FINAL SCORE IN DUNEDIN, FLA:
BUFFALO BLUE JAYS OF DUNEDIN: 15
ANAHEIM ANGELS OF ANAHEIM: 1
How many times must Pujols grab a bat and pretend that he might get a hit?
How many pitches can Quintana throw home, when his repertoire is pretty much sh*t?
Yes and how many slides will take out a short stop until an ump sees what we all can admit?
The answer my friend is losin’ in Dunedin, the answer is losin’ in Dunedin…
THIS SONG NEEDS NO SECOND VERSE but it would mention how Jaime Barria could have saved the bullpen some innings but instead gave himself an ERA over thirty but why in the hell are you even reading this unless you are a masochist Angels fan (redundant) or are here for some schadenfreude you jerk, good night.
Hey, outside Q and Barria, the bullpen was awesome…. There’s that.
2 starts, 5 innings, 11 earned runs, 8M a year ( yet another one of our patented angel’s one yr deal debacles! ). But yet the discussion is about Dexter Fowler. 🙄
Let’s give him a few more starts before doom and gloom shall we. With things starting out pretty good there is bound to be a couple late starters. Trust me that this guy will turn it around for us.
I agree. Particularly since last night was about as strange a situations as can happen for a pitcher. First the long rain delay and then the bizarre call at 2B. Talk about a mental strain!
2002 – I knew the news had been too good for you to show up. You are like a vulture waiting for your pray to be in its most vulnerable state and then you show up.
Hey we’re still oft to a better start than many thought about us
We missed out on Lance Lynn and he’s making just $10M a year! 😫
.
scavengers are nature’s essential workers!
After being called a Vulture…
Scavengers are nature’s essential workers!
That’s the best line you’ve dropped!
Nice!
Ha! That’s good re scavengers.
I hate to see an injury correct a bad decision to bring Dexter Fowler in, but pretty much anybody they use to replace him will be an improvement. I was enjoying Schebler this spring. Please no John Jay. I would love to give Brandon Marsh a shot.
Fowler needs surgery and is out 6-9 months. Knew it was way more serious than they were letting on.
Any play that one player goes out of their way to hurt another should be ruled an out. I understand playing hard, but at what point do we protect the player from getting purposely spiked?
Welcome to CtPG! Perfect username =)
Last night’s game was rained out. We did not play. We all had a collective fever dream.
Hopefully the Jay’s got all the runs out of them and will not have anything left
I’ll take win two, lose one all season long
That play in the second was absurd, unfortunately you knew what kinda night it was gonna be right then and there.
Just the second? The umps were blind practically from the first pitch.
Okay – beyond the Pujol’s affect etc and the fact this was just a bad game, I’m going to say it again. I just don’t understand that review.
If correct, the neighborhood play (designed to protect the player catching the ball at 2nd) is irrelevant as is the rule designed to protect the player from slides away from the base.
If the League is moving away from those rules back to 1970s/1980s era baseball – then fine. Good to know. Otherwise those rulings on replay made no sense.
Obviously if you go out of your way to take out the defender or slide past the base, you’ll be called out.
Davis seems to be running in his basepath, Iglesias is in front of the bag in that basepath, and Davis doesn’t slide past the base or go out of his way to take him out. Iglesias himself said he thought it was legal.
After some time and sleep, I do think the umps may have made the right call.
Except his basepath was 2 feet above the base as if he was going to round the base on his was to 3rd. Also his slide was towards Iggy and his foot would have never touched the base. If iggy jumped one his hand would have hit the base. Video clearly show his slide foot was directed towards Iggy and not the base. Video is on Angels main site and has the Jay’s broadcasters saying he made no attempt to go after the base.
“When sliding into a base in an attempt to break up a double play, a runner has to make a “bona fide slide.” Such is defined as the runner making contact with the ground before reaching the base, being able to reach the base with a hand or foot, being able to remain on the base at the completion of the slide (except at home plate) and not changing his path for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder. The slide rule prohibits runners from using a “roll block” or attempting to initiate contact with the fielder by elevating and kicking his leg above the fielder’s knee, throwing his arm or his upper body or grabbing the fielder.”
“Accidental contact can occur in the course of a permissible slide, and a runner will not be called for interference if contact is caused by a fielder being in the runner’s legal pathway to the base.”
You only need one hand to touch the base. I’m not sure what language of the rule is violated. He doesn’t change his path for the purpose of initiating contact. He doesn’t kick above the knee. And he doesn’t kick out at Iglesias. Davis’s leg seems at a much more drastic angle because it goes that way AFTER he makes contact with Iglesias.
Okay H. T. – we disagree on the slide – but even for the sake of argument if you accept the slide was legal, the runner at 2nd should still be out due to the ‘neighborhood’ understanding that protects players in this situation. How many times have we seen the runner called out when the player at 2nd in a double play situation catches the ball nowhere near the bag. That is designed to protect the player from the hard sliding runner.
So, both protections for the defensive player were ignored in this situation. I could have lived with the slide being judged legal but the runner still being out at second due to the ‘neighborhood’ play. But if both are to be ignored- fine – just do it consistently and have plenty of ambulances around to deal with the injuries.
