Critique, Please
 

Background: Senior amateur league whose players are aged 17-50+. We have an evolving rule set, which is based on MLB. There are only 4 teams in this league so everybody knows everybody. For the most part, it is a fairly easy going bunch, depending on who is umpiring.

About two weeks ago team A's pitcher hit a couple of Team B's batters whose manager complained to the umpire that the pitcher should be removed because he was dangerously wild. When the teams were changing sides, Team A's coach spoke to the plate umpire about the possibility of retaliation, but was rebuffed by the umpire as nothing to worry about.

As B's coach had feared, the first pitch landed in the middle of the batter's back. While the batter was recovering, B's coach made a few comments to A's pitcher who offered his own comments in return. B's coach who was in the 3rd base box, turned to his dugout and asked "when is this guy [the pitcher] up again?" The pitcher bolted from the mound toward the coach and was tackled by his third baseman. Shortly after A got their pitcher to the dugout, he ran back onto the field with a bat, but fortunately, was restrained by several of his teammates. At that point, the president of the league ran onto the field issuing suspensions for both A's pitcher and B's coach. Both served a one game suspension.

Last night, I had the plate with the same teams in the second game of a best of 3 league finals. I wasn't present at the previous game, but I did know the story well. This time, different pitchers, but all the characters were the same. Team A's (previously suspended) player was hit by pitch in 3 consecutive at bats by 3 different pitchers. No other batters on either side were hit by pitch.

After the second time his player was hit, Team A's manager approached me and suggested that his batter appears to be targeted. I didn't think that Team B was intentionally throwing at the batter and told him that the pitches were just a little in, but nothing obvious. In fact, I think the 2nd one was the result of the pitcher trying hard not to hit the batter and losing control of his nerves.

On the first two occasions, the batter clearly stared down the pitcher as he slowly went to first. I moved out in front of the plate and shadowed the batter toward first - and was very happy when he finally dropped his bat. (I wasn't at the previous game, but I was very familiar wih the details what happened.) He never gave any indication that he was going to go toward the mound, but the recent history gave me concern, which is why I shadowed him toward first.

On his third at bat, he was hit by pitch again and I was even quicker to get out front and more obviously escorted him toward first. By this point, I was overwhelmingly surprised the batter didn't go "postal," but he continued on to first without anything more than an angry toss of the bat. At that point I issued a warning that the next hit batter (on either side) would result in an ejection of the pitcher and his manager/coach.

Team B's manager, who had previously been suspended for his unhappy interaction with the batter who had just been plunked for the third consecutive time, came rushing out to object to my heavy handed response. I told him that I had the responsibility to manage the game, and given the recent history between these teams, I had a concern for safety. He argued that none of the errant pitches were intentional, the game was not close to being out of control and that I was questioning his integrity. I stood by my decision. We had another few words of explanation of the technical details of who would be ejected and then we continued the game. After my warning, no more batters were hit by pitch over the remaining 4 innings.

I still don't believe any of the pitchers were intentionally throwing at the batter, but after the same batter is hit by pitch in 3 consecutive at bats, it seemed like I needed to do something to keep things from exploding. My question: Does it sound like I was heavy handed in issuing a warning to both teams? Also, should both teams have received the warning?

"For the most part, it is a fairly easy going bunch,"

Would hate to see how it went if they were strangers.:rolleyes:

No. Yes.

And, imo, it should have been addressed after the first time the player was hit (note that by "addressed" I don't necessarily mean an official warning).

Hello, Pollyanna.

About two HBPs too late.

Heavy handed? He and his pitcher should have been dumped. He should have been thanking you.

Q.E.D.

Still in lah-lah-land are we, Pollyanna?

You were not "heavy handed." You were issuing the prescribed penalty for their actions. You were just a little bit too late ... er, make that a lot too late. Knowing the history (which you don't have to admit to the coach), the warnings - yes, to both benches - should have occurred after the first HBP. Ejections after the second HBP. Even granting the benevolence of "benefit of the doubt," all doubt should have been erased by the second HBP.

