The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 01:16pm
Broadcaster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: LaGrange, Ga.
Posts: 364
MLB suspends Winters

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_yl...v=ap&type=lgns

NEW YORK (AP) -- Umpire Mike Winters was suspended by Major League Baseball for the remainder of the regular season on Wednesday because of his confrontation with San Diego's Milton Bradley last weekend.

The Padres claimed Winters baited Bradley, who has a history of losing his temper. Bradley tore a knee ligament when his manager spun him to the ground while trying to keep him from going after the umpire during Sunday's 7-3 loss to Colorado in San Diego.

Winters was suspended because the commissioner's office concluded he had used a profanity aimed at Bradley, a baseball official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the reasoning for the suspension was not announced.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 01:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 226
thats what---3 games?


(memo to mlb: the seasons' over!!)
__________________
It's sad when you're at a baseball game and realize that you'll never have the money, status or talent that the guys on the field take for granted. And it gets even worse when the grounds crew gives way to the players.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 01:54pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson
thats what---3 games?


(memo to mlb: the seasons' over!!)
He could lose playoff games and the suspension could carry over into next season. Just have to wait and see if it comes out in a news release or not.
__________________
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 02:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by msavakinas
larry... they know the season season is over... thats why they did it. winters didnt do anything wrong he just confronted bradley. bobby meachem claims today that he used a racist remark which i guarantee is bs. he's smarter than that. he was sticking up for his fellow umpire, brian runge. winters shouldnt have gone after him, and this suspension is good because it shuts up bradley for a while but then its bad because it lets Bradley run the show.

maybe Jim Porter can find the video of the flip at the end of the fifth? and maybe the ejection?
1. Isn't "confronting Bradley" wrong in and of itself?

2. Knowing the penalties for criticizing umpires, and imagining the penalties for making THAT kind of an allegation and not being able to back it up, why exactly would anyone make that up? (And please spare me your "he's a rat" garbage)

3. There has to be a better way to "stick up for his fellow umpire."

4. What "show" is "Bradley running?"
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 02:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,226
One thing that is mentioned over and over when discussing participant/umpire relations is that the offended manager/player should not "cross the line" in a discussion with the umpire. To do so invites an ejection, even if the call was kicked or a rule misinterpreted. In other words, argue properly or take a hike.

Now it seems to me that the same should hold true for the umpire. Keep it "proper" or risk the consequences. If the AP article is correct, Winters crossed a line.

I saw the video three times. Winters said/did something and BOTH Mecheam and Bradley immediately went toward Winters. Then Mecheam turned to head off Bradley. Something was said that pissed off both of them. Mecheam kept his cool enough to turn his attention to Bradley. Bradley "lost it".

I wish someone had interviewed whoever was F3 and added his comments to the articles and commentaries. That could shed more light on what happened. Perhaps MLB did so and it contributed to their action against Winters.

Bradley has a history. As far as I know, Mecheam does not have a history.
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 02:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by reddevil19
1. Isn't "confronting Bradley" wrong in and of itself?

2. Knowing the penalties for criticizing umpires, and imagining the penalties for making THAT kind of an allegation and not being able to back it up, why exactly would anyone make that up? (And please spare me your "he's a rat" garbage)

3. There has to be a better way to "stick up for his fellow umpire."

4. What "show" is "Bradley running?"
1. Not necessarily.

2. Based on what I've read, the coach has backed off his initial allegations.

(3 & 4 -- no comment).

Here's what I think. This was a typical "chain of events" scenario. No single action was "over the top", but when added together they lead to a negative situation. If any action had not occurred, we wouldn't have had this. (If Bradley hadn't flung the bat, if Runge would have noticed and addressed it immeidately, if Winters had stayed out of it, if Winters hadn't made a show of addressing it, if Runge hadn't brought it back up later, if Bradley had let it go, ...)

They were all to blame, and all have the "defense" of "well, he started it."

MLB is right to send them to "time out", and I bet MLB know more about the story then will ever be made public.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 02:59pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives
One thing that is mentioned over and over when discussing participant/umpire relations is that the offended manager/player should not "cross the line" in a discussion with the umpire. To do so invites an ejection, even if the call was kicked or a rule misinterpreted. In other words, argue properly or take a hike.

Now it seems to me that the same should hold true for the umpire. Keep it "proper" or risk the consequences. If the AP article is correct, Winters crossed a line.

I saw the video three times. Winters said/did something and BOTH Mecheam and Bradley immediately went toward Winters. Then Mecheam turned to head off Bradley. Something was said that pissed off both of them. Mecheam kept his cool enough to turn his attention to Bradley. Bradley "lost it".