You keep bringing up the neighborhood play, but that literally does not exist anymore.
“The “neighborhood play” is a colloquial term used to describe the leeway granted to middle infielders with regards to touching second base while in the process of turning a ground-ball double play. Though it is not explicitly mentioned in the rulebook, middle infielders were long able to record an out on the double-play pivot simply by being in the proximity — or neighborhood — of the second-base bag. The maneuver had been permitted for safety purposes, as it allowed the pivot man to get out of the way of the oncoming baserunner as quickly as possible.
But via a rule change instituted before the 2016 season, the neighborhood play is now reviewable by instant replay. That means middle infielders must touch the second-base bag while in possession of the ball in order to ensure the out is made on a ground-ball double play. In order to protect the middle infielders, Major League Baseball also amended the sliding rules for baserunners.”
Edit: And yes, I do understand an interpretation of the rule where the slide is illegal, causing the runner at first to be out. Alternatively, I would like to see second and third with one out in that situation. Call could go either way, depending on your view of the slide. I now slightly lean towards legal.
Yep. Right after I posted that, I had that question in my mind and found that on the MLB site. I did not know that the neighborhood play was reviewable and non-enforceable anymore.
So with that clarification, the slide rule needs to be strictly enforced. That slide was not a direct line to the bag and was right at Iglesias. If you’re going to revoke the neighborhood ‘rule’ then that slide HAS to be illegal or else your going to end up with a lot of injuries.
The correct ruling should have been safe at second, out at first, runner that scored back to 3rd.
That is a reasonable interpretation. These types of calls are never black-and-white.
However, given that he was running straight at the base “in the general baseline that he was on”, his hand would have touched the base, and he did not go out of his way to slide into Iglesias, it seems legal to me according to the way the rule is written. I think the rule possibly should be a little stricter.
Probably a 70-30 call to me. Would’ve been fine if it the sides were reversed and it went against us. Also fine as is.
I think the key wording of the rule in this situation is:
“and not changing his path for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder”
The runner has to be able to touch the base with his hand or foot AND not alter his path initiating contact with the player covering the bag. It’s an ‘and’ so it has to be both to be a legal slide. .
Davis clearly altered his path to the base to interfere with Iglesias who was well above the bag towards centerfield. Davis veered right to get to Iglesias and initiate contact. There is no other reason for that slide and Davis veered right to do it.
So even though his hand could still reach the bag, it is still an illegal slide by the rule book. I just don’t see how it can be called legal and still promote the stated goal of protecting the player covering the bag. If that is legal, a 6 foot player with a 3 foot reach could slide 9 feet outside the basepath and initiate contact with the player’s body abd still arguably be able to touch the bag with his hand. That’s not the intention of the rule.
I wouldn’t say he’s “clearly” altering his path, but sure.
Given the constraints of replay, it definitely makes sense that they couldn’t overturn it.
And people don’t slide sideways. It would be nigh impossible to establish a legal basepath and somehow slide 9 feet away from the bag.
But but but…..Davis did slide sideways. Look at the review. He begins his slide towards the bag and then alters the path of his legs to the right to hit Iglesias.
I am late to the party, but there is already intent for Davis, after jumping the ball, to swing wide with a look to interfering with the play. No chance he was headed to third (needing the wide swing) as he say Pujols catch the ball).
He aims for Iglesias’ legs, and reaches back only for the nominal contact. Perhaps he is trying to stay within the letter of the law, but that violates the intent of the rule. Don’t try to injure players – slide for the bag.
There is no instance of legit trying to get to second that needs a slide out with the legs. That was a clear case of trying to interfere with Iglesias. That, imo (and perhaps not yet in the rules explicitly) should be how this goes. Trying to knock the ball out, or disrupt the throw, is just unsportsmanlike conduct, in my mind.
Right, but is the fact that he’s already moving to the right to interfere with the THROW overturnable in replay? That seems like a judgment call to me.
And I agree, there’s an intent to slide into the player, and it violates the intent of the rule, because he could have easily avoided Iglesias. I just don’t think it violates the letter of the law.
I think we’ve exhausted all points of differences here and we know where we disagree.
But imo he’s still going straight until he hits Iglesias.
“But imo he’s still going straight until he hits Iglesias.”
That’s veering/altering and that violates the rule.
Okay you are right. Enough said. A lively debate.
How? His legs only go sideways after contact. We’re concerned about what happens before contact. If he slide straight through Iglesias instead of going to the side after contact, you would be fine?
He is sliding straight and then swings his legs out to the right. His hand is going towards the base but he then swings his legs out at an angle towards Iglesias. I think that violates the letter of the rule and the intent.
I’ll add that in old-school baseball that’s a legal slide. That’s how I learned to break up a double play. But with the new sliding rule, I saw it as clearly in violation of the rule because if he had simply slid straight and not veered his legs to the right, he does not impact Iglesias. In other words, to reach Iglesias and still be running straight, Davis would have had to have been out of the baseline.
Well, it was not a fun game, but amazingly it does not bug me nearly as much as it would have over the previous five seasons. Could it be that after all these years I’ve finally learned to turn the page?
Naaaaaah. I’m still just happy to have a game to watch.