Did Rogers Cheat

[magnet]

Originally Posted by CONN CHRIS

dsvitak - you have emails and pms turned off so this is the only way to communicate with you. Get the suicide reference out of post 149 right now.

[classroom]
"ooooooooooooooohhhhh"
[/classroom]

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by andymac

You are being an idiot, you don't think that pitchers often have dirty hands?

Tony LaRussa, ten minutes ago, clearly stated that it wasn't dirt on Roger's hand.

The photographic evidence is completely clear. Rogers cheated, and got caught.

[Bay Area Bob]

Originally Posted by dsvitak

This isn't the least bit heated.

I BEG TO DIFFER, DVSAIOPAAK'DJFASNABKRACKMANAJOVPAVKSJD;

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

I know it is, because it alters the ball. And applying something to the HAND is not the same according to the rulebook as applying it to the ball.

.

But, if applying it to the glove is illegal, then surely applying it to the pitching hand is just as illegal.

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by CONN CHRIS

dsvitak - you have emails and pms turned off so this is the only way to communicate with you. Get the suicide reference out of post 149 right now.

READ MY POSTS...IT WAS NOT MY REFERENCE, OR MY COMMENT THAT WAS BEING QUOTED.

I DEMAND AN APOLOGY.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by andymac

You are being an idiot, you don't think that pitchers often have dirty hands?

From the photographic evidence it is clear that on several occasions, Rogers placed the substance in the same exact spot on his palm. The rest of his hand is virtually clean from what we can observe in the pictures.

Am I being an idiot, too?

[andymac]

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Rogers cheated and got caught. All the evidence indicates he purposefully placed a foreign substance onto the heel of his pitching hand, like he has done on at least two other occasions this year.

The only evidence is a few pictures of something on his hand. There is no evidence of his applying anything to his hand or that whatever was on his hand was illegal. Even if the stuff was illegal, there is no way to prove it and therefore no meaningful argument that can lead to any kind of punishment.

I have heard NOTHING that would explain the repeated stains/marks/discolorations on his pitching hand, going back to at least July 20th.

There doesn't need to be. What you need that you don't have is anything resembling proof that it is an illegal substance. Pictures aren't going to prove that.

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

But, if applying it to the glove is illegal, then surely applying it to the pitching hand is just as illegal.

But those substances were in the glove for the purpose of doctoring the ball. My whole premise is that what was on his hand wasn't ever applied to the ball, and thus could not alter the ball's characteristics. If it was transferred to the ball or somehow used to doctor it (as in the case of an emery board, where you're not really "transferring"), then I will retract what I've said. But based on what I know, he didn't do anything but enhance his grip and not actually change what a baseball is normally supposed to do.

[CONN CHRIS]

Originally Posted by dsvitak

READ MY POSTS...IT WAS NOT MY REFERENCE, OR MY COMMENT THAT WAS BEING QUOTED.

I DEMAND AN APOLOGY.

No apology, but you do have a warning.

Try and be civil folks. This is well on it's way to just being a mud slinging match (pun intended) and I don't think anyone wants the thread locked.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Tony LaRussa, ten minutes ago, clearly stated that it wasn't dirt on Roger's hand.

The photographic evidence is completely clear. Rogers cheated, and got caught.

Saying that it wasn't dirt isn't the same as saying it was illegal and Tony La Russa never examined Kenny Rogers hand so I don't see how he can have any type of first hand knowledge of what was there.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

From the photographic evidence it is clear that on several occasions, Rogers placed the substance in the same exact spot on his palm. The rest of his hand is virtually clean from what we can observe in the pictures.

Am I being an idiot, too?

There is evidence of something being there but there is no evidence that Rogers himself purposefully placed it there or that it was illegal.

[The Professor]

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

But those substances were in the glove for the purpose of doctoring the ball. [1]My whole premise is that what was on his hand wasn't ever applied to the ball, and thus could not alter the ball's characteristics. If it was transferred to the ball or somehow used to doctor it (as in the case of an emery board, where you're not really "transferring"), then I will retract what I've said. [2]But based on what I know, he didn't do anything but enhance his grip and not actually change what a baseball is normally supposed to do.

[1] is just conjecture. You cannot know whether he was applying that - whatever it was - to the ball.

[2] Isn't enhancing your grip beyond what is normal essentially helping to change what the ball does? A better grip means better pitches, no? Otherwise, why use it?

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

From the photographic evidence it is clear that on several occasions, Rogers placed the substance in the same exact spot on his palm. The rest of his hand is virtually clean from what we can observe in the pictures.

Am I being an idiot, too?

That wasn't directed at me, but I say no. It's not the opinion that he cheated that's idiotic.

[Cooleyvol]

Originally Posted by CONN CHRIS

No apology, but you do have a warning.

Try and be civil folks. This is well on it's way to just being a mud slinging match (pun intended) and I don't think anyone wants the thread locked.

BAB posts it, but the quoter gets the warning? Am I missing something?

[Johnny Canuck]

Originally Posted by dsvitak

This isn't the least bit heated.

Rogers cheated and got caught. All the evidence indicates he purposefully placed a foreign substance onto the heel of his pitching hand, like he has done on at least two other occasions this year.

I haven't furthered any arguments against this basic premise: Rogers cheated, and got caught.

What part of this are you not understanding?

I have heard NOTHING that would explain the repeated stains/marks/discolorations on his pitching hand, going back to at least July 20th.

