Roger's finger 'stuff'

[cloverdale]

it dismays me that rogers pitching perfprmances in the post season has come down to his "posssible cheating". He cleaned the hand and went out a pitched another 7 innings which left those facing him clueless as to what to do...lets just wait and see... if we will get to see him another day in this series with clean hands, who knows he might just pitch another gem.

[LMan]

From the Detriot News:

ST. LOUIS -- Clean it up -- or else.

That was the message St. Louis manager Tony La Russa sent after FOX television cameras revealed some type of substance on the pitching hand of Detroit starter Kenny Rogers during the first inning of Game 2 of the World Series on Sunday.

La Russa could have gone further and not just issue his version of a warning. He could have asked the umpires to check Rogers with hopes that if the veteran left-hander indeed was doing something illegal, there could be a suspension for the rest of the series.

"I decided that I was not going to be part of the (garbage) where I was going to ask the umpire to go to the mound and undress the pitcher," La Russa said Monday during a workout day before Game 3 tonight at Busch Stadium. "I alerted (plate umpire Alfonso Marquez).

"I said, 'I hope it gets fixed. If it doesn't get fixed, then I'll take the next step.'

"I'm sure there are fans of ours and maybe teammates or whoever, people in the organization, that said, 'You should have gone to the mound.' (The umpires) have to get a request (from the manager). They don't act on their own.

"I said, 'I don't like this stuff, let's get it fixed. If it gets fixed, let's play the game.' It got fixed, in my opinion, and we never hit the guy."

[mbyron]

MLB managers are always controversial figures, and La Russa has had his idiot moments over a long career. But on the biggest stage in baseball, he showed a lot of class, and that counts for something.

Maybe Rogers was cheating, and maybe not. But if La Russa gets into it, then it becomes a different kind of controversy. In the event, any unfair advantage was eliminated, and the Cards still couldn't win.

La Russa's words, "If it gets fixed, let's play the game," demonstrate that he's got his priorities straight. It's about playing the game, not wheedling every possible advantage out of a situation.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by mbyron

MLB managers are always controversial figures, and La Russa has had his idiot moments over a long career. But on the biggest stage in baseball, he showed a lot of class, and that counts for something.

Maybe Rogers was cheating, and maybe not. But if La Russa gets into it, then it becomes a different kind of controversy. In the event, any unfair advantage was eliminated, and the Cards still couldn't win.

La Russa's words, "If it gets fixed, let's play the game," demonstrate that he's got his priorities straight. It's about playing the game, not wheedling every possible advantage out of a situation.

You're giving LaRussa far too much credit. I believe his low key approach has more to do with Leyland knowing where the bodies are buried in St. Louis side of the field. Leyland worked with LaRussa.

LaRussa's skirt isn't all that clean. If he had come out and demanded a cavity search of Rogers, Leyland would have come out and the St, Louis pitchers, or the source of their goo, would be subjected to the same treatment.

LaRussa practically admitted this with a comment that basically said that everyone was looking for an edge and as along as it didn't go too far, it was okay.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by GarthB

You're giving LaRussa far too much credit. I believe his low key approach has more to do with Leyland knowing where the bodies are buried in St. Louis side of the field. LaRussa's skirt isn't all that clean.

If LaRussa had come out and demanded a cavity search of Rogers, Leyland would have come out and the the St, Louis pitchers, or the source of their goo, would be subjected to the same treatment.

LaRussa practically admitted this with a comment that basically said that everyone was looking for an edge and as along as it didn't go too far, it was okay.

I'm so disillusioned. I hope that you're wrong: the comment you mention did not appear in the earlier post. Where did you see or hear him say that? (I'm curious, not denying what you say.)

A couple things are hard to square with your interpretation: (1) why is Leyland different from any other manager? Surely there aren't any secrets among the grizzled veterans. (2) If LaRussa were motivated as you say, why bring up the matter at all? Doesn't he run the risk of escalation merely from mentioning it to the umpires?

[SAump]

This article confirms what LaRussa said and what GarthB stated earlier.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slu...yhoo&type=lgns

"I also know that pitchers use some sticky stuff to get a better grip from the first throw in spring training to the last side they're going to throw in the World Series. Just because there's a little something that they're using to get a better grip, that doesn't cross the line, you know?"

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I'm so disillusioned. I hope that you're wrong: the comment you mention did not appear in the earlier post. Where did you see or hear him say that? (I'm curious, not denying what you say.)

A couple things are hard to square with your interpretation: (1) why is Leyland different from any other manager? Surely there aren't any secrets among the grizzled veterans. (2) If LaRussa were motivated as you say, why bring up the matter at all? Doesn't he run the risk of escalation merely from mentioning it to the umpires?

The comment I mentioned was in this morning's paper. Leylan worked for LaRussa. As I said, he knows where the bodies are and probably how LaRussa's pitchers work.

