Did Rogers Cheat - Page 6

imation · 10-23-2006, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notjaxmagicman

No.

I change my vote.

JDOldSchool · 10-23-2006, 04:13 PM

FWIW, that much pine tar would make it very difficult to throw a ball with any accuracy. It also would also probably transfer to the ball... a lot. I don't know or care what it was, but I find the pine tar thing to be somewhat unreasonable.

Goody · 10-23-2006, 04:56 PM

Here's my theory.

Its hair gel or something similar...with dirt sticking to it.

Cheating? Yes. But I'm guessing 75% of major league pitchers have similar little cheats they use.

If I was an MLB pitcher I can imagine I would have a hard time not doing something sneaky like that. One day you have some gel in your hair and you run your hand through it after you've sweated a bit and you notice it helps you get an extra bite to your curve....so you start wearing hair gel every time...even if its just in one spot that you can continually "dip from" throughout the course of the game.

He got too blatant...not subtle enough. He got called out and fixed it. The game of baseball goes on just like it has for over 100 years.

phenom · 10-23-2006, 04:59 PM

Since he's 41, it's probably

Goody · 10-23-2006, 05:10 PM

Also, found this on espn.

However, at the bottom of the 'penalties' section is the following disclaimer:
Rules 8.02(a)(2) through 8.02(a)(6) Comment: If a pitcher violates either Rule 8.02(a)(2) or Rule 8.02(a)(3) and, in the judgment of the umpire, the pitcher did not intend, by his act, to alter the characteristics of a pitched ball, then the umpire may, in his discretion, warn the pitcher in lieu of applying the penalty.

In this case, it would seem, the umpires felt that Rogers "did not intend, by his act, to alter the characteristics of a pitched ball."

JDOldSchool · 10-23-2006, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 9lives

Also, found this on espn.

However, at the bottom of the 'penalties' section is the following disclaimer:
Rules 8.02(a)(2) through 8.02(a)(6) Comment: If a pitcher violates either Rule 8.02(a)(2) or Rule 8.02(a)(3) and, in the judgment of the umpire, the pitcher did not intend, by his act, to alter the characteristics of a pitched ball, then the umpire may, in his discretion, warn the pitcher in lieu of applying the penalty.

In this case, it would seem, the umpires felt that Rogers "did not intend, by his act, to alter the characteristics of a pitched ball."

According to this rule, it appears that trying to get a better grip with something like what bowlers use is not illegal. If it doesn't stay on the ball, it's not illegal. Just helping his hand seems to be not cheating.

Bay Area Bob · 10-23-2006, 05:42 PM

.

AnotherAlias · 10-23-2006, 05:49 PM

^^^

Why am I NOT shocked by those numbers?

MuertoDesagradecido · 10-23-2006, 06:04 PM

Ugh. Now if the Cardinals go on to lose the series they can blame it on this, nevermind the fact that Rogers only had whatever it was on his hand for one inning and it was his worst inning at that.

AnotherAlias · 10-23-2006, 06:06 PM

That would be a sham...errr...I mean shame.

dsvitak · 10-23-2006, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuertoDesagradecido

Ugh. Now if the Cardinals go on to lose the series they can blame it on this, nevermind the fact that Rogers only had whatever it was on his hand for one inning and it was his worst inning at that.

Why are you people so HUNG UP on the idea that it doesn't matter, because he pitched well?

THE TWO ARE NOT CONNECTED!

HE CHEATED, AND GOT CAUGHT!

HE DESERVES TO BE SUSPENDED!

MuertoDesagradecido · 10-23-2006, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Why are you people so HUNG UP on the idea that it doesn't matter, because he pitched well?

THE TWO ARE NOT CONNECTED!

HE CHEATED, AND GOT CAUGHT!

HE DESERVES TO BE SUSPENDED!