I wish someone had interviewed whoever was F3 and added his comments to the articles and commentaries. That could shed more light on what happened. Perhaps MLB did so and it contributed to their action against Winters.

Bradley has a history. As far as I know, Mecheam does not have a history.
But he does have a vested interest in the outcome.

Well, like I said in the other thread, this will just give Winters a break before the playoffs.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 03:00pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
1. Not necessarily.

2. Based on what I've read, the coach has backed off his initial allegations.

(3 & 4 -- no comment).

Here's what I think. This was a typical "chain of events" scenario. No single action was "over the top", but when added together they lead to a negative situation. If any action had not occurred, we wouldn't have had this. (If Bradley hadn't flung the bat, if Runge would have noticed and addressed it immeidately, if Winters had stayed out of it, if Winters hadn't made a show of addressing it, if Runge hadn't brought it back up later, if Bradley had let it go, ...)

They were all to blame, and all have the "defense" of "well, he started it."

MLB is right to send them to "time out", and I bet MLB know more about the story then will ever be made public.
If they would've just ejected Bradley in the fifth inning, none of this would have happened. Just evidence to show that "keeping people in the game" brings risks to the umpires, as well.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 03:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 226
mr Devil: 'attention in the compound.... hes a rat. that is all'
__________________
It's sad when you're at a baseball game and realize that you'll never have the money, status or talent that the guys on the field take for granted. And it gets even worse when the grounds crew gives way to the players.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 03:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN
Question: Did you join this board only to discuss THIS? If so, go away, troll.
Not necessarily. Like I said in my first post, I've been reading this forum since early this year when I found it looking for some insight into a rule interpretation I saw in a high school game. I've always had an interest in umpiring and I've found many things here interesting.

I only posted on this because I was at the game and thought maybe an eyewitness account might be of interest for the discussion. I probably would have posted earlier in the season when I saw some things of interest and had questions, but I didn't realize you didn't have to join the paysite to post. I don't consider anything I've done to be "trolling." I don't see how following up on the matter would be considered as such, unless your definition of a "troll" is someone who doesn't just blindly agree with your personal point of view.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 03:28pm
Stop staring at me swan.
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson
mr Devil: 'attention in the compound.... hes a rat. that is all'

__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 03:29pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by reddevil19
Not necessarily. Like I said in my first post, I've been reading this forum since early this year when I found it looking for some insight into a rule interpretation I saw in a high school game. I've always had an interest in umpiring and I've found many things here interesting.

I only posted on this because I was at the game and thought maybe an eyewitness account might be of interest for the discussion. I probably would have posted earlier in the season when I saw some things of interest and had questions, but I didn't realize you didn't have to join the paysite to post. I don't consider anything I've done to be "trolling." I don't see how following up on the matter would be considered as such, unless your definition of a "troll" is someone who doesn't just blindly agree with your personal point of view.
Not at all. This board, though, has had a lot of posters come (and just as quickly go) when something controversial happens involving officiating.

You're just as welcome as anyone else, although I hope you'll stay a while.

I've been wondering how many Padres Froemming will eject this coming weekend, though

Hey, Bob, do I have to get my freaking posts approved so you won't delete them? It's getting ridiculous around here. And you're being over officious, which I know isn't your nature.

Last edited by Rich; Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 03:31pm.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 03:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN
Not at all. This board, though, has had a lot of posters come (and just as quickly go) when something controversial happens involving officiating.

You're just as welcome as anyone else, although I hope you'll stay a while.

I've been wondering how many Padres Froemming will eject this coming weekend, though
Ok. I'd imagine that has happened, but I'm not into that kind of stuff.

Hopefully Bruce doesn't have to eject anyone. If he does, I'm 100% certain they'll deserve it.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 03:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives
...I wish someone had interviewed whoever was F3 and added his comments to the articles and commentaries...
I believe F3 was Todd Helton of the Rockies.

I read something on Monday that said he was asked about the incident and declined to comment. I'm reasonably sure that he had comments for MLB, however.
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2007, 04:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 1,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy
I believe F3 was Todd Helton of the Rockies.

I read something on Monday that said he was asked about the incident and declined to comment. I'm reasonably sure that he had comments for MLB, however.
I'm sure he did, from what I've read in the past Todd Helton is a good guy and probably stood up for what was right.

I don't feel sorry for Bradley, but I also think Winters made a very poor judgement. It was not his call and he stuck his nose in his partner's business ...

I would hope that Winters would get no postseason because of this. Similiar to the NBA - give him a break and let him think about it, then bring him back next year.

Thanks
David
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Milton Bradley and Mike Winters tcblue13 Softball 11 Wed Sep 26, 2007 03:18pm
Big Sky suspends three officials for error Nevadaref Basketball 13 Wed Mar 01, 2006 05:12pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:03pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1