I still don't believe any of the pitchers were intentionally throwing at the batter.

You can almost always tell, even on TV. If it looks like a duck . . .

Given the history between the two teams, I would have issued a warning after the FIRST time the player got hit, and it would have been a stern warning (very loud, very animated). Remember, if the thought of "it was intentional" flashed through your mind, it was also going through everyone else's. It's being proactive - even if you are wrong, you are erring on the side of safety and nobody will ever accuse you of "looking for trouble". Obviously, given the history, you ARE looking for trouble in this case. Everyone will know that you aren't afraid of the situation, or dealing with it. And the odds are HBP's #2 and #3 would not have happened. Learn from it!

JJ

What color is the sky in your world?

[
Enough said Men's leagues at their best

I am surprised no one filed charges. You have a player rushing onto the filed with a bat and only a one game suspension. This player should be GONE from the League PERIOD.


[/QUOTE]

What you have is an out of control league. Above you said ages 17-50 meaning most have to go to work the next day and they are willing to risk possible serious injury (throwing at one another) over a rec game.

The commissioner in this league is soft. You have F1's throwing at batters, a player rushing onto the field with a bat in hand and only 1 game suspensions are being handed out.

It's a disgrace league and one in which I would not umpire.

You have to get Control over the mens leagues. The program I umpire in is UNDER control. There was one dirty player who used to "plow" over F2's (ala the PROS). he was Kicked out of the league.

Pete Booth

I agree, this league sounds out of control. I no longer work a Mens Senior League for that reason. They could'nt pay me enough to take the abuse that that league handed out. On a positive note, working that league gave me valuable exprience if I ever have to ump a prison league or a league at the loony bin.

You might consider finding somewhere else to work as well.

Ha!


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

"California Penal."

This is the reason my long-time association quit working adult baseball in the late 90's. Too many wanna-be stars that just b*tch, moan, and complain about anything and everything, and act like a bunch of thugs.

A deadly combination: beer, bats and no brains

Thanks for the replies guys.

It's interesting that so many of you concluded that our league is out of control when we have had a total of ONE incident (the one described) in 6 years of operation. The truth is, umpiring this league is quite simple, other than suffering through a lot of bad baseball and the pay isn't so good.

Some of you directly or indirectly questioned my grasp of reality, but never enquired why I think the pitchers weren't throwing at this particular batter. The main reason is that none of the three pitches were more than 6 inches inside. The batter was hit on an extended elbow all three times. He moved just enough to meet the demands of the "must make an effort" rule.

Beyond that, I know these players well. Some will scoff that I only think I know them well, but our baseball community is very small and those who are active wear many hats. We don't have the luxury of having an umpire community that is separate from coaching or playing, so we all know each other very well.

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?

Mr. Booth, the reason that no one filed suit is that Israel isn't America and people don't usually run to court because they had an argument with someone. We don't have jury trials here, so we don't have the kinds of outrageous awards that seem to be regularly handed out in the US, thus people are less inclined to run to court.

Garth, the sky in my world is generally blue unless the winds are coming in from the desert or buildings have been bombed and are burning. In the case of the former, the sky is a dusty orange. In the latter, it's kind of smokey grey. And, no the sky is not falling as some of my fellow umpires seem to think.

Mr. Patrino, I considered finding work elsewhere, but the leagues in Gaza and Lebanon have suspended their schedules so the boys can kill each other in civil wars. :)

Mr. Jenkins, how would you have addressed the situation without giving an official warning? What would you say, and to whom? Thanks for your previous thoughts.

A lot depends on my relationship with the teams, and how well they (both sides) think this has been handled up to this point.

So, I might say to the catcher, "I heard you had some problems last game. I trust this has now made it even and it ends here."

