Half right. We don't teach it, we enforce it. You're allowing this and the helmet slam in the OP just makes the job of the umpires after you more difficult.

I'm just a reporter of what happened. Players and coaches eject themselves by their actions.

Seriously you two?

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Sorry for being late to this party, but I was away from computers during an extended Labor Day weekend.

First and foremost, I don't care for any form of frustration taken out on equipment like this. It bugs me when I see even the youngest of kids who hammer the ground with their bat as they head back to the dugout following a swinging strike out. I also see things like helmets and bats being thrown into equipment areas, gloves being slammed against benches, etc.

For those who say it's no big deal when it happens inside the dugout, I feel that's a cop-out. It's unsporting whether it happens on the field the moment a player fails, or it happens a minute later inside the "protection" of the dugout. If you see it happen, what difference does it make where it happens?

That said, there is an accepted tolerance by umpires to let things go depending upon:
- the location of the act
- the age of the player
- the game situation
- the direct cause of the act (frustration at himself/herself vs. obvious disagreement with an umpire's call)
- any "collateral damage" inflicted, especially if it is inflicted on or near the umpire
If an umpire deviates from that acceptance, he/she is viewed as either too lenient or too over-officious.

Which brings me to this particular play. In my opinion, Harper should have been tossed. But then, many MLB players should have been tossed in games past for slamming their equipment when they strike out, when they hit into a DP, when they fail to catch a fly ball, etc. But routinely they don't because MLB umpires look the other way. And I feel CB should have looked the other way on this one.

A few weeks ago, we discussed a situation where an Oriole player was tossed after he slammed his first baseman's mitt on the ground when the PU overruled U1's call of Out at first. That one was pretty obvious that he was acting out on the PU's reversal.

What was Harper acting out on here? He never looked at CB, never yelled in disgust "NO!" or "THAT'S BULL SPIT!" or gave any other indication that he disagreed with the umpire's call. If Harper's act really warranted the ejection, then there are plenty of other acts I've seen that should similarly warrant the same result...and they rarely do.

Speaking of overreacting Nats, I recall a couple of years ago when Nyjer Morgan was on the team, and he missed a fly ball against the wall. Instead of going after the loose ball and throwing it back to the infield, he reared back and slammed his glove on the ground. Did that deserve an ejection? For those who argue, "Of course not," then why should Harper's act deserve one? To me, he was just as frustrated for grounding into a DP late in a game where his team was losing as Nyjer was when he muffed the catch.

Again, I prefer that all that crap results in ejections, regardless where it happens or why. It's unsporting conduct, plain and simple. But as long as we continue to ignore it under certain accepted standards, then we deserve criticism when we violate those standards, as I believe happened here.

I'm dumping him for that 100 times out of 100.

IMO, If he hangs on to his helmet and slams it against the ground, I would let it go. He chose to THROW his helmet, which I would eject for.

Harper's act had the potential to cause injury. Morgan's didn't.

So Manny... I am a little hung up on your contradiction here. Should he have been tossed or not? How can you say he should have been and then say that CB should have not tossed. Very confusing....

But he did look at CB. He was looking at him for the call. True, he wasn't looking at him with a glare but he was looking at him and he threw his helmet just after.

CB didn't take the time to think of WHY Bryce looked at him.

It doesn't change the point you made, but it is an explanation of why he was tossed.

Rita

I guess I didn't make my point clear. My bad.

I feel that all these kinds of incidents should result in ejections. There should be no leeway given.

But leeway is given depending on certain circumstances. In my opinion, a couple of those circumstances existed here. That's why I think CB was too quick to pull the trigger.

You're right, Rita. I went back and looked at the play again, and he did look at him as he ran by.

What I also saw when I revisited the video was CB telling Davey Johnson, "I don't know why he threw it!" If he had taken a little more time to watch Harper as he went by, he might've surmised it was more out of frustration for hitting into the DP than out of anger at the umpire's call.

Reading the same lips, I'm getting "I don't CARE why he threw it!" Which personally I agree with.

IMO, the reason Harper got tossed is that he has developed a reputation.

If Derek Jeter (not that he would have) did the same EXACT thing as Harper I doubt very much he would have been tossed.

It's like World Peace (Artest) in the NBA. He gets NO-leeway because he has a reputation.

Also, not just with the Harper incident bu CB is not a "well loved" official to begin with.

FWIW I doubt very much Harper would have been tossed if this were a play-off game.

Paul O'Neil took his helmet off plenty of times and did not get tossed. Got fined but not tossed. This is major league baseball not kiddy ball.


Pete Booth

How so?

Context matters. I've ejected players for slamming equipment, and for yelling F**K. When they do it obviously only in frustration over their own poor performance, I don't see the need. If other umpires want to eject as a matter of course without making those sorts of distinctions, I haven't made their job more difficult; they've done that to themselves.

Swing and miss for strike three (with no disputed pitches during that at bat) and then slam your helmet/bat in frustration = I (umpire) am looking the other way.

Strike out on a called strike three and then slam your helmet/bat in frustration = ejection. (When player complains that he was "mad at himself" I'll suggest that he wait until he's in the dugout next time before becoming "mad at himself.")

Hit a ground ball, get thrown out at first base by 10-feet (or more) and then slam your helmet = I am walking away (unless the helmet/bat makes contact with me.)

Hit a ground ball, get thrown out at first base on a "close call" and then slam your helmet = ejection.

Context does matter, I agree. However, in CB's play, the play at first base was a "close call". At this point, it doesn't matter why the helmet was thrown. The B/R has just stuck it up CB's backside. On the professional level, this has to be addressed immediately. That's game management on the professional level.

This was a no-brainer ejection.