Now, LaRussa is stating on local television that it was NOT dirt on his hand.

Rogers was not caught, for as I said, only the umpires can make that determination. The umpires decided nothing illegal was going on, so therefore Rogers was not cheating.

LaRussa's comment really annoys me. If he thinks that was the case, then it was his responsibility to insist that the umpires inspect Rogers' hand to determine what was present. If he thought it was not dirt & did not insist on an inspection, he signally failed his team & probably cost them a game. If I were a Cardinals fan & heard that statement, I would be very angry at LaRussa. Furthermore, making that statement now just further clouds the situation & further taints Rogers & the Tigers without any actual determination of guilt.

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by Bay Area Bob

zzZzzZzzzzZZZzZzzzZzZzZzZzzZzZZzZZzZzZzZZZZzZzZzZz ZzZzZzZzz

This was the post that referenced suicide.

I notice, with considerable amusement, that he was given the opportunity to edit his post, and not provided with the well-deserved warning.

I, however, was given a warning....probably for the excessive use of caps and colors.

I can live with this....but Bay Area Bob needs to receive a ban. Outright.

My brother in law commited suicide on May 17th, 1995, and I was the one to find his body.

I am SHAKING with rage right now...at the injustice of this board, of the moderator---YES YOU, CHRIS CONN---and of the REPREHENSIBLE and DESPICABLE comment by Bay Area Bob.

This is ludicrous, and inexcusable.

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by The Professor

[1] is just conjecture. You cannot know whether he was applying that - whatever it was - to the ball.

[2] Isn't enhancing your grip beyond what is normal essentially helping to change what the ball does? A better grip means better pitches, no? Otherwise, why use it?

Yes, 1 is just conjecture. But isn't that what this whole thread is?

2) I'm just going by the rule exception, not giving my opinion of what it should be.

A pitcher is allowed to use the rosin bag to enhance his grip, but he's not allowed to cover the ball in it. It seems that baseball has no problem with enhancing the grip.

[Bay Area Bob]

Originally Posted by Cooleyvol

BAB posts it, but the quoter gets the warning? Am I missing something?

Yes, you pretty clearly are. I edited it two minutes after I posted, whereas dvsataick was repeatedly told to edit it and refused.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by The Professor

[2] Isn't enhancing your grip beyond what is normal essentially helping to change what the ball does? A better grip means better pitches, no? Otherwise, why use it?

Isn't using rosin "enhancing your grip"?

I would think the substance has to be clearly identified before it could be considered illegal. The presence of a substance doesn't automatically consititute cheating.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

But those substances were in the glove for the purpose of doctoring the ball. My whole premise is that what was on his hand wasn't ever applied to the ball, and thus could not alter the ball's characteristics. If it was transferred to the ball or somehow used to doctor it (as in the case of an emery board, where you're not really "transferring"), then I will retract what I've said. But based on what I know, he didn't do anything but enhance his grip and not actually change what a baseball is normally supposed to do.

Here's the rule as posted earlier. The bolded part at the bottom.

8.02
The pitcher shall not --
(a) (1) Bring his pitching hand in contact with his mouth or lips while in the 18 foot circle surrounding the pitching rubber. EXCEPTION: Provided it is agreed to by both managers, the umpire prior to the start of a game played in cold weather, may permit the pitcher to blow on his hand. PENALTY: For violation of this part of this rule the umpires shall immediately call a ball. However, if the pitch is made and a batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a hit batsman or otherwise, and no other runner is put out before advancing at least one base, the play shall proceed without reference to the violation. Repeated offenders shall be subject to a fine by the league president.
(2) expectorate on the ball, either hand or his glove;
(3) rub the ball on his glove, person or clothing;
(4) apply a foreign substance of any kind to the ball;
(5) deface the ball in any manner; or
(6) deliver a ball defaced in a manner prescribed by Rule 8.02(a)(2) through (5) or what is called the “shine” ball, “spit” ball, “mud” ball or “emery” ball. The pitcher is allowed to rub the ball between his bare hands.
PENALTY: For violation of any part of Rules 8.02(a)(2) through (6):
(a) The pitcher shall be ejected immediately from the game and shall be suspended automatically for 10 games.
(b) If a play follows the violation called by the umpire, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and no other runner is put out before advancing at least one base, the play shall proceed without reference to the violation.
(c) Even though the offense elects to take the play, the violation shall be recognized and the penalties in subsection (a) will still be in effect.
(d) The umpire shall be sole judge on whether any portion of this rule has been violated.
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 set forth for violations of Rules 8.02(a)(2) through 8.02(a)(6). If the pitcher persists in violating either of those Rules, however, the umpire should then apply the penalty.
Rule 8.02(a) Comment: If at any time the ball hits the rosin bag it is in play. In the case of rain or wet field, the umpire may instruct the pitcher to carry the rosin bag in his hip pocket. A pitcher may use the rosin bag for the purpose of applying rosin to his bare hand or hands. Neither the pitcher nor any other player shall dust the ball with the rosin bag; neither shall the pitcher nor any other player be permitted to apply rosin from the bag to his glove or dust any part of his uniform with the rosin bag.
(b) Have on his person, or in his possession, any foreign substance. For such infraction of this section (b) the penalty shall be immediate ejection from the game. In addition, the pitcher shall be suspended automatically for 10 games.

It's clearly spelled out.