I might toss the ball back to the pitcher and say in a pointed tone, "That just slipped. Right?"

Or, I might warn right away.

"This guy's dead."

"Cross him off the list then."

One of my favorite movies. :D

Craig, regardless of where the pitches are, doesn't it seem at least somewhat odd to you that the player that caused a host of problems last game is beaned three times in a row in your game?

TX MSBL Rule
 

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.

Adult baseball sucks, current case under discussion is example. They just can't control themselves and the league administration will not either. After 3 years of this I stopped doing adult baseball.

This is pretty much my first year of umpiring.

Being one of the "rookies" in my association, I don't get the "better" games.

Most (approx. 70%) of the games, I work solo.

Despite having read the "horror stories" on this (and other) website(s), I started signing up for some MSBL games (25+ & 38 +; 7 so far), primarily because it gave me the opportunity to work 2-man games.

So far there have been a couple of "iffy situations" in the games I've done. Not nearly as bad as I had expected.

So far.

JM

[QUOTE=CraigD]Thanks for the replies guys.

You did not mention an argument

here's what you said

In the US a bat (not used for it's intended purpose meaning to hit a baseball) can be classified as a weapon especially when someone is mad. It's no different than a knife or a gun. This is not the normal type argument that you have in a baseball game. When someone rushes onto the field with a bat IMO that's serious business. This is not about some frivilous award that you are referring to.

When I said file charges I meant criminal charges.

If you tolerate a player rushing onto the field with a bat that's your business. Hopefully, in the future no official will be hurt because some wanna be has been takes his frustrations out on the official with a bat.

Pete Booth

Welpe, it does seem odd, but I live in a part of the world where odd is normal. :) The abilities, or lack thereof, of the players in question, the pressure of "what happened last time," the location of the pitch, and my knowledge of the players all lead me to conclude the HBP's were not intentional - none of them.

I understand that is difficult, if not impossible, for some of you who work a different quality of baseball in a different place to believe the HBP's weren't intentional. I knew that coming into the discussion.

SAump,

Definately a rule that should be considered for our amateur league. However, in the case under discussion three different pitchers hit the batter.

I did mention an argument - I described what happened prior to the bat being brought onto the field.

My point was that, Israel isn't the United States. Then I tried to contrast one of the ways we are different: In my opinion, the United States has become an overly litigious society and at even the slightest offense people run to the police or courts to complain. I think much of this is the result of bizzare financial rewards handed out by juries. (I know there are some lawyers in this community and they may have a different opinion.) Israelis, in general, are much less prone to go to court or the police (therefore, by default, I consider them more tolerant), and I think this is a result of having only judges hear cases. It's not a perfect system, but it is what we have here.

The culture here tends to be more animated and what is considered a normal conversation, would be considered an argument or worse in the USA.

NOTE: I'm not suggesting that brandishing a baseball bat is a normal part of discourse, even here. However, an interesting contrast between our two worlds is that, to my knowledge, no one at the game considered calling the police to manage this situation. It was an "in house" issue. Clearly, some thought the one game suspension was too light, but they were mainly on the opposing team. :)

Hold on Pete, I never said I tolerate a player rushing onto the field. Disagree with me, but don't try to make me something I'm not. I wasn't at the game when the player brought the bat onto the field, so I had nothing to do with that incident.

Not in the incident under discussion nor, to my knowledge, any other time has a baseball umpire in Israel felt physically threatened. Thankfully, that's not our world. Yet. We have other problems, but assualts on umpires hasn't yet become one of them.

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

One more for me because I simply do not understand your logic.

Here's the question for you. In the heat of the moment if this player was not tackled by someone etc. What were his attentions by bolting onto the field with a bat? What was he going to do with that bat? Obviosuly it was not to hit a baseball. At that moment the players intentions were most likely to cause harm otherwise why rush onto the field with a bat.

IMO, that player is lucky at least if this were the US that criminal charges were not pressed.

