Quote:
|
Originally Posted by abailey3313
1. Intentionally hitting a player with a pitch is harmful to the game -- just like steroids or whatever else you want to put on Bonds. If "baseball" (pitchers, actually, considering no one pitcher represents the sport) wants to run it's self by the "two wrongs make a right" philosophy, then hey, go for it. Everybody enjoy the chaos and double standards.
|
What is your opinion on retaliation for HBP's or brushbacks? Those have been around for 100+ years, with remarkably few occasions in which it was permanently "harmful" to the player (other than the immediate pain of the batter). I've always been in the camp of "baseball must police itself", when it comes to brawls, brushbacks and beanings. Luckily baseball has avoided the chaos part.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by abailey3313
2. You don't mind if they hits Bonds in his knees? The same ones that are so messed up that he can barely run to first base? That's directly messing with a person's livelihood. (And no, it doesn't matter how many millions he's made. There is a such thing as principle and integrity.) A pitcher targeting an opposing batter's obvious injury would be like if I were the manager of a fast food restaurant and hired a person who didn't speak a lick of English and assigned that person to work drive thru every night. It's directly jeopardizing that person's job.
|
IMO, the fast food/sports player injury analogy is a good one in theory. The concepts are there, and you're making sense. I understand that the pitcher holds a large amount of responsibility in hurling a ball period, whether it be at one's noggin or down the middle.
But my point is that these players have the VERY BEST physicians working on them when they get hurt, while Joe McBurgerFlipper has to wait in line in the ER for 4 hours, pay their $50 co-pay (if they even have insurance), and hopefully avoid being fixed by just some nurse practioner. So sure, the act of intentional injury is the same, but the effects of the injury are much different. Its a double standard I suppose, but that's my opinion.
As an added point, I never approve of anyone calling someone else's statement "stupid", as you did above. Uninformed maybe. Ignorant possibly. But disagreeing with someone's point does not make it stupid.