Bay wins a steak.

On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Ray Salemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Here's a rule question I think we resolve in the office.
>
> Bay's ground-rule double hit the ground fair and bounced into the stands in
> foul territory for a ground rule double.
>
> What if it had high the right fielder in the head in fair territory and
> gone into the stands in the same spot without touching the ground?
>
> Ray
>
>
>  On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Steve Gendron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>  Ripken made the point that whenever there is a collision at the plate
>> the umpire always waits to see if the catcher is still holding the ball
>> before making the out call - so why should this be any different?  However,
>> I think the difference is that if the collision causes the ball to come
>> loose, then the runner would be safe.  But in this case, the runner was
>> tagged, Varitek was in control and the subsequent fall caused the ball to
>> come loose.  If the ball came loose in the act of tagging, the runner would
>> have been safe, but that obviously was not the case.
>>
>> By the way, I thought Eck seemed a little nervous on the TBS broadcast.
>> Not quite crisp as I'm used to hearing him on NESN.
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Tom Salemi
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 9:48 AM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: Dave Campbell is a tool
>>
>>  Cal Ripken raised a point on the post game.  He didn't go as far as say
>> he should be safe, but he asked what about when there's a collision at teh
>> plate. If the catcher falls back after the collision and drops the ball, the
>> runner would be called safe. No one had an answer as to why teh calls would
>> be differnet. The anchor guy said maybe it's because the runner dislodged
>> the ball as he tried to get to teh base.
>>
>> I don't see a controversy. The runner was called out five or six feet down
>> teh basepath.
>>
>> As for Campbell, so what? So what if we'd be outraged. We're going to base
>> calls on whether or not they upset the fans??
>>
>> Aybar blew it (and I think Scoscia frankly overmanaged.) THe ump was fine.
>> Scoscia only cried for 10-20 seconds. For a manager who gripes about every
>> ball and strike it came across as a clearly just-for-show argument.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Beaudoin, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There is no controversy for anyone but disgruntled Angels fans.  When in
>>> doubt, ask a non-partisan baseball fan.  Even Yankee fans would agree
>>> with the call.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [email protected]
>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Ouellette
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 9:36 AM
>>> To: Red Sox Citizens
>>> Subject: Dave Campbell is a tool
>>>
>>>
>>> He's on the radio going on and on about how the runner should have been
>>> safe after the missed squeeze bunt because Varitek dropped the ball
>>> after the tag. How Boston would be in an uproar if a similar call had
>>> been made against the Sox.
>>>
>>> He had the ball. He tagged the runner. He stumbled a couple of steps,
>>> fell, hit the ground and the ball popped out. Where is the controversy?
>>>
>>> Steve O
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> Blog: http://blog.raysalemi.com
>
> "Why should a sequence of words be anything but a pleasure?"  - Gertrude
> Stein
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Red 
Sox Citizens" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to