Another Joe Morgan funny

[zm1283]

Detroit/LAA game in the bottom of the 8th right now. R1 and R3. Detroit's RHP does a third to first move and doesn't throw to first. (Of course you can hear the morons in the crowd yelling "Balk!!!!")

As usual, the announcers are idiots:

Play-by-play guy: There's that play, that play that everybody gets aggravated by, but Joe, it never works until it works. (Huh? )

Morgan: Yeah, I just think its unfair because the rule book says you're not supposed to deceive the runner. Well if he's not trying to deceive the runner, who's he trying to deceive, the umpire?

Play-by-play guy: It would seem to fall under the textbook definition of a balk.

Morgan: Yeah.

EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T FIT WITHIN THE RULE BOOK DEFINITION OF A BALK AND IS PERFECTLY LEGAL, YOU IDIOTS!

I want to email ESPN and tell them to at least get people who know the rules to work their games.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Non-umpires have a hard time telling the difference between legal and illegal deception.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by zm1283

but Joe, it never works until it works. (Huh? )

Yogi would be proud of this statement!

[jwwashburn]

It actually DID work the other night. The A's vs the Tigers. I had not seen it work in the MLB in years and years.

Cabrera on first and Raeburn on third. Cabrera was picked off terribly, got the 1B to chase him and Raeburn stole home.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

It actually DID work the other night. The A's vs the Tigers. I had not seen it work in the MLB in years and years.

Cabrera on first and Raeburn on third. Cabrera was picked off terribly, got the 1B to chase him and Raeburn stole home.

Hmm, I might argue that it DIDN'T work.

If the object is to fake the throw to third and pick the guy off first - no harm to the fielding team, then the offense scoring a run because they had enough sense to get in a run down.....maybe isn't as planned and not a success? If the play "works" you should pick the guy off and NOT have a run score.

Thoughts?

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Hmm, I might argue that it DIDN'T work.

If the object is to fake the throw to third and pick the guy off first - no harm to the fielding team, then the offense scoring a run because they had enough sense to get in a run down.....maybe isn't as planned and not a success? If the play "works" you should pick the guy off and NOT have a run score.

Thoughts?

Right.

Ultimately, it did not work. Tigers scored.

It had been so long since I had seen a guy get picked off....well, THAT part worked

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Yogi would be proud of this statement!

Which is exactly the spirit the announcer intended when he said it.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

It actually DID work the other night. The A's vs the Tigers. I had not seen it work in the MLB in years and years.

Cabrera on first and Raeburn on third. Cabrera was picked off terribly, got the 1B to chase him and Raeburn stole home.

Intentional.

Orlando did that at least three times as an Angel that I saw. Once, they were both safe and Orlando cruised to an unmanned third base.

Along with Torii Hunter, Orlando is one of the most savvy base runners I've ever seen on a regular basis. Once he stole home during a pitch by a right-handed pitcher, and he did it so cleanly that the pitch was never even delivered. I also saw him steal second without a throw several times a year. He's one of the smartest players in the game. He'll be a manager someday, I predict.

[JR12]

Depending on the score and inning the defense may rather have the sure out.

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Once he stole home during a pitch by a right-handed pitcher, and he did it so cleanly that the pitch was never even delivered.

So it was a balk, and he would have scored anyway?

I also saw him steal second without a throw several times a year. He's one of the smartest players in the game. He'll be a manager someday, I predict.

Defensive Indifference. If he's fast enough and gets a good enough jump, catchers won't even try.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by yawetag

Defensive Indifference. If he's fast enough and gets a good enough jump, catchers won't even try.

Just because the catcher doesn't throw does not automatically mean Defensive Indiference. If a runner takes a base because the defense allows him to, as in late in the game with the defensive team way ahead, then yes. But when a runner gets such a jump that making a throw would be too risky or useless, that counts as a stolen base.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by yawetag

So it was a balk, and he would have scored anyway?


Defensive Indifference. If he's fast enough and gets a good enough jump, catchers won't even try.

Wrong both times. The pitcher on the play was Billingsley, and he took this deliberate windup, ufolded, turned, looked at the plate, and Cabrera was sliding in and he held up the pitch. Steal.

The steals without throws are key steals of second like Steve just described, in which the guy gets such a sick jump that there is no play. It's a steal, and not defensive indifference. I know the indifference.

I don't really need an introductory scoring lesson, I got that in 1967. But thanks anyway.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Just because the catcher doesn't throw does not automatically mean Defensive Indiference. If a runner takes a base because the defense allows him to, as in late in the game with the defensive team way ahead, then yes. But when a runner gets such a jump that making a throw would be too risky or useless, that counts as a stolen base.

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Wrong both times. The pitcher on the play was Billingsley, and he took this deliberate windup, ufolded, turned, looked at the plate, and Cabrera was sliding in and he held up the pitch. Steal.

The steals without throws are key steals of second like Steve just described, in which the guy gets such a sick jump that there is no play. It's a steal, and not defensive indifference. I know the indifference.

I don't really need an introductory scoring lesson, I got that in 1967. But thanks anyway.

I agree with these two. It's indifference when they're not even trying to hold the runner on or they don't care if he advances, like in a late inning when that runner is not the tying run. It's not the runner's fault he was skilled enough to get a good jump.

Just because some umpires haven't read Rule 10 and don't keep score doesn't mean others do know about scoring (and like doing it when they go to watch pro games).

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Wrong both times. The pitcher on the play was Billingsley, and he took this deliberate windup, ufolded, turned, looked at the plate, and Cabrera was sliding in and he held up the pitch. Steal.

You said first:

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Once he stole home during a pitch by a right-handed pitcher, and he did it so cleanly that the pitch was never even delivered.

If the pitch was never delivered, how did he steal home during a pitch?

[Kevin Finnerty]

Okay.

Chad Billingsley had a very deliberate windup, in which he also dipped his head and actually looked at the ground, reminiscent of Don Sutton. He went into his windup with a runner at third at an earlier time in the game, and Orlando timed it and decided right then that if he got to third and Billingsley faced the batter to go into this windup, he was going to pick his pocket. Orlando got to third with two outs and Vladi at the plate. He took his slow-walking lead and Billingsley never looked back, so Orlando took off. Halfway to home, Orlando screamed at Vladi in Spanish that he was coming and not to swing, and Vladi just backpedaled away from the plate with his arms upraised. Orlando went into his slide, and Billingsley was about to deliver, and just held onto it and stood there like the over-matched rookie that he was. Orlando popped up and ran to the dugout having stolen home before the pitcher could deliver the damned pitch.

When he ran down the steps, Mike Scioscia said, "Thank you!" Orlando turned and smiled and said, "Thank you? Why?" Scioscia said, "I've been in this game for almost 30 years and I have never seen that before."

So I don't blame you if you haven't seen it either.