closetjaysfan

Barney scoring some serious points here.

Rehearsal? you mean they actually practice this garbage before the game?

Lesson is, dont throw at/hit jays players because the next guy in the lineup is going to crush it

Wow that was really lucky

Kelly really unraveling

wow pillar CAN lay off a first pitch

Whelp... we better score some f***ing runs here boys.

Nice!

Im starting to wonder how helpful it is to have 3 pitchers (Storen, Cecil and Osuna) that are only going to be used for an inning at a time. I get the importance of set-up men but this has the makings of disaster if we are going to see game 4 of the Rays series get repeated consistently. Furthermore, Loup coming back is just going to add another situational pitcher. Is it not possible to give these guys 2 innings of work if we need it? **- note that this comment doesnt directly address the problem of game 4 in that Floyd should have stayed in.

I think he did this last year with Osuna. If I remember his first appearance ever was with runners on and Arod at the plate or something like that.

Wouldnt the best case be a series of throwing errors that scores 2 runs?

you know, as I watch the replay again it looks like he violates the utley rule for the simple fact that he slides past the bag.

6.01 K, so according to that it was a 6.01 violation...

Well, if we are talking about the utley rule (6.01(j)), the problem would still be that it is a judgement call: Rule 6.01(i) -- Sliding to Bases on Double Play Attempts If a runner does not engage in a bona fide slide, and initiates (or attempts to make) contact with the fielder for the purpose of breaking up a double play, he should be called for interference under this Rule 6.01. A "bona fide slide" for purposes of Rule 6.01 occurs when the runner: (1) begins his slide (i.e., makes contact with the ground) before reaching the base; (2) is able and attempts to reach the base with his hand or foot; (3) is able and attempts to remain on the base (except home plate) after completion of the slide; and (4) slides within reach of the base without changing his pathway for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder. A runner who engages in a "bona fide slide" shall not be called for interference under this Rule 6.01, even in cases where the runner makes contact with the fielder as a consequence of a permissible slide. In addition, interference shall not be called where a runner's contact with the fielder was caused by the fielder being positioned in (or moving into) the runner's legal pathway to the base. Notwithstanding the above, a slide shall not be a "bona fide slide" if a runner engages in a "roll block," or intentionally initiates (or attempts to initiate) contact with the fielder by elevating and kicking his leg above the fielder's knee or throwing his arm or his upper body. If the umpire determines that the runner violated this Rule 6.01(j), the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter-runner out. Note, however, that if the runner has already been put out then the runner on whom the defense was attempting to make a play shall be declared out. but I want to repeat for clarity: contrary to popular belief closetjaysfan is not an expert in the area of replay rules or frankly anything else for that matter

These? Rule 6.01 61 ( 6 ) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate. In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner; ( 7 ) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a batter-runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball, with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead; the umpire shall call the batter-runner out for interference and shall call out the runner who had advanced closest to the home plate regardless where the double play might have been possible. In no event shall bases be run because of such interference I would point out that these are also judgement calls and should be non-reviewable (though I dont consider myself any kind of authority on the rules surrounding review)

Rule 6.01(a) Penalty for Interference Comment (Rule 7.08( Comment): A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not. If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out. comes down to whether or not it is intentional... does not appear as though it is reviewable however, which may be the Jays strongest argument if they protest.

Burns a review does it not? but I agree that in the very least, it is going to cause a delay for the pitcher if there is a replay.

Yeah im not sure it is reviewable: Rule 6.01(a) Penalty for Interference Comment (Rule 7.08( Comment): A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not. Judgement calls are not reviewable

weird, in the yanks game 6.01 was deemed not to be reviewable. Not sure if it is the same subsection though.

What we really needed was another inning so that someone could hit a homerun in protest then bat-flip their way onto the cover of sports illustrated.

interference and thus flopping associated with it, are not reviewable

It looks to me like (d) would apply before (e)

I wonder how long it will be before we see 2nd basemen deliberately getting too close to the runner and then diving...

So they adopt a rule to protect second basemen. Please explain to me how this violates the spirit of that rule change?

Protest the game