Also, it is a flat out joke to only have a one game suspension for this act.

Pete Booth

Mr. Booth,

You're making this harder than necessary. The two societies we are comparing are different. That's all. I have no doubt that in America, it is likely that the police would have been called, or a civil suit filed later. However, that isn't the normal way of handling things here, and it hasn't always been that way in America either. If I'm not mistaken, you are old enough and experienced enough to know that there was a time in America when every guy brandishing a baseball bat with the intent to harm wasn't prosecuted. If his team mates tackled him and settled him down and nobody was hurt, it was over with. That's what happened here. End of story.

I gather from those who were there that had he not been tackled he likely would have caused great harm to the opposing team's coach. Thankfully, it didn't get that far and, in the end, no one was hurt.

On these two points we are in total agreement.

All that's left now is to get through the final game tomorrow evening without an incident. I have the plate again and will likely start the game with an official warning.

My first "adult" summer game I did the dish and had a no-hitter. Both coaches said I did a great job. Second game of that DH we had 5 ejections. I learned from BOTH situations why some coaches and players carry the title "rats".

JJ

I don't remember a time when a bat swinging guy was not hauled away. Whether he was prosecuted afterwards is out of my hands.

Anyone threatening bodily harm with a baseball bat is removed from the game immediately. In most most leagues, he will receive additional penalties. I've never seen it played out as you suggest.

As far as "prosecution" goes, that will depend on the wishes of the victim.

Bottom line, by any standard, you let too much go in your games.

That is exactly what happened. Most have said that the additional penalty he received was too light. No argument from me about that.

Well, I guess your experiences have been different than mine.

I suppose none of you have ever seen an argument in a bar or pool hall in which one patron threatened another patron with a pool cue, but when things were stopped short of an actual physical altercation, everybody walked away without the intervention of the police or the courts.

I've seen the same kind of thing at baseball and softball games in the 70's and 80's in Texas and Oklahoma. Apparently, I grew up in a dramatically different environment than some of you.

Thanks for your critique.

CraigD,

Apparently, you handled it better than plate umpire in the Padres/Cubs game yesterday who just sat on his thumbs after Chris Young hit Derek Lee.

Yes, Mark Everett should have escorted Lee all the way to first base, and not allowed him to talk smack to Young, who did not intentionally hit him. I mean, why would Lee think Young would want to hit him when Young was pitching a perfect game with a 2-2 count on him?

You could tell by Young's initial reaction that he was upset with himself for hitting Lee. Then Lee was allowed to walk out toward Young and say something. Young isn't going to back down, and then got Sunday punched by Lee. Then Young gets tossed for defending himself. That whole thing could have been prevented by the umpires, but they sat back and let it happen.

Then on top of that, they throw Jake Peavy out for tackling Lee to prevent him from doing any more damage, but allow Zambrano to stay in the game after punching several people, and going berserk until someone corralled him.

Gerry Davis and his crew handled the situation miserably.

This post proves beyond a doubt that you are certifiably nuts.

Peavy was ejected for tackling Lee to keep him from throwing more punches. He was just standing up for his buddy. I didn't say Peavy should not have been run, just that Zambrano was a worse offender, and he should have been dumped as well.

Lee threw a cheap sucker punch at Young. Poor Lee? What are you talking about?:confused: Yeah, he took off running away as soon as he realized he was about to get his butt kicked.

80% of the players didn't belong on the field? It was a BENCH CLEARING BRAWL! I don't know how many you have seen in your born days, but they usually involve 100% of the players, the managers, coaches, bat boys, and ball girls (:) I wish!).

Oh, and attention all Cubs fans:

If an elderly couple (or anyone else for that matter) does not wish to participate in your silly little ritual of throwing back opponents home run balls, do not resort to assaulting them, harassing them, or knocking their caps off their heads. The behavior exhibited by that dumb blond twit in the bleachers today is just typical of the boorish behavior I have witnessed over the years from pasty-faced Cub fans here at Padres games.

