2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Home of Football Tailgating, Intramural Football and the occasional baseball game
Forum rules
"The opinions expressed on this board are property of the poster and do not reflect the opinion of EagleOutsider, Boston College or Boston College Athletics"

How's it going down?

Cards in 4
1
13%
Sox in 4
0
No votes
Cards in 5
1
13%
Sox in 5
0
No votes
Cards in 6
0
No votes
Sox in 6
5
63%
Cards in 7
0
No votes
Sox in 7
1
13%
 
Total votes : 8

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby pick6pedro on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:35 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Image
'
This one was my favorite.


Yes because it's impossible to see interference unless one is looking at the exact moment that Craig is grabbing Middlebrooks cheeks and there aren't other officials who can see it or over rule a call made by that guy there. Time to put your tear-soaked bib in the wash.
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:40 pm

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Image
'
This one was my favorite.


Yes because it's impossible to see interference unless one is looking at the exact moment that Craig is grabbing Middlebrooks cheeks and there aren't other officials who can see it or over rule a call made by that guy there. Time to put your tear-soaked bib in the wash.


True, when he turned around, all he could see was Craig directly on the chalk. I know, because that's what he said he saw.

Image
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby flyingelvii on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:41 pm

Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.
flyingelvii
Higgins Hall
 
Posts: 5871
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:28 pm
Karma: -50

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby pick6pedro on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:48 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Image
'
This one was my favorite.


Yes because it's impossible to see interference unless one is looking at the exact moment that Craig is grabbing Middlebrooks cheeks and there aren't other officials who can see it or over rule a call made by that guy there. Time to put your tear-soaked bib in the wash.


True, when he turned around, all he could see was Craig directly on the chalk. I know, because that's what he said he saw.

Image


you'll have to show me where because I haven't been pouring over the grainy footage of the grassy knoll.
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:48 pm

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.


I know he looked and I know he thinks he had to call it. My problem is that he had to make shit up to justify what he thinks he was forced to call because even he knows it is an idiotic outcome. So he pretends Craig didn't push Middlebrooks to get up and he pretends Craig was remotely near the wide-open baseline (given that Middlebrooks dove off of the bag towards second base to try to catch the ball).

Again, if you want to argue that the awful language of the rules interpretation makes that a proper call, fine. But it is an absurd rule that shouldn't be called in that situation. And that is further illustrated by Joyce's need to invent what happened to make it look like it wasn't a silly call.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby pick6pedro on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:49 pm

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.


on top of that, teddy seems to believe peripheral vision is not common amongst humans.
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:51 pm

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.


on top of that, teddy seems to believe peripheral vision is not common amongst humans.


I think all of the justifying of a ridiculous interpretation of an idiotic rule to be amusing, including the inventing of things that occurred, like Craig being in the baseline.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:52 pm

can someone please cardinals this up?

Image

this is the best i can do in the meantime

Image
Last edited by TobaccoRoadEagle on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
now in the street there is violence
and, and a lots of work to be done
no place to hang out our washing
and, and i can't blame all on the sun
good god we gonna rock down to electric avenue
and then we'll take it higher
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
BC Guy
 
Posts: 24016
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 6074

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby pick6pedro on Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:57 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.


on top of that, teddy seems to believe peripheral vision is not common amongst humans.


I think all of the justifying of a ridiculous interpretation of an idiotic rule to be amusing, including the inventing of things that occurred, like Craig being in the baseline.


what's funnier is those that believe the base line is only directly on top of the chalk. many runners that slide into a bag end up gettting up on that side of the bag. in both pictures craig is in very close range (less than 1.5 feet by my esitamtion) of the bag. if you think he is out of the base line every runner who rounds a base at top speed should be out.

where was the invention of things? you yourself said the existing rule was applied correctly. shitty wording and whether the rule should exist are out of the scope here.
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby flyingelvii on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:14 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.


I know he looked and I know he thinks he had to call it. My problem is that he had to make shit up to justify what he thinks he was forced to call because even he knows it is an idiotic outcome. So he pretends Craig didn't push Middlebrooks to get up and he pretends Craig was remotely near the wide-open baseline (given that Middlebrooks dove off of the bag towards second base to try to catch the ball).

