I used to have an argument with a friend all the time. He said baseball wasn't a real sport, because there was no risk of injury. I rest my case, my friend.
Via ESPN: The official said the rule that requires a pitcher to be leave the game after two mound visits should have been superseded by an adendum to the rule. Rule 8.06 says if two mound visits occur while the same batter is up, the umpires must eject the manager and the pitcher must face the batter. After the batter, the pitcher should be removed.So it looks like the umps blew it. But my interest is in the language requiring the pitcher to stay in: "the pitcher is required to pitch to the batter until he is retired or gets on base. After the batter is retired, or becomes a baserunner, then this pitcher must be removed from the game." So what happens when the manager does what Mattingly did, and then the pitcher picks off a baserunner for the third out of the inning? Is the pitcher *required* to stay in the game (and possibly bat) to face the same batter in the next inning? Can the opposing manager replace the batter with a pinch hitter? If so, is the pitcher automatically removed from the game?
I was at that O's-Rays game, and my friend and I decided that hitting the other team's players in the groin is an effective strategy. The O's can credit this for their comeback--there were at least a couple of plays in the outfield that Crawford would've made.
Reminded me of Bill Cosby's old routine about Temple getting a nationally televised game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWt6qZ0IGOk
<span><span><span><span>Please note from Rule 8.06: In a case where a manager has made his first trip to the mound and then returns the second time to the mound in the same inning with the same pitcher in the game and the same batter at bat, after being warned by the umpire that he cannot return to the mound, the manager shall be removed from the game and the pitcher required to pitch to the batter until he is retired or gets on base. After the batter is retired, or becomes a base runner, then this pitcher must be removed from the game. Since Mattingly wasn't warned, there would be no ejections. The penalty to eject is part of this rule because the manager disregarded the umpire's warning, not because of the second trip.</span> <span>More about this ruling at http://forum.officiating.com/baseball/58642-dodgers-padres-rule-8-06-a.html, where I found the answer to your second question, courtesy of johnnyg08. According to the MLB Umpire's Manual:</span></span></span></span>A consequence of the rule regarding trips to the mound is that once a manager or coach has completed a trip to the mound, the pitcher then pitching must continue pitching to the batter then at bat (or retire the side) unless a pinch hitter is substituted or unless one of the following situations applies: a. If a game becomes suspended during a manager's or coach's trip to the mound (or after the trip but while the same batter is still at bat), a new pitcher may be substituted when the game is later resumed. b. If a rain delay occurs during a manager's or coach's trip to the mound (or after the trip but while the same batter is still at bat), a new pitcher may be substituted when the game is resumed following the rain delay.
maybe its the angle, but I see the ball hitting Crawford just above the knee. No?How did that game end for the Dodgers then? The announcer said there was no one in the pen.
No, or at least not first. The ball disappears behind the glove, hits him full on, then travels down his leg to his knee. One sure give away--look where he grabs when he hits the ground.As for the Dodgers--they had no one up in the pen, but they did have relievers left. One got up, working in 3 pitches in teh pen before hte umps insisted he com eout for the allowed 8 warm up pitches. The Giants wound up getting 3 runs off him and won the game 7-5.
I spent way too much time looking at another man'*ahem* area, and I see it now. It's the deflection off the cup that lands above the knee.Ouch.
I would like to exchange links with your site www.blogger.comIs this possible?