The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Sat May 28, 2011, 04:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
AUSTRALIA (4)
Balfour, Grant, TB
Moylan, Peter, ATL
Rowland-Smith, Ryan, SEA
Thomas, Brad, DET

CANADA (13)
Bay, Jason, NYM
Bedard, Erik, SEA
Crain, Jesse, MIN
Dempster, Ryan, CHI-NL
Francis, Jeff, COL
Harden, Rich, TEX
Hawksworth, Blake, STL
Kottaras, George, MIL
Martin, Russell, LA-NL
Morneau, Justin, MIN
Richmond, Scott, TOR
Stairs, Matt, SD
Votto, Joey, CIN

COLOMBIA (2)
Cabrera, Orlando, CIN
Renteria, Edgar, SF

CUBA (7)
Baez, Danny, PHI
Betancourt, Yuniesky, KC
Contreras, Jose, PHI
Escobar, Yunel, ATL
Morales, Kendry, LAA
Pena, Brayan, KC
Ramirez, Alexei, CWS

CURAÇAO (2)
Jones, Andruw, CWS
Jurrjens, Jair, ATL

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC (86)
Abreu, Tony, ARI
Arias, Alberto, HOU
Arias, Joaquin, TEX
Aybar, Erick, LAA
Aybar, Willy, TB
*******o, Antonio, PHI
Batista, Miguel, WSH Bautista, Jose, TOR
Beltre, Adrian, BOS
Bonifacio, Emilio, FLA
Borbon, Julio, TEX
Cabrera, Melky, ATL
Cano, Robinson, NYY
Caridad, Esmailin, CHI-NL
Carmona, Fausto, CLE
Casilla, Alexi, MIN
Castillo, Luis, NYM
Colon, Roman, KC
Cordero, Francisco, CIN
Cruz, Juan, KC
Cruz, Nelson, TEX
Cueto, Johnny, CIN
Dotel, Octavio, PIT
Encarnacion, Edwin, TOR
Feliz, Neftali, TEX
Feliz, Pedro, HOU
Francisco, Frank, TEX
Francisco, Juan, CIN
Furcal, Rafael, LA-NL
Gervacio, Samuel, HOU
Gomez, Carlos, MIL
Guerrero, Vladimir, TEX
Guillen, Jose, KC
Guzman, Cristian, WSH
Hernandez, Diory, ATL
Jimenez, Ubaldo, COL
Joaquin, Waldis, SF
Liriano, Francisco, MIN
Lugo, Julio, BAL
Madrigal, Warner, TEX
Marmol, Carlos, CHI-NL
Marte, Andy, CLE
Marte, Damaso, NYY
Mejia, Jenrry, NYM
Mota, Guillermo, SF
Norberto, Jordan, ARI
Nunez, Leo, FLA
Olivo, Miguel, COL
Ortiz, David, BOS
Ortiz, Ramon, LA-NL
Paulino, Felipe, HOU
Paulino, Ronny, FLA
Peña, Carlos, TB
Peña, Ramon, CWS
Peralta, Jhonny, CLE Perez, Rafael, CLE
Pie, Felix, BAL
Polanco, Placido, PHI
Pujols, Albert, STL
Ramirez, Aramis, CHI-NL
Ramirez, Edwar, OAK
Ramirez, Hanley, FLA
Ramirez, Manny, LA-NL
Ramirez, Ramon, BOS
Reyes, Jose, NYM
Rodney, Fernando, LAA
Rodriguez, Wandy, HOU
Rogers, Esmil, COL
Santana, Ervin, LAA
Santiago, Ramon, DET
Soriano, Alfonso, CHI-NL
Soriano, Rafael, TB
Tatis, Fernando, NYM
Taveras, Willy, WSH
Tejada, Miguel, BAL
Tejeda, Robinson, KC
Troncoso, Ramon, LA-NL
Uribe, Juan, SF
Valdez, Merkin, TOR
Valverde, Jose, DET
Vargas, Claudio, MIL
Vasquez, Esmerling, ARI
Velez, Eugenio, SF
Veras, Enger, FLA
Villanueva, Carlos, MIL
Volquez, Edinson, CIN

JAPAN (14)
Fukudome, Kosuke, CHI-NL
Igarashi, Ryota, NYM
Iwamura, Akinori, PIT
Kawakami, Kenshin, ATL
Kuroda, Hiroki, LA-NL
Matsui, Hideki, LAA
Matsui, Kazuo, HOU
Matsuzaka, Daisuke, BOS
Okajima, Hideki, BOS
Saito, Takashi, ATL
Suzuki, Ichiro, SEA
Takahashi, Hisanori, NYM
Tazawa, Junichi, BOS
Uehara, Koji, BAL

KOREA (2)
Choo, Shin Soo, CLE
Park, Chan Ho, NYY

MEXICO (12)
Aceves, Alfredo, NYY
Cantu, Jorge, FLA
Castro, Juan, PHI
De La Rosa, Jorge, COL
Gallardo, Yovani, MIL
Garcia, Jaime, STL
Lopez, Rodrigo, ARI
Mendoza, Luis, KC
Pena, Ramiro, NYY
Perez, Oliver, NYM
Reyes, Dennys, STL
Soria, Joakim, KC

NICARAGUA (2)
Cabrera, Everth, SD
Padilla, Vicente, LA-NL

PANAMA (5)
Corpas, Manny, COL
Lee, Carlos, HOU
Rivera, Mariano, NYY
Ruiz, Carlos, PHI
Tejada, Ruben, NYM PUERTO RICO (21)
Beltran, Carlos, NYM
Castro, Ramon, CWS
Cora, Alex, NYM
Feliciano, Pedro, NYM
Lopez, Felipe, STL
Lopez, Javier, PIT
Lowell, Mike, BOS
Molina, Bengie, SF
Molina, Jose, TOR
Molina, Yadier, STL
Morales, Jose, MIN
Nieves, Wil, WSH
Pagan, Angel, NYM
Piñeiro, Joel, LAA
Posada, Jorge, NYY
Rodriguez, Ivan, WSH
Romero, J.C., PHI
Sanchez, Jonathan, SF
Soto, Geovany, CHI-NL
Torres, Andres, SF
Vazquez, Javier, NYY

TAIWAN (3)
Kuo, Hong-Chih, LA-NL
Ni, Fu-Te, DET
Wang, Chien-Ming, WSH

VENEZUELA (58)
Abreu, Bobby, LAA
Andrus, Elvis, TEX
Ascanio, Jose, PIT
Bazardo, Yorman, HOU
Belisario, Ronald, LA-NL
Betancourt, Rafael, COL
Blanco, Andres, TEX
Blanco, Henry, NYM
Cabrera, Asdrubal, CLE
Cabrera, Miguel, DET
Cairo, Miguel, CIN
Callaspo, Alberto, KC Cedeño, Ronny, PIT
Cervelli, Francisco, NYY
Escobar, Alcides, MIL
Escobar, Kelvim, NYM
Flores, Jesus, WSH
Garcia, Freddy, CWS
Gonzalez, Alberto, WSH
Gonzalez, Alex, TOR
Gonzalez, Carlos, COL
Guillen, Carlos, DET
Gutierrez, Franklin, SEA
Gutierrez, Juan, ARI
Guzman, Angel, CHI-NL
Hernandez, Felix, SEA
Hernandez, Ramon, CIN
Infante, Omar, ATL
Izturis, Cesar, BAL
Izturis, Maicer, LAA
Lopez, Jose, SEA
Martinez, Victor, BOS
Mijares, Jose, MIN
Monasterios, Carlos, LA-NL
Montero, Miguel, ARI
Mora, Melvin, COL
Morales, Franklin, COL
Mujica, Edward, SD
Navarro, Dioner, TB
Nieve, Fernando, NYM
Ordoñez, Magglio, DET
Ortega, Anthony, LAA
Parra, Gerardo, ARI
Pinto, Renyel, FLA
Prado, Martin, ATL
Quintero, Humberto, HOU
Rivera, Juan, LAA
Rodriguez, Francisco, NYM
Salazar, Oscar, SD
Sanchez, Anibal, FLA
Sandoval, Pablo, SF
Santana, Johan, NYM
Scutaro, Marco, BOS
Silva, Carlos, CHI-NL
Torrealba, Yorvit, SD
Valbuena, Luis, CLE
Vizquel, Omar, CWS
Zambrano, Carlos, CHI-NL

