OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

hockeyman001 · 05-23-2016, 02:00 PM

As for the Belle/Vina play, it looks bad without context.

So here's some context. Earlier in the game, the exact same play had happened. Belle had run into the tag (without bowling over Vina or doing any such thing), and that had been the first half of an inning ending double play that had negated a run for the Indians (since Belle's passive baserunning in that instance did not instead caused it to be a fielder's choice).

Belle was told the next time to make sure he breaks up the double play.

Source:

Belle Defends His Hit On Vina - philly-archives
Coach Says Belle Followed His Orders

So, he did it in the only way he knew how, which was a violent collision, which, while still not the right way to do it, at least casts doubt on the narrative that the guy was "always" out to hurt people etc. because if that were true he would have dropped Vina on the first double play attempt.

Not to mention, at the time, all sports were a little more violent (just as in Cobb's time, although certainly much more so in Cobb's), and people didn't have this reaction they do now where all violence is condemned at all times, but no one bats an eye over, say, theft or lying. There was more "action" if you will, and less jawing through the media. Someone charging the mound was not a big deal even 20 years ago, it would be a bit noteworthy for a day or two and there would be suspensions, etc. but media would not be writing about it for months on end over such frivolities as near miss chin music and bat flips as we see today, and there wasn't this stupid back and forth over it by the pundits that we see today. Guys have been flipping bats for 100 years, and beanballs and collisions have happened since the day baseball began. Heck even a homeplate collision would be cause for uproar in today's game, and by today's standards because of the Buster Posey rule, or a collision at any other base due to the Utley rule.

I don't agree with Belle's play, but I can understand how it happened, and I don't think Belle's gut reaction was to flatten Vina (one of the nicest guys in baseball, btw) since he didn't do it earlier in the game. He probably was undiagnosed with some sort of mental condition of some kind, but he could hit the hell out of the ball, so he didn't always get the help he needed, and ballpark clubhouses, fans, and the media, are not really known as the most understanding groups for that sort of thing...so it was just easier to make him the bad guy. There was a way to get through with him and earn his respect, but only certain people did it. Kenny Lofton did it. Charlie Manuel did it. He was always great with the charities he worked with. If he was truly irredeemable, no one would have done it.

05-23-2016, 02:00 PM	#86
hockeyman001 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 33	As for the Belle/Vina play, it looks bad without context. So here's some context. Earlier in the game, the exact same play had happened. Belle had run into the tag (without bowling over Vina or doing any such thing), and that had been the first half of an inning ending double play that had negated a run for the Indians (since Belle's passive baserunning in that instance did not instead caused it to be a fielder's choice). Belle was told the next time to make sure he breaks up the double play. Source: Belle Defends His Hit On Vina - philly-archives Coach Says Belle Followed His Orders So, he did it in the only way he knew how, which was a violent collision, which, while still not the right way to do it, at least casts doubt on the narrative that the guy was "always" out to hurt people etc. because if that were true he would have dropped Vina on the first double play attempt. Not to mention, at the time, all sports were a little more violent (just as in Cobb's time, although certainly much more so in Cobb's), and people didn't have this reaction they do now where all violence is condemned at all times, but no one bats an eye over, say, theft or lying. There was more "action" if you will, and less jawing through the media. Someone charging the mound was not a big deal even 20 years ago, it would be a bit noteworthy for a day or two and there would be suspensions, etc. but media would not be writing about it for months on end over such frivolities as near miss chin music and bat flips as we see today, and there wasn't this stupid back and forth over it by the pundits that we see today. Guys have been flipping bats for 100 years, and beanballs and collisions have happened since the day baseball began. Heck even a homeplate collision would be cause for uproar in today's game, and by today's standards because of the Buster Posey rule, or a collision at any other base due to the Utley rule. I don't agree with Belle's play, but I can understand how it happened, and I don't think Belle's gut reaction was to flatten Vina (one of the nicest guys in baseball, btw) since he didn't do it earlier in the game. He probably was undiagnosed with some sort of mental condition of some kind, but he could hit the hell out of the ball, so he didn't always get the help he needed, and ballpark clubhouses, fans, and the media, are not really known as the most understanding groups for that sort of thing...so it was just easier to make him the bad guy. There was a way to get through with him and earn his respect, but only certain people did it. Kenny Lofton did it. Charlie Manuel did it. He was always great with the charities he worked with. If he was truly irredeemable, no one would have done it. Last edited by hockeyman001; 05-23-2016 at 03:49 PM.