LaRussa had to handle it someway...the clubhouse was telling him that Fox was showing close-ups of Roger's hand. He handled it as discreetly as a manager could.

[GarthB]

Since I couldn't find the quote in my newspaper's online version, I searched and found it in a Fox article:

"There's a line that I think defines the competition — and you can sneak over that line, because we're all fighting for an edge," La Russa said. "I always think, does it go to the point of abuse? And that's where you start snapping.

"I also know that many pitchers — I was going to say, 'routinely,' but that may be too strong — use some sticky stuff to get a better grip from the first throw in spring training to the last side (session) they're going to throw in the World Series. Just because there's a little something that they're using to get a better grip, that doesn't cross the line."

The full story is here: http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6088650

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by GarthB

You're giving LaRussa far too much credit. I believe his low key approach has more to do with Leyland knowing where the bodies are buried in St. Louis side of the field. Leyland worked with LaRussa.

LaRussa's skirt isn't all that clean. If he had come out and demanded a cavity search of Rogers, Leyland would have come out and the St, Louis pitchers, or the source of their goo, would be subjected to the same treatment.

LaRussa practically admitted this with a comment that basically said that everyone was looking for an edge and as along as it didn't go too far, it was okay.

Well, as I said, Tavarez got 10 days in 2004 when he played for the Cards and he got caught with pine tar on his hat brim.

When LaRussa was with Oakland....and I think that this happened in the 1989 ALCs.....a clubhouse attendant in Toronto found an emery board in Dennis Eckersley's glove after a game. LaRussa brought Eckersley in to close the next night, and the Jay's manager, Cito Gaston, immediately went to the home plate umpire to ask for a search of Eckersley's glove. I think that the ump was Davey Phillips- he talked about this play in his book iirc. The tv cameras caught Eckersley shoving something down his pants, but they never had a good shot of what it was. Phillips never found anything in the glove, and he said afterwards that there was nowayinhell that he was going into Eckersley's pants. So, yes, I agree that laRussa know what real life is like from both sides. Btw, also iirc that game ended with an Eckersley strike-out and the Oakland catcher then giving the Toronto bench the finger. That incident played big on the sports pages for a while too back then.

[David B]

Originally Posted by GarthB

You're giving LaRussa far too much credit. I believe his low key approach has more to do with Leyland knowing where the bodies are buried in St. Louis side of the field. Leyland worked with LaRussa.

LaRussa's skirt isn't all that clean. If he had come out and demanded a cavity search of Rogers, Leyland would have come out and the St, Louis pitchers, or the source of their goo, would be subjected to the same treatment.

LaRussa practically admitted this with a comment that basically said that everyone was looking for an edge and as along as it didn't go too far, it was okay.

Great perspective and I believe very true. Baseball is a dirty game - its not all good ole boys as its portrayed on TV.

We've been there as umpires in HS college and down and even with friends there is nothing above reproach when it comes to winning.

LaRussa knows what would have happened, Leyland's been around the block a few times and LaRussa probably knows that his pitchers might not be able to withstand the same treatments??

Makes you wonder ...

thanks
David

[Andy]

I was listening to the first part of the radio broadcast of last night's game three on ESPN radio and Joe Morgan indicated that he had had breakfast with Randy Marsh before the flight to St. Louis. Morgan asked Marsh why the crew never went and checked Rogers hand. Marsh replied that LaRussa never asked the umpires to do so.

I think that we have established that this is a reasonably accurate recount of the events. My question is if this is a MLB philosophy - wait for the opposing manager to request an inspection for a foreign substance on the pitcher?

How would all of you that work the levels below MLB (college, HS, LL, etc...) handle this situation? If you noticed something unusual on the pitcher's person, would you intitiate the inspection or would you wait for the opposing manager to bring it to your attention?

[LMan]

MLB 7.10: "....A manager may request that an umpire inspect an opposing pitcher for possession of an altering substance or object,but the umpire is not obligated by this request to inspect the pitcher." - quoted from J/R pg 134

[DG]

Originally Posted by Andy

I was listening to the first part of the radio broadcast of last night's game three on ESPN radio and Joe Morgan indicated that he had had breakfast with Randy Marsh before the flight to St. Louis. Morgan asked Marsh why the crew never went and checked Rogers hand. Marsh replied that LaRussa never asked the umpires to do so.

I think that we have established that this is a reasonably accurate recount of the events. My question is if this is a MLB philosophy - wait for the opposing manager to request an inspection for a foreign substance on the pitcher?

How would all of you that work the levels below MLB (college, HS, LL, etc...) handle this situation? If you noticed something unusual on the pitcher's person, would you intitiate the inspection or would you wait for the opposing manager to bring it to your attention?

I will not pick buggers. Manager is going to have to say something, especially if what I am seeing is very visible to everybody, as was the "something suspicious" on the base of Roger's thumb. He was clearly not hiding it.