2016 MLB thread. THE CUBS HAVE BROKEN THE CURSE! Chicago Cubs are your 2016 World Series champions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lance Lynn hasn't been sharp in the playoffs. Farrell seems to have faith in Buchholz's shoulder holding up. Used Doubront tonight. I suppose Dempster is the next long reliever in line.

Since you're a STL fan, where's Shelby?

That same homie (Sox fan) floated the idea of Napoli at the hot corner. Middlebrooks was detrimental in G3. He knows Napoli is a fielding liability, but wants his bat in the lineup with Big Papi.

Tazawa showed nuts limiting the damage at 4-2. Striking out two and getting a fly out.
 
AyZee said:
JD617 said:
 
Jim Joyce was wrong on that but it doesn't matter. The baseline is between the runner and the next base (for example a runner who's way out in foul territory rounding a base.)
Click to expand...

Exactly. If you make a move back towards second base, you're supposed to re-touch 3rd before advancing. No one talking about that though.

The obstruction rule in the book is straight comedy: "...the fielder is "likely" obstructing the play" :lol:
Click to expand...

he doesn't need to re touch third because he slid to third and touched it, the obstruction happened after that.

Plus this isn't the NBA where it's under a minute and no ticky tack calls are to be made. :lol:
 
ChampCruThik said:
And don't worry, FB. I had STL winning the WS prior to the start of the postseason. It's well documented.
Click to expand...
I recall you making that prediction; I would just prefer St. Louis wrap this up in 5 (I am aware that's asking a lot). I've never been a fan of teams winning on the opposing teams field/ice.
ChampCruThik said:
Lance Lynn hasn't been sharp in the playoffs. Farrell seems to have faith in Buchholz's shoulder holding up. Used Doubront tonight. I suppose Dempster is the next long reliever in line.

Since you're a STL fan, where's Shelby?
Click to expand...
I've noticed your love for Shelby and it's deserved. I think both managers will have the starters on a very short leash tomorrow. We might see Shelby if Lynn ***** the bed.
 
I love Kolten Wong even more than Shelby. He played a huge role tonight with defense, clutch hit late, and swiped bag. Sick glove work and elite speed on the paths.

I realize I'm leveraging a lot on Buchholz's worn down shoulder. Farrell would be happy with 5 strong. I'm just surprised he utilized Doubront tonight.

I picked Boston in advance for G4 and the terms of G3 dictate a huge response from the Sox. Which means STL would ideally need to win G5 and obviously 6 or 7.
 
I watched the replay over and over again on ESPN.com. Good call, the stumble was CLEARLY unintentional. However, I'd be ******g pissed if i was a red sox fan..
 
He's not even running on the baseline
mean.gif
Joyce is terrible I remember him late this year screwing up a call against the Dodgers costing them a run against the Diamondbacks.
 
Catcher shouldn't have even thrown that ball to 3rd... He's the one Boston fans should be blaming.
 
Last edited:
It was the correct call. All the umpires knew it. Ferrell knew it too, couldn't even argue it.


It also looked intentional to me, even though that doesn't matter.
 
Don't have a horse in this race and honestly don't care who wins the series (actually was hoping that there was a way both teams could lose, but that's another story), but I think it's just awesome that Jim Joyce is at the center of this, right or wrong. :lol:

Baseball :pimp:
 
He's the rule. If you still think it's a bad call, then stop watching baseball.

Here's the official comment on the obstruction rule. Seems like the correct call:

Rule 2.00 (Obstruction) Comment: If a fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and if the ball is in flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the ball he may be considered “in the act of fielding a ball.” It is entirely up to the judgment of the umpire as to whether a fielder is in the act of fielding a ball. After a fielder has made an attempt to field a ball
and missed, he can no longer be in the “act of fielding” the ball. For example: an infielder dives at a ground ball and the ball passes him and he continues to lie on the ground and delays the progress of the runner, he very likely has obstructed the runner.
 
dland24 said:
Vague? Interpreted many ways? Lol. In every post, you further demonstrate you dont have a clue what you are talking about. I thought your post about needing to retag third base because he made a move back towards second base was particularly hilarious.
Click to expand...
Rule 2.00 (Obstruction) Comment: If a fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and if the ball is in flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the ball he may be considered "in the act of fielding a ball." It is entirely up to the judgment of the umpire as to whether a fielder is in the act of fielding a ball. After a fielder has made an attempt to field a ball and missed, he can no longer be in the "act of fielding" the ball. For example: an infielder dives at a ground ball and the ball passes him and he continues to lie on the ground and delays the progress of the runner, he very likely has obstructed the runner.  
Click to expand...
Some parts are pretty vague, you have to admit. Joyce used his judgment so I can't knock him in regards to applying the rule as written. But it definitely leaves a little too much open to interpretation. 

In regards to the retagging of the base, I was just reiterating what analysts were saying post game on NESN. Yes they were probably salty like me 
laugh.gif


I do know what I'm talking about, played baseball all my life and these weren't your run of the mill everyday plays. Sorry if my questioning them bothers    Quote:
FIRST B0RN said:
 
Why are you even bothering with home dude? I can't help but 
mean.gif
 @ everything he said
Click to expand...
Calm down. It's not that serious. We're simply discussing a unique baseball play.
 
Last edited:
Can't imagine the Cards reaction if the roles were reversed :lol:


When the play happened live, my immediate reaction was interference. Still don't know why the throw was made though
 
They use the word likely because the player can dive then the runner goes out of the base path to make contact the rule doesn't apply but clearly that wasn't the case here.
 
Glad this wasn't the Yankees. I'd be distraught if my team lost in that fashion. I still haven't got over the midges in Cleveland.:lol:
 
I dont care how the Red Sox lose, as long as those douches lose. The call doesnt even matter IMO, the Red Sox made two bone head plays two games in a row. Saltamachhchaicahciahcaiahhhahia shouldnt have even throw to 3B anyway. Ferrell bats the RP over Napoli, great strategy.
 
Yeah Farrell has made some questionable decisions. Workman only threw to one batter, so there was no point having him hit.

Saltalamacchia and Drew are pitiful. Drew's only saving grace is his fielding.
 
dmxfury said:
Can't imagine the Cards reaction if the roles were reversed :lol:


When the play happened live, my immediate reaction was interference. Still don't know why the throw was made though
Click to expand...

That's two throws to 3rd in this series by Boston that were game-changing, against their favor. They've played themselves into a 2-1 deficit thus far, regardless of an rightful 'obstruction' call or not.

Can't say I'm mad about it...

700
 
SMH at all these people saying "Nah, nah, he wasnt running on the chalk, he shoulda been out!" o_O

The path between the runner and the next base is NOT the BASELINE!!!!!!!!!!!!! baseline = basepath............NO!!!!!!

It doesnt matter what PATH the runner takes to the next base, if a fielder causes a disruption in the path between the runner and home plate, its obstruction. (unless its OBVIOUS that the runner ran towards the fielder OUTSIDE of HIS path to the next base to cause a disruption)

He would have had to be shown to INTENTIONALLY deviate from HIS path to the base to be called out instead of safe.

Oh, and if we were in Boston and this happened, it still would have been the correct call.........Accept it and stop letting salt try to gun down anyone at 3rd, just give em the base next time.
 
pacmagic2002 said:
SMH at all these people saying "Nah, nah, he wasnt running on the chalk, he shoulda been out!" o_O
 
Click to expand...
You missed the point. Joyce SAID that the was "right on the chalk," indicative of him either not watching or saving face. 

Of course you don't have to run on the line. It's not a field sobriety test.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom