Critique, Please

[SAump]

4. Pitchers who hit three (3) batters in one game must be removed from the mound and cannot return to pitch in that game.

Your league president must now decide if the rule is worth adopting or not.
I never understood why a hitter would take a HBP off the hand, wrist or elbow. I would simply tell them to raise their arm out of the way.
A batter should not be allowed to wear elbow protection. They shouldn't be taught to dig in so close, nor to accept the rewards.
Yet, it may be better not to even say anything to the players who can't get out of the way. I enjoy teasing them after the laugh.

[umpduck11]

Originally Posted by LMan

Ha!


"Hey, what league did you pitch in last season?"

"California Penal."

Dorn: "Hmmm.... never heard of that one".

[ctblu40]

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

The title of this thread is Critique Please

CraigD explains in pretty good detail a situation he had in an adult league game. Seemingly, he would like to be critiqued on the way he handled the situation.

Many critiques are given, and most are along the lines of, "You should have warned or ejected soon. You let the situation go too far."

Then CraigD defends his actions to the nth degree.

Me thinks he wanted verification, not an honest critique. I've seen that kind of umpire before.

[Eastshire]

A player coming on the field with a deadly weapon and the intent to use it should be removed from the game by the police, whether the game took place in the States, Isreal, or on one of the moons of Saturn.

I don't care where the guy got hit in the second game. Heck, I don't even care if he steps into it. I'm warning both teams and tossing the next pitcher to hit someone on general principles.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

Nope,...that's a swing and a miss. You apparently have trouble reading. In fact, you are 25 posts too late in your wrong assessment. In post #13 of this thread I wrote:

Originally Posted by CraigD

I appreciate the replies and agree that I should have given a warning sooner - probably after the second occurance, perhaps after the first, in spite of the fact that I'm certain they weren't throwing at him intentionally. And that was the real point of my enquiry: If I didn't think they were intentionally throwing at the batter should I still give a warning?

Originally Posted by ctblu40

The title of this thread is Critique Please

CraigD explains in pretty good detail a situation he had in an adult league game. Seemingly, he would like to be critiqued on the way he handled the situation.

Many critiques are given, and most are along the lines of, "You should have warned or ejected soon. You let the situation go too far."

Oops, another swing and miss. I'm pretty sure the quote above indicates that I did receive the critiques you mentioned.

Originally Posted by ctblu40

Then CraigD defends his actions to the nth degree.

Oh no, another swing and miss. That's okay, son. Go take your seat on the end of the bench and watch the other kids play.

I didn't defend my actions at all, much less to the "nth degree." It makes me wonder if you can read.

The thread went in a completely different direction than my original question. Some questioned my grasp of reality because I believe the HBP's were not intentional. I wasn't enquiring if anyone else thought they were intentional. The point of my enquiry was whether I should have responded sooner IF I thought they weren't intentional.

The thread went farther off target with a discussion of the legal ramifications of using a bat to threaten or harm someone else before it went even farther off target with the discussion of the Cubs/Padres fight.

Originally Posted by ctblu40

Me thinks he wanted verification, not an honest critique. I've seen that kind of umpire before.

Sorry, but you blu this one, Mr. 40.

I accepted the critique 25 posts ago, but thanks for playing anyway.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by CraigD

I didn't defend my actions at all, much less to the "nth degree." It makes me wonder if you can read.

The thread went in a completely different direction than my original question. Some questioned my grasp of reality because I believe the HBP's were not intentional. I wasn't enquiring if anyone else thought they were intentional. The point of my enquiry was whether I should have responded sooner IF I thought they weren't intentional.

The thread went farther off target with a discussion of the legal ramifications of using a bat to threaten or harm someone else before it went even farther off target with the discussion of the Cubs/Padres fight.

It's hard to gain an understanding of a situation and we often write HTBT for had to be there. We discussed your issues from our own interest, POV and experience. From what I read, you seperated the individuals after each HBP. This was the reason the Cubs/Padres fight came into the discussion. We continued to discuss the Cubs/Padres retaliation because we thought it was a proper. Did you missed the compliment for preventing a MLB style brawl?

Everyone agrees that the one game suspension was a light "punishement" for the individual making the threats to harm somneone else. The other team also agreed and thought it was fair and justifiable to continue to hit this guy another 3 times the next game. The person involved decided he merited such punishement/humiliation that he also failed to move out of the way 3 times. I think he has proven that he is no longer a threat to anyone and nothing further should take place.

Notice that I did not discuss your original point of inquiry. It is difficult to answer because I cannot answer the question for you. You must use or reject whatever "good advice" you choose. Another person, Mr. Jenkins, did answer your question. His posts are highly regarded in these parts and it is often hard to ignore his advice. The rest of us, myself included, enjoy the twists and turns attached in each thread. I feel they give "life" to a very boring 1 type of scenario/1 correct answer type of dialogue. It keeps the site from going stale. JMOHO.

[lawump]

Originally Posted by SAump

Just so SDS knows, Marcus Giles was the only Padre who had his head on straight.
More should be said about the type of player he has proven himself to be.
Perhaps, never a HOF 2B candidate, that was one HOF performance.

As much of a character as Carlos Z is with the Cubs, I read he was in the locker room adjusting his jock during the melee.
Clearly, one of the Padres would have felt something very deserving had he been ejected from the game.

I said to myself, while watching this incident, "damn, Giles might have just prevented F1 from getting seriously hurt." Giles did a great job eliminating any chance of his F1 getting injured after the initial blows happened. Why is it after this incident I have it in my mind that Giles is a future coach/manager?