-1, 2 outs. Beltran just singled and next pitch to Floyd is a wild pitch, Beltran to 2b, count 1-0. Seems like a good time for manager to make a trip to the mound. Next pitch hits Floyd. Hmmmm. Floyd on 1B, Beltran on 2B. Piazza walks, bases loaded. Anderson singles, Beltran scores. Pitching change (it's about time). Wright K's to end the inning. I would not be a bit surprised to see a visit to the mound in a 2-1 ball game after a pitcher allows a single and then throws one wild allowing that runner to advance to 2B. I would be shocked to learn the manager told the pitcher to hit the batter to put 2 runners on base, with Mike Piazza on deck, slumping or not. The only thing that might make a warning appropriate is the visit by the manager. Otherwise this is a pitcher getting tired, and manager not quick enough with the hook.

[Edited by DG on Jun 7th, 2005 at 10:31 PM]

[orioles35]

This has been the whole issue with this warning the benches after a HBP. You can't get inside the pitcher's mind to determine intent. Was it intentional...how has the guy's control been that night? What's the score? Has someone been hit previously? It's so hard to weigh all the factors and arrive at a conclusion that justifies tossing a guy just because of a HBP.

Now if they warn both benches and it continues, that's another story.

[mcrowder]

How was his control? The pitch immediately preceding it was a wild pitch.

Eject immediately, and then only warn if the other team retaliates? Wrong on both counts.

[TBBlue]

Originally posted by mcrowder
How was his control? The pitch immediately preceding it was a wild pitch.

Eject immediately, and then only warn if the other team retaliates? Wrong on both counts.

I assume he is a Mutts fan, based on his handle. The Mutts, by the way, are no longer the "other NY team" this year. NL East ROCKS. Decent baseball being played top to bottom. Not great, but no D'Rays involved either. Gotta love a game and a half separating top to bottom.

[mattmets]

Originally posted by TBBlue
I assume he is a Mutts fan, based on his handle. The Mutts, by the way, are no longer the "other NY team" this year. NL East ROCKS. Decent baseball being played top to bottom. Not great, but no D'Rays involved either. Gotta love a game and a half separating top to bottom. [/B]

And that has what to do with this thread?

[TBBlue]

Trying to clarify your reasoning for umpire to supercede rulebook and eject immediately for throwing at someone...nothing more. Hey, I would have loved for Erstad to be tossed for the hit on Estrada....but not in the rules to do so. Therefore it didn't happen. Life goes on. Enjoy the season...it ought to be fun...fortunately we should have a race all season.

[mattmets]

I wasn't speaking as a Mets fan, if that's what you were thinking. I see a manager go out to talk to his pitcher, then the next pitch hits a batter who is 2-3 and who that pitcher has had run-ins with before, I'm a little suspicious of the situation. Whether it's Phil Garner, Joe Torre, or Bruce Bochy, this is a little fishy to me.

[TBBlue]

Ok, cool. It may be fishy, (maybe even dead on accurate, I didn't see the game), but the rule specifically states on an intentional hit batsman, both benches shall be warned...etc.

The rule is written this way, in my opinion, because a)it is hard to read minds as far as judging intent, and b)the retaliation is sometimes (most times??) worse, and is what leads to the brawls, headshots, and injuries in general.

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by mattmets

Don't know if anyone saw/heard the Mets-Astros game tonight but a situation came up. 2-1 Mets, runner on first, bottom of the 7th, Cliff Floyd is 2-3 off Roy Oswalt tonight. With a 1-0 count, Phil Garner pops out of the dugout to talk to Oswalt. The next pitch is a fastball that pegs Floyd in the back. Floyd walks out towards the mound, but doesn't charge or take more than 2 or 3 steps. Catcher and HP umpire step in and diffuse the sitch. Bruce Dreckman warns both benches, which leads Willie Randolph to discuss the validity of the warning in terms of retaliation.

The aforementioned is where IMO MLB needs to get rid of the warning rule period. By issuing a warning, the hitters automatically get a tremendous advantage because anything inside that's questionable will almost always result in an EJ.

At the major league level, let the players police the game.
Hey you hit one of my top hitters I will hit yours, then we can play ball. Baseball used to be played that way when the likes of Kofax, Gibson, Drysdale, Seaver played the game.

The Problem: Too much money today.

Pete Booth

[Bfair]

Originally posted by DG
With 2-1 game, in the 7th, and a 1-0 count on a batter who has gone 2-3, I just don't see this as a situation that is intentional, even if it was, and I can't imagine why it would be. Why would you want to intentionally put a runner on base in a 2-1 ball game in the 7th? Warning seems appropriate.

Agreed...............

Know the situation......and this is not one that would warrant an intentional HBP. If you're going to err, then err by giving a warning vs. an ejection. If you are certain the ejection is warranted, then take necessary action.


Just my opinion,

Freix

[Dave Hensley]

Originally posted by mattmets
The umpire is in control of the game. Leave it that way. If the guy cannot call a curve ball, or won't give the outside corner, then his reality differs from yours. And his is the only one that counts. Deal with it. Adapt to it. And if you can adapt to this faster than the other coach, then you have an advantage.- Unknown

The author of your sig line quote is not Unknown. That was written by a Canadian umpire named Jim Mantle, about 8 or 9 years ago in a Usenet post entitled "How to Argue with an Umpire," posted in either alt.sport.officiating or rec.sport.officiating.

I'm sure I still have a copy of the original article, which was full of advice every bit as useful and relevant as the quote you've adopted for your sig.

[mattmets]

Thanks....I found it on-line but it said "Anonymous"....now I have a name