The umpires decided it was dirt, Tony LaRussa didn't press the issue, I'm certainly not going to suspend a guy over some inconclusive camera shots. Your definition of "proof" is a bit jaded by those Cardinal Red-colored glasses.

dsvitak · 10-23-2006, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuertoDesagradecido

The umpires decided it was dirt, Tony LaRussa didn't press the issue, I'm certainly not going to suspend a guy over some inconclusive camera shots. Your definition of "proof" is a bit jaded by those Cardinal Red-colored glasses.

Explain to me the photos from THREE SEPARATE GAMES, which have the same "dirt mark." One, all the way back in July.

Go on, I'm waiting.

Johnny Canuck · 10-23-2006, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Why are you people so HUNG UP on the idea that it doesn't matter, because he pitched well?

THE TWO ARE NOT CONNECTED!

HE CHEATED, AND GOT CAUGHT!

HE DESERVES TO BE SUSPENDED!

Rogers did not cheat, & did not get caught. The only people who can make a determination on cheating are the umpires, & they determined that there was no foreign substance on his hand. Therefore, no cheating.

Now, if you want to argue that the umpires didn't do their jobs, that's another issue. But neither you nor anyone else on these forums can 'catch' Rogers cheating, since it's not up to you. I have enough faith in MLB umpires to let them make the call - if they determined he was using a foreign substance, then they would have tossed him, & have been right to do so. Since they didn't, Rogers didn't cheat.

AnotherAlias · 10-23-2006, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Explain to me the photos from THREE SEPARATE GAMES, which have the same "dirt mark." One, all the way back in July.

Go on, I'm waiting.

Can't be explained. Since he's done it before and never got caught, he figured why not cheat in the World Series. He got away with it. Like I said, he won't do it in the next game, I'll wager.

dsvitak · 10-23-2006, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Canuck

Rogers did not cheat, & did not get caught. The only people who can make a determination on cheating are the umpires, & they determined that there was no foreign substance on his hand. Therefore, no cheating.

Now, if you want to argue that the umpires didn't do their jobs, that's another issue. But neither you nor anyone else on these forums can 'catch' Rogers cheating, since it's not up to you. I have enough faith in MLB umpires to let them make the call - if they determined he was using a foreign substance, then they would have tossed him, & have been right to do so. Since they didn't, Rogers didn't cheat.

You cannot say, with a straight face, that Rogers did not cheat. That position was THOROUGHLY destroyed by the photographic evidence. THOROUGHLY.

Your logic is completely screwed up. Amazingly convoluted, and totally without merit.

For WHATEVER reason, the umpires decided not to "inspect" his pitching hand, but rather "observe" it, and order him to wash his hands.

I am 100% convinced that the umpires had no desire to "inspect" Rogers, knowing FULL WELL that they would have to suspend him.

This may have been LaRussa's doing, or they may have decided on their own to say: "wink, wink, you've been busted, wash your hand, QUICK!"

Either way, he is GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY, on at LEAST three separate occasions.

MuertoDesagradecido · 10-23-2006, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Explain to me the photos from THREE SEPARATE GAMES, which have the same "dirt mark." One, all the way back in July.

Go on, I'm waiting.

I don't really see anything conclusive in the first two pics (hell, I don't see any smudge at all in the first pick). It seems pretty reasonable that the smudges on his hands were damp dirt and rosin as he says and the umpires say. I'm not saying he for sure didn't cheat, but you don't have anything close to "proof" no matter how many words you capitalize for emphasis.

Raidergoo · 10-23-2006, 06:30 PM

They should have nuked Rogers, and LaRussa is a lesser man for not pressing the button.

dsvitak · 10-23-2006, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuertoDesagradecido

I don't really see anything conclusive in the first two pics (hell, I don't see any smudge at all in the first pick). It seems pretty reasonable that the smudges on his hands were damp dirt and rosin as he says and the umpires say. I'm not saying he for sure didn't cheat, but you don't have anything close to "proof" no matter how many words you capitalize for emphasis.

