World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaysofYaz. Show DaysofYaz's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to scubber's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    > Soooo..the only way it would not have been obstruction is if WMB disappeared into thin air after he missed the ball.

    Yes.  From what I can gather from the press conference, it does not matter the circumstance that leads to the obstruction.  The opposing fielder cannot be in the way between the runner and the next base.

    [/QUOTE]

    Well if that's the case that rule will definitely be changed because its asking the impossible of the fielder.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to DaysofYaz's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to scubber's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The umps are not even saying the feet were the problem.  The fact that Middlebrook was there in the line between the runner and home base, it is an obstruction.

    [/QUOTE]

    Soooo..the only way it would not have been obstruction is if WMB disappeared into thin air after he missed the ball.

    [/QUOTE]

    LOL, sure seems that way, doesn't it.  If that is what they are saying then they are wrong.  You know how many obstruction calls there would be in a season for just laying in the way?  A ton!  They either have to call him for putting the feet up or let the call go.  Just laying there would be a very lame call and seriously need a rule change if that's the case.  They have blown the credibility of the call and rule by not talking about the feet going up.  I thought that was what they could pass this call off with, now they are saying it wasn't a factor in their decision??  I don't like that.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to isurfvb24's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sadly I agree with the call to an extent.  It just bothers me that it doesn't look like Middlebrooks was in 3rd base line.

    Embedded image permalink

    [/QUOTE]
    I don't agree with it at all. As seen in your pic, he pushes wm down with both hands then trips over wm when he's laying on ground. No obstruction there

    [/QUOTE]

    Craig was looking at the ball going down the third base line and then tripped over Midlebrooks and held him down. Craig completely sold it because with his bad ankle he knew it was going to be close at the plate.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from unhgrad. Show unhgrad's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to AL34's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to isurfvb24's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sadly I agree with the call to an extent.  It just bothers me that it doesn't look like Middlebrooks was in 3rd base line.

    Embedded image permalink

    [/QUOTE]
    I don't agree with it at all. As seen in your pic, he pushes wm down with both hands then trips over wm when he's laying on ground. No obstruction there

    [/QUOTE]

    Craig was looking at the ball going down the third base line and then tripped over Midlebrooks and held him down. Craig completely sold it because with his bad ankle he knew it was going to be close at the plate.

    [/QUOTE]

    When you look at it Middlebrooks is actually between 3rd and second not 3rd and home therefore he was not impeding the runner advancing from 3rd to home by being in his path to home. If he was in the coaches box and the runner tripped over him would that be impeding him too. Seems like a bad call because the runner took an indirect path home. What is Middlebrooks supposed to do go stand in the dugout? 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from scubber. Show scubber's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    Ross, Nava, Drew, Bogearts got to play tomorrow.  If Buch sucks and we get blown out