Again, if you want to argue that the awful language of the rules interpretation makes that a proper call, fine. But it is an absurd rule that shouldn't be called in that situation. And that is further illustrated by Joyce's need to invent what happened to make it look like it wasn't a silly call.

I agree. It's still a rule though and no amount of butthurt is going to change that.
flyingelvii
Higgins Hall
 
Posts: 5871
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:28 pm
Karma: -50

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:38 pm

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.


on top of that, teddy seems to believe peripheral vision is not common amongst humans.


I think all of the justifying of a ridiculous interpretation of an idiotic rule to be amusing, including the inventing of things that occurred, like Craig being in the baseline.


what's funnier is those that believe the base line is only directly on top of the chalk. many runners that slide into a bag end up gettting up on that side of the bag. in both pictures craig is in very close range (less than 1.5 feet by my esitamtion) of the bag. if you think he is out of the base line every runner who rounds a base at top speed should be out.

where was the invention of things? you yourself said the existing rule was applied correctly. shitty wording and whether the rule should exist are out of the scope here.


The ump was quoted as saying that he was "directly on the chalk". That is a complete fabrication designed to give what he knew was a crappy application of a rule he felt compelled to enforce a sense of credibility.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:39 pm

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.


I know he looked and I know he thinks he had to call it. My problem is that he had to make shit up to justify what he thinks he was forced to call because even he knows it is an idiotic outcome. So he pretends Craig didn't push Middlebrooks to get up and he pretends Craig was remotely near the wide-open baseline (given that Middlebrooks dove off of the bag towards second base to try to catch the ball).

Again, if you want to argue that the awful language of the rules interpretation makes that a proper call, fine. But it is an absurd rule that shouldn't be called in that situation. And that is further illustrated by Joyce's need to invent what happened to make it look like it wasn't a silly call.

I agree. It's still a rule though and no amount of butthurt is going to change that.


True, and they never should have thrown the ball and they probably don't win anyway. It's still a dumb outcome to a game.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby flyingelvii on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:41 pm

So is the Tuck Rule but you're starting to sound like MoJS and the rest of his Raider-folk kin.
flyingelvii
Higgins Hall
 
Posts: 5871
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:28 pm
Karma: -50

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:43 pm

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:So is the Tuck Rule but you're starting to sound like MoJS and the rest of his Raider-folk kin.


The Tuck Rule sucked too.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby flyingelvii on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:45 pm

Meh, I got over it fairly quickly.
flyingelvii
Higgins Hall
 
Posts: 5871
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:28 pm
Karma: -50

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby pick6pedro on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:50 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Regardless of what he says he saw, he still interpreted the rule correctly. And if you watch the video of the play, you notice he glances over for a split second. Photographic evidence makes it look bad.


on top of that, teddy seems to believe peripheral vision is not common amongst humans.


I think all of the justifying of a ridiculous interpretation of an idiotic rule to be amusing, including the inventing of things that occurred, like Craig being in the baseline.


what's funnier is those that believe the base line is only directly on top of the chalk. many runners that slide into a bag end up gettting up on that side of the bag. in both pictures craig is in very close range (less than 1.5 feet by my esitamtion) of the bag. if you think he is out of the base line every runner who rounds a base at top speed should be out.

where was the invention of things? you yourself said the existing rule was applied correctly. shitty wording and whether the rule should exist are out of the scope here.


The ump was quoted as saying that he was "directly on the chalk". That is a complete fabrication designed to give what he knew was a crappy application of a rule he felt compelled to enforce a sense of credibility.


"He was right on the chalk" is the quote. I'm sorry you think that means he needs to be kicking up chalk as he runs and anything otherwise means the opinion is invalid. Running down the line inside the base path is still "right on the chalk" in all but your ultra-conservative and foil-hatted interpretation.
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:53 pm

He wasn't anywhere near the chalk or the baseline when the obstruction occurred. Not that it mattered - according to that ultra liberal interpretation of the rule, it's still obstruction, but it just underscores how dumb everyone thinks that rule is that you need to come up with an excuse for it.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:55 pm

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Meh, I got over it fairly quickly.