Try to understand that the rest of the sporting world thinks your little tradition of throwing back a perfectly good souvenir is stupid and childish.

End of rant.

Can't blame umpire
 

States that F2 distracted U1 after HBP and both were surprised to see punches.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports...s17padres.html
More of the same: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=270616116

Melee took the focus off great pitching and great baseball. :)
Happy to read the strangler was ejected too. :p
Now there we have possible trade bait for Boston. ;)

No, can't blame the umpires ever, huh SA? The only reason there were any punches was Derrick Lee. Period.

If I may play Mr. Positive Side
 

Awareness is good if things do "head south" on their own. However, most baseball things only happen by mere coincidence. Sometimes, having this situation in your mind may exagerate an innocent event that may take place during the game. That would be bad. I would suggest that you try to put it behind you and not even mention it anymore.

If you go looking for anything to escalate before it happens, you may end up putting yourself in a very awkward postion. The individuals have already dealt with the league president and I am sure that the real "players" want to put this bad situation behind them ASAP and enjoy some good baseball, again.

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. :rolleyes:

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.

Throwing at his head and then Young running his mouth about it had nothing to do with Lee going off now did it.......... Lee wouldn't have been able to throw a punch if Young hadn't approached him on the foul line. Blame on this one is a two way street. Young should have kept his *** near the mound and bit his toungue!


Tim.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't you the one saying Lilly intentionally hit Renteria? He also had a perfect game going.

Maybe because Peavy publicly announced that if he was pitching he would retaliate and then poof there he was tackling Lee. Hard to make the argument that he was a peacemaker.

Wow...were you actually watching the game? I was.

First, Young did not "throw at his head." The ball barely grazed him, and it was shoulder height.

Secondly, Young, for the hundredth time, WAS NOT THROWING AT LEE. He was working on a perfect game at the time with two strikes on Lee. He is not intentionally hitting a batter with a 2-2 count in a 0-0 ball game.

Thirdly, Derrick Lee left the running lane, and turned left toward the mound. What was Young supposed to do, get punked by Lee? Wait at the mound like a little sissy? No, he's going to meet Lee half way. Lee was definitely the aggressor in this action. Young was merely reacting to Lee's actions. What was he supposed to do, allow Lee to mouth off without retaliation?

Bud Black sure wanted to know why Chris Young was being ejected. He didn't even get in a decent punch, while Carlos Zambrano was running around taking shots at anyone within reach before a teammate intervened. Where was Zambrano's ejection? Our starter gets run, but the Cubbie guy gets to keep playing? Not very equitable, is it?

Well, it's probably a good thing Zambrano was allowed to continue, so he could give up the game winning home run. That was sweet.

Two outs in the first inning and hits the third batter and it ruined the perfect game? Wow Don, that is really lame.

I did not ever say that 1) Peavy was acting as peacemaker, or 2) that Peavy should not have been ejected, or 3) that he did not tackle Lee. I said that he tackled Lee to prevent Lee from doing any more damage than he already had.

Duh, acting to prevent more damage would be the role of a peacemaker.

As for Zambrano, he apparently was smart enough to stay out of the sightline of the umps.

If I was a pitcher that just put a 90mph fastball an inch away from a mans chin on accident I'd be a bit more humble, might even say sorry. If I'd just retaliated I'd be cocky and tell Lee to get his ### to first and shut-up.
I think Young showed everyone what his intentions were.

I don't fault him for retaliating, but it should have been Soriano, not Lee, but then even the Padre faithful would have had a hard time denying the intent.

If you are talking about Ted Lilly's ejection by Ron Wolf, it was in the first inning:

From FOXSports:

Lilly, who was ejected after two-thirds of an inning in his previous start against Atlanta for hitting Edgar Renteria with a pitch,

Again, this was not retaliation for Soriano's little home run dance the day before. If this were the case, it would have 1) happened the first time through the batting order, and 2) been Soriano, not Lee.