Almost 30% of current active players were not exposed to Fed type safety rules while developing. Almost a third of the Majors...'many' seems like an appropriate term. Hard nosed baseball involves collisions at the plate. We may prefer it doesn't but the majority of players think it does or the union would allow the change.

Many Catholic and private schools around here didn't adopt NFHS standards for some time. They utilized pro type rules and shunned the IHSA until they found that competition was better and liability less by being part of the association.

Last edited by MikeStrybel; Sat May 28, 2011 at 04:58pm.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Sat May 28, 2011, 05:09pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
Owners have a vested interest in a change. "Players" are not all catchers. They should establish a sub-committee with equal mix of position players and catchers to provide feedback on union position.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 07:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
A subcommittee? They have those already and they have long recommended that this part of the game not change. EVERY player's union member has a vote already. EVERY means that they include all position players - even the ones on IR and DL. Nearly 100 players who aren't even active can still voice their concerns - yes, those are the injured ones who are probably predisposed towards protecting their own! Plenty of managers and coaches, including former catchers, stand by the desire to not change the rules. Mike Scioscia is one who is adamant about it and instructs catchers on how to block the plate properly. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?...k_ana&c_id=ana

One of the most famous collisions in baseball involved Pete Rose bowling over Ray Fosse in an All Star game. Ray Fosse separated his shoulder in a fairly meaningless contest. He was never the same after that injury. He is on record as saying that collisions at the plate are and should remain part of baseball. His position has not changed and he was sought out after Posey went down. He maintains that changing the game is wrong.

Posey was hurt on a clean play. His spikes caused his ankle to be held in place while his body rolled back. Outlaw metal spikes?

They are paid to play and risk injury. They are entertainers.

Last edited by MikeStrybel; Sun May 29, 2011 at 08:55am.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 10:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 3,100
They are paid to play and risk injury. They are entertainers.

Entertainers to the fans, I guess. But to the owners, the players are, as Jim Bouton said, farm animals.
__________________
greymule
More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men!
Roll Tide!
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 11:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by DG View Post
Owners have a vested interest in a change. "Players" are not all catchers. They should establish a sub-committee with equal mix of position players and catchers to provide feedback on union position.
A change is coming. Owners will realize their investments are in unnecessary jeopardy and players will will choose to protect their future earnings. It will take time and a seminal moment, but just as sure as all batters will wear helmets in today's games, a change is coming.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 11:39am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
A little history lesson is in order. The first helmet used for protecting a batter was introduced in 1907. Ray Champman was beaned in 1920 and died as a result of the injury. Owners did not rally to 'protect their investments'. Several players chose to wear plastic inserts under their caps for protection. In 1952, the Pittsburgh Pirates mandated that their players wear a helmet, sans ear protection. It was not until 1971, after several years of brutal beanings at the plate and while sliding, that MLB instituted a helmet policy. Helmets with earflaps were shunned by the Players Union until 1983 when they aqcuiesced to mandatory single earflaps. Several players who were grandfathered in elected to wear the flapless helmets until retirement.

It seems that the death of a player is not considered a seminal moment. Several decades of horrific beanings didn't change player mentality. It took almost a century to provide for player safety gear to be mandatory. One catcher breaking an ankle won't be the impetus for adopting a MC rule in MLB. Given the bantering here about what constitutes MC, it will be a disaster upon implimentation in the bigs.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 03:59pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
A little history lesson is in order. The first helmet used for protecting a batter was introduced in 1907. Ray Champman was beaned in 1920 and died as a result of the injury. Owners did not rally to 'protect their investments'. Several players chose to wear plastic inserts under their caps for protection. In 1952, the Pittsburgh Pirates mandated that their players wear a helmet, sans ear protection. It was not until 1971, after several years of brutal beanings at the plate and while sliding, that MLB instituted a helmet policy. Helmets with earflaps were shunned by the Players Union until 1983 when they aqcuiesced to mandatory single earflaps. Several players who were grandfathered in elected to wear the flapless helmets until retirement.

