***Official MLB Discussion Thread*** (Non Royals/Cardinals)

[ChiefsCountry]

For all the other MLB teams news and notes and discussion. We got plenty fans of the non Missouri teams on here.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by kcpasco

Neighborhood play? That was part of baseball for over 100 years. ****ing get rid of replay it’s ruining the game.

It was dumb for over 100 years.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

Dude is married to 2nd base.

Like my second girlfriend?

[Sandy Vagina]

Originally Posted by ping2000

Nice ass on that bullpen girl.

lol, I liked too.

[kcxiv]

Originally Posted by kcpasco

Neighborhood play? That was part of baseball for over 100 years. ****ing get rid of replay it’s ruining the game.

things change, just like it changes in football and basketball. I rather them get the play right then, well, he was close enough! Also, if a guy slide over a bad and the ref seen it, he was out. So why cant a replay do that? If a ump see's the guy lift his foot off the base guess what? he's going to call im out too. Sometimes umps miss things. I dont mind if they get them correct. Its not like they challenge 5 play a game, its very limited.

[jd1020]

Doesn't matter much in the end because the Cubs aren't even going to get 4 runs to tie what would have been the score.

My only issue with the call is that the runner didn't make contact with Contreras' leg before Contreras had the ball. Did Contreras make a move to block the plate before he had the ball? Ya. But did he have the ball when the block was made? Yup.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by kcpasco

Neighborhood play? That was part of baseball for over 100 years. ****ing get rid of replay it’s ruining the game.

As long as there are Umps behind the plate calling balls and strikes the "neighborhood play" shall remain. Some neighborhoods bigger than others.

[Sandy Vagina]

Not too late to clutch onto last year's trophy for warmth... should you not remember how to... actually hit pitches, and stuff..

Let's do this, Cubbies. wake the **** up! :o(

[jd1020]

If the Cubs cant get at least 6 innings out of their starters or Maddon simply wont let them try then they are going to get swept.

[siberian khatru]

For some reason Puig is under the impression he hit a postseason HR a few years ago.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by jd1020

Are you talking about the one that reads "in the umpires judgement"?

Catcher leans in to a back swing to block a ball that he completely whiffs on and you want to call that a strike and dead ball even though the ball is 40 feet away? Was the catcher impaired in any way on that play? Nope.

Do you honestly want to believe that the rule in question wasn't specifically written to prevent a runner from taking a base in the event that the catcher was hit squarely in the head or the back preventing him from making any kind of play for the next couple minutes at least.

For **** sake you might as well start asking your catcher to take one for the team every now and then in critical situations like you do a batter for dropping an elbow on a pitch thats a ball by an inch.

It doesn't read that interference is in the umpire's judgment, you lying bastard; it says that the runners shall return to the last base safely touched in the umpire's judgement.

Rules 6.03(a)(3) and (4) Comment (Rule 6.06(c) and (d) Comment): If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call “interference.” The batter is out and the ball dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference.

It doesn't say "shall call interference if the umpire believes he was interfered with," it says, "shall call interference."

"If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire’s judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play."

The ball is ****ing dead, either way. Dead.

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It doesn't read that interference is in the umpire's judgment, you lying bastard; it says that the runners shall return to the last base safely touched in the umpire's judgement.

Rules 6.03(a)(3) and (4) Comment (Rule 6.06(c) and (d) Comment): If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call “interference.” The batter is out and the ball dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference.

It doesn't say "shall call interference if the umpire believes he was interfered with," it says, "shall call interference."

"If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire’s judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play."

The ball is ****ing dead, either way. Dead.

Let me help you out here.

There is no way that rule is intended to be called on that play.

Oh and also... lets take a gander at the paragraph ignored below what you quoted and above the red box in the tweet.

I don't want to be an alarmist, but... it would appear they seriously messed that up. pic.twitter.com/0aABJlzGkC

— Jeff Long (@JeffLongBP) October 13, 2017

[Sandy Vagina]

Glad that call didn't ultimately matter. Cubs just didn't bring it.. LAD did.. meh... more to come....

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by jd1020

Let me help you out here.

There is no way that rule is intended to be called on that play.

Yeah, just ignore:

If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire’s judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play.


It's literally right there in the ****ing rule book. The ball is dead, and it's a strike. And that was strike three. Batter out. Inning over.

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Yeah, just ignore:

If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire’s judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play.


It's literally right there in the ****ing rule book. The ball is dead, and it's a strike. And that was strike three. Batter out. Inning over.

And you conveniently ignore the part of the rule where if the catcher attempts to make a play then it is to be believed that no interference occurred. Next.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by jd1020

And you conveniently ignore the part of the rule where if the catcher attempts to make a play then it is to believed that no infraction occurred. Next.

You lying mother****er. Just get out of here:

"If, however, the catcher makes a play and the runner attempting to advance is put out, it is to be assumed there was no actual interference and that runner is out—not the batter. "

So, if a batter interferes and a catcher throws out someone trying to steal second and is tagged out, then he's out. Otherwise, the play is dead. The runner isn't the batter, you brain dead ****ing Cub-ass-sucking scum. You're a perfect example of that fanbase of baseball-illiterate drunks.