Yeah me too. Pretty much over this one too, since there is a lefty on the mound tonight and two games remaining at Fenway.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby pick6pedro on Mon Oct 28, 2013 2:00 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:He wasn't anywhere near the chalk or the baseline when the obstruction occurred. Not that it mattered - according to that ultra liberal interpretation of the rule, it's still obstruction, but it just underscores how dumb everyone thinks that rule is that you need to come up with an excuse for it.


it's still funny how you are slighting the use of language to justify applying the rule but then trying to twist language for your own emotional benefit. Like how you claimed Joyce had to "turn around" even though everything happened just to the left of his gaze. I don't really have a horse in this race, so whatever.
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby Onyx Blackman on Mon Oct 28, 2013 3:17 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:Image

Did those two have issues or did they just love high-waisted pants?
User avatar
Onyx Blackman
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:37 am
Karma: 3001

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby flyingelvii on Mon Oct 28, 2013 3:59 pm

I believe, much like tying yellow onions to belts and using bees for ferry rides, it was the style at the time.
flyingelvii
Higgins Hall
 
Posts: 5871
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:28 pm
Karma: -50

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Mon Oct 28, 2013 4:46 pm

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:I believe, much like tying yellow onions to belts and using bees for ferry rides, it was the style at the time.

all because moose didn't have knuckles in those days
now in the street there is violence
and, and a lots of work to be done
no place to hang out our washing
and, and i can't blame all on the sun
good god we gonna rock down to electric avenue
and then we'll take it higher
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
BC Guy
 
Posts: 24016
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 6074

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby Onyx Blackman on Mon Oct 28, 2013 4:59 pm

Their jerseys had zippers because the Kaiser stole all the buttons.
User avatar
Onyx Blackman
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:37 am
Karma: 3001

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby hansen on Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:11 pm

That strike 3 call to Carpenter looked to be inside.
HANSENPOST :shrug

Image
User avatar
hansen
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 19045
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Your Mom’s House
Karma: -2237

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby hansen on Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:19 pm

couple hard hit balls that inning by the cards... holliday's HR, beltran to the wall, and drew's (great) leaping catch of the ball hit molina
HANSENPOST :shrug

Image
User avatar
hansen
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 19045
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Your Mom’s House
Karma: -2237

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby hansen on Mon Oct 28, 2013 9:44 pm

WHY THE FUCK DID MATHENY NOT PINCH-HIT FOR KOZMA WHO CANT HIT FOR SHIT?
HANSENPOST :shrug

Image
User avatar
hansen
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 19045
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Your Mom’s House
Karma: -2237

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby RegalBCeagle on Mon Oct 28, 2013 10:40 pm

Kozma Kramer
User avatar
RegalBCeagle
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:55 pm
Karma: 374

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:12 am

Cards need to swap one of the five midgets in their lineup for a right handed stick with power. Just inept against lefties.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby twballgame9 on Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:49 am

Has anyone checked hansen for a pulse?

I wouldn't have figured this one to bother him so much, given: (1) his team can't hit lefties, so last night was in the bag; (2) the lost opportunity was in Game 4 when they faced Buchholz going a mediocre 4 inning stretch; and (3) Wacha is still pitching Game 6, so you have to like the chances he keeps the Sox in striking distance.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34372
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: 2013 World Series - St. Louis Cardinals vs. Boston Redsox

Postby hansen on Tue Oct 29, 2013 12:22 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Has anyone checked hansen for a pulse?

I wouldn't have figured this one to bother him so much, given: (1) his team can't hit lefties, so last night was in the bag; (2) the lost opportunity was in Game 4 when they faced Buchholz going a mediocre 4 inning stretch; and (3) Wacha is still pitching Game 6, so you have to like the chances he keeps the Sox in striking distance.


There isn't' that much left to be said that hasn't been said already.

I definitely like the pitching match-ups for the cards the next two games but with the next two at Fenway (where the redsox are really good at home) and the redsox leading 3-1, it will be a very tall (although not impossible) task for them to come back to win the series. a far more likely scenario is the cards winning game 6 and the redsox winning the decider in 7 which will be a punch to the balls.
HANSENPOST :shrug

Image
User avatar
hansen
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 19045
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Your Mom’s House
Karma: -2237

PreviousNext

Return to Shea Field

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests

Untitled document