You're joking, right?

THREE SEPARATE DAYS, THREE SEPARATE GAMES, SAME SPOT, SAME PLACE, AND THEY ARE ALL DIRT CLODS? ARE YOU DAFT? (emphasis added)

cephasjames · 10-23-2006, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsvitak

You're joking, right?

THREE SEPARATE DAYS, THREE SEPARATE GAMES, SAME SPOT, SAME PLACE, AND THEY ARE ALL DIRT CLODS? ARE YOU DAFT? (emphasis added)

Hmmm. You're right. Your big words prove it. Case closed.

EDIT: The color of your words also add to their correctness.

View Poll Results: Did Kenny Rogers Cheat During the Game Today?
Heck yeah! Nailed by the Camera!	25	28.41%
Insufficient Evidence to Convict...Probably Yes	34	38.64%
Dude, it was a GRASS STAIN!!! WOOT!!!!11!!!	20	22.73%
Llama Steaks are Quite Tasty!	9	10.23%
Voters: 88. You may not vote on this poll

10-23-2006, 04:56 PM	#103
Goody Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Korea Posts: 3,530	Here's my theory. Its hair gel or something similar...with dirt sticking to it. Cheating? Yes. But I'm guessing 75% of major league pitchers have similar little cheats they use. If I was an MLB pitcher I can imagine I would have a hard time not doing something sneaky like that. One day you have some gel in your hair and you run your hand through it after you've sweated a bit and you notice it helps you get an extra bite to your curve....so you start wearing hair gel every time...even if its just in one spot that you can continually "dip from" throughout the course of the game. He got too blatant...not subtle enough. He got called out and fixed it. The game of baseball goes on just like it has for over 100 years. __________________ In the past: Laseron Baseball Association creator. Present: I am Rezulm on PT and OOTP Discord. Future: I wish it was the past.

10-23-2006, 04:59 PM	#104
phenom Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Near the Great Wall. On the GOOD side. Posts: 3,763	Since he's 41, it's probably __________________ reported

10-23-2006, 05:42 PM	#107
Bay Area Bob Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Alabama via Oregon via Alabama Posts: 14,268 Posts: 276	. Attached Images

10-23-2006, 04:13 PM	#102
JDOldSchool Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 4,023	FWIW, that much pine tar would make it very difficult to throw a ball with any accuracy. It also would also probably transfer to the ball... a lot. I don't know or care what it was, but I find the pine tar thing to be somewhat unreasonable.

10-23-2006, 05:10 PM	#105
Goody Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Korea Posts: 3,530	Also, found this on espn. However, at the bottom of the 'penalties' section is the following disclaimer: Rules 8.02(a)(2) through 8.02(a)(6) Comment: If a pitcher violates either Rule 8.02(a)(2) or Rule 8.02(a)(3) and, in the judgment of the umpire, the pitcher did not intend, by his act, to alter the characteristics of a pitched ball, then the umpire may, in his discretion, warn the pitcher in lieu of applying the penalty. In this case, it would seem, the umpires felt that Rogers "did not intend, by his act, to alter the characteristics of a pitched ball."

10-23-2006, 05:49 PM	#108
AnotherAlias Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I'm back...for now Posts: 4,190	^^^ Why am I NOT shocked by those numbers?

10-23-2006, 06:04 PM	#109
MuertoDesagradecido Major Leagues Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Saint Francisco Posts: 436 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	Ugh. Now if the Cardinals go on to lose the series they can blame it on this, nevermind the fact that Rogers only had whatever it was on his hand for one inning and it was his worst inning at that.

10-23-2006, 06:06 PM	#110
AnotherAlias Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I'm back...for now Posts: 4,190	That would be a sham...errr...I mean shame.

10-23-2006, 06:30 PM	#118
Raidergoo Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 9,005	They should have nuked Rogers, and LaRussa is a lesser man for not pressing the button.