|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 | ||||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts 
|
It seems that the rules governing unsportsmanlike conduct should apply here.
|
|||||||||
stoneunhinged Inner circle 3067 Posts
|
Bob, rules about unsportsmanlike conduct in baseball amount to something like this: don't call the umpire a "mother-f-----".
I have always admired you, but you are naive about baseball. |
|||||||||
|
0pus Inner circle New Jersey 1739 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 13, 2015, stoneunhinged wrote: I wouldn't say that the rules allow it. I think it might be more accurate to say that the rules do not explicitly prohibit it. In like manner, I do not think that the rules explicitly prohibit one from hitting a player over the head with a bat, but I would certainly NOT say that the rules "allow" it. |
|||||||||
|
stoneunhinged Inner circle 3067 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 13, 2015, 0pus wrote: Right. Which thread is this? The alternative medicine thread? |
|||||||||
|
0pus Inner circle New Jersey 1739 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 13, 2015, stoneunhinged wrote: I hope not. I thought I got out of that one. |
|||||||||
|
stoneunhinged Inner circle 3067 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 13, 2015, 0pus wrote: LOL! Baseball is a religion, not a science. But I treat it as science. That is proof that I'm a very strange person. |
|||||||||
|
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 13, 2015, stoneunhinged wrote: I don't think I'm that naive, really.  But I believe that even under video replay rules, it is not permissible to review a neighborhood play. In the present case, it was ruled that the neighborhood rule didn't apply because of the unlikelihood of the double play being successful and NOT because Tejada had not touched the base:
Quote:
The slide by Utley and the subsequent review that overturned the call have been the subject of controversy. Although reviewing a neighborhood play is not allowed, this play was allowed to be reviewed because, according to an MLB spokesperson, it was reviewed under the auspices of a force play, not that of a neighborhood play. Because the odds of successfully turning a double play were deemed low, the neighborhood play did not apply, and so the play could only be viewed as an attempted force-out at second. This is a reviewable play and provided the basis for the call's overturning. The following day Joe Torre, the MLB Executive Vice President for Baseball Operations, suspended Utley from games 3 and 4 of the series, and indicated that discussions with the Player's Union concerning protecting middle infielders had been ongoing over the past year, and will continue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neighborhood_play The rationale of the neighborhood play is a good one, as it is designed to protect infielders in the very situation which occurred in the Mets/Dodgers game. But it seems to me that a bit of sophistry was used here to justify the review. |
|||||||||
|
stoneunhinged Inner circle 3067 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 14, 2015, mastermindreader wrote: ;) What's most interesting about the play is that most of us--maybe,in fact, ALL of us--think that there was something "unjust" about it, so we wish that there was an official MLB rule against it. But there isn't. It's very interesting to me because it's kind of a lesson for how all of us see the world. We think there should be a rule (or law) against things we find to be unjust, whether there is a rule or not. We tend to believe in something like "natural law", regardless of what we claim to believe in. Let me tell y'all something I find incredibly ironic. I'm sitting in my office, and a woman is waiting near the restroom, because it's occupied. She happens to be a specialist in gender studies, and is rather radical about it. Yet there are two restrooms, identical (each have a single toilet and sink), and she is nevertheless waiting. Why? Because, in spite of her radicalism, she won't go into the room that has the little picture of a man next to the door. She is obeying the unwritten rule that says you can't go into a men's room if you're not a man, even though she doesn't even believe in the natural distinction between men and women, and would get into a huge intellectual fight with anyone who says the distinction is natural. It's rather bizarre. So who is naive? Me? The woman? Bob? The MLB? The American people? Proponents of "natural law"? |
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
She actually submitted her bathroom policy in lieu of a Ph.D. Dissertation, and was immediately approved by the doctoral committee.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
Michael Rubinstein V.I.P. 4675 Posts
|
Willie Randolph said in the 70'S when he was sent into the outfield by Hal Mcrae during the playoffs it was legal. Now, it's not. It's the way the game has evolved.
S.E.M. (The Sun, the Moon, and the Earth) is a sun and moon routine unlike any other. Limited to 100 sets, here is the promo:
https://youtu.be/aFuAWCNEuOI?si=ZdDUNV8lUPWvtOcL $325 ppd USA (Shipping extra outside of USA). If interested, shoot me an email for ordering information at rubinsteindvm@aol.com |
|||||||||
|
0pus Inner circle New Jersey 1739 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 14, 2015, stoneunhinged wrote: Sharp observation, Stone. I think I might put it a little differently: We think things we find to be unjust should not be permissible, whether there is a rule/law against it or not. In certain respects, I see this as the basis for Anglo-american common law, which I think is grounded in fairness. By contrast, under civil law, anything not prohibited is allowed. So, yes, there are underlying world views that shape our thoughts on this play. And, while not always giving rise to clearcut answers in all cases, I prefer a world grounded in "fairness." |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Baseball fans: your opinion? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 | ||||||||||
Posted: Oct 13, 2015 07:55 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
|
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < 
|