This was a pitch that got away from Young. It was meant to be inside, but not hit Lee. Like I said, the pitch just grazed him. At first glance it appeared to have hit the bat, not Lee. Chris Young's immediate reaction was one of disgust with himself for hitting the batter.

Look at the replay. It was either an Oscar winning performance or a genuine reaction, and it was clear that Young was mad at himself. It wasn't until Lee walked toward the mound and spouted off did Young understandably say something back to Lee. He shouldn't have to apologize (when do they ever do that?:confused: ) Had Lee done what he was supposed to do, which is go directly to first base, then none of what happened would have.

1. Soriano dances
2. Peavy and other pitchers issue veiled threats
3. Cubs best hitter gets a high hard one directed to the head
4. Lee takes exception
5. Young smarts off and tells Lee to get his ### to first
6. Brawl ensues
7. Peavy gets right in the middle of the action

You could blame it on Soriano, but since it's in his home park it's harder to make a reasonable argument that he was showing up the visiting team.

You could blame it on Peavy and his crew for 1. being so sensitive and 2. publicly announcing a need for retaliation.

You could blame it on Young, intentional or not, for putting one at Lee's head and seemingly following through with what the Leader of the pitching staff publicly announced.

Or you could blame it on Young for being a smart a##.

You could blame the HP umpire for daydreaming

Lee was the only one with out a dog in the fight until Young threw at him.

Blame it on Lee if you like, but I think there's plenty of of culpability to go around.

Get hit with baseball. Go to first. Go directly to first. Do not GO to the mound. Do not collect $200,000,000 contracts.

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:

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

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.

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

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

I was going to say the same about Peavy's comments
Give up a homer to the opposition-deal with the dancing

Throwing at someones head potentially endangers their livelihood.
Lee was the only on in this whole scenario with a right to be p@@@@@ off.

Well, I see there is no reasoning with you about this, so I am done. You are going to spin this your way because you must be a Cubs fan. I don't believe that Young was trying to hit Lee. That is my position. You can tell a lot by a pitchers initial reaction, and Young clearly was not throwing at Lee. If you look at Lilly's initial reaction after hitting Renteria, you can tell there was no regret whatsoever.

Young, on the other hand, was upset that he had hit a batter. It was in the fourth inning, a 0-0 score, and he had not allowed a base runner. Do you realize what a perfecto or a no-no would mean to the city of San Diego? They have not had one in their 38 year history.

Young wants nothing more than to be the first Padre with a no-hitter or perfect game. He wasn't going to jeopardize this for a stupid retaliation, I don't care what veiled threat Peavy allegedly made. Peavy is a hot-head like Zambrano. Chris Young is actually a very level headed young man with a boat load of class.

CraigD, sorry about the thread hijack. It's just easier than starting a new thread. Hope you don't mind too much.

To be fair, SDS, in a prior post in this thread you did write,

"Our starter gets run" (emphasis added). (You did not write "San Diego's starter gets run" or "The Padres' starter gets run". You used "our..."

While I'm not trying to get in the middle of this discussion back-and-forth, can it be that TWO posters are seeing this incident through lenses tinted with their team's colors, rather than with their umpire's lenses?

Absolutely. My glasses are tinted a bit blue and sand. But I do feel objectively that Young was genuinely upset that he had hit a batter for the game's first baserunner.

I'm glad you admit it, seriously. You should be commended.

Better "blue and sand" than those horrible camo's they where once a year. (And, yes, I know why they wear them, my brother did his military training in your neck of the woods.)

Shooting Straight
 

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.

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?

In other words if I don't see it your way I'm unreasonable. I understand, I feel the same way


I'm glad you're done because it's getting harder and harder to get in the last word:D

Well, it was nice to see that the front office found Young just as complicit as Lee in this fray. 5 games for both........

Tim.