It seems that the death of a player is not considered a seminal moment. Several decades of horrific beanings didn't change player mentality. It took almost a century to provide for player safety gear to be mandatory. One catcher breaking an ankle won't be the impetus for adopting a MC rule in MLB. Given the bantering here about what constitutes MC, it will be a disaster upon implimentation in the bigs.
This isn't 1907 or even 1957. I'm not saying it'll happen now, but just because it didn't in 1907 or 1961 doesn't mean anything with regards to today.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 06:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
This isn't 1907 or even 1957. I'm not saying it'll happen now, but just because it didn't in 1907 or 1961 doesn't mean anything with regards to today.
You are correct. Changes progress at different tempi at different times regarding different issues and different rationale.

A change is coming. If you take the time to listen, and tune out the broadcasters and old school toughies, you can hear it from owners, players and even ML umpires.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 06:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,300
The NCAA rule makes sense to me. If theplate is blocked, you can got for the plate, even if that means going "through" the catcher. If the plate isn't b;locked, you can't go after the catcher.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 06:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
The NCAA rule makes sense to me. If theplate is blocked, you can got for the plate, even if that means going "through" the catcher. If the plate isn't b;locked, you can't go after the catcher.
Yep. Some ML umpires have opined similarly. Others have suggested simply callinging plays at home as they would at first using current ML interpretations would be an improvement over the current situations. I doubt owners will trust umpires to change their calls without a change in the rules.
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 29, 2011, 10:16pm
Stop staring at me swan.
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
The NCAA rule makes sense to me. If theplate is blocked, you can got for the plate, even if that means going "through" the catcher. If the plate isn't b;locked, you can't go after the catcher.
Unless the contact is judged to be above the waist. Then it violates the collision rule. Then it is judged as an attempt to dislodge the baseball, not an attempt to reach the plate.
__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 07:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
Anyone hear Posey's comments about the incident? An ESPN interview has him stating that he doesn't want the rule changed and how collisions are part of professional baseball.

Someone rekindled a thread from 4 years ago regarding INT at 2B. It is interesting to see some say how rule changes will be forthcoming because the players will demand it. Four years later...
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 07:58am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyg08 View Post
Unless the contact is judged to be above the waist. Then it violates the collision rule. Then it is judged as an attempt to dislodge the baseball, not an attempt to reach the plate.
that's a guideline, not an absolute. I wasn't trying to recreate the entire rule and interp in my post.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 08:47am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: W. Pa
Posts: 216
agreed

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
The NCAA rule makes sense to me. If theplate is blocked, you can got for the plate, even if that means going "through" the catcher. If the plate isn't b;locked, you can't go after the catcher.
this sounds sensible to me.......
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 10:00am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
Anyone hear Posey's comments about the incident? An ESPN interview has him stating that he doesn't want the rule changed and how collisions are part of professional baseball.

Someone rekindled a thread from 4 years ago regarding INT at 2B. It is interesting to see some say how rule changes will be forthcoming because the players will demand it. Four years later...
1. It's not up to Posey.
2. He would like like a big baby if he were to come out now and push for a rule change. No way he does that.
3. I anticipate the owners will push for it harder than the players.
4. One incident won't be a catalyst.
5. It'll probably have to happen to a more high profile player before a rule change is made.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
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
When is hair contact a contact? OmniSpiker Volleyball 6 Tue Nov 04, 2008 06:27pm
First Contact chartrusepengui Volleyball 2 Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:57pm
+ POS---Does anyone have a contact there? jwwashburn Baseball 25 Wed Aug 02, 2006 07:32pm
NFL - down by contact jack015 Football 1 Thu Jan 01, 2004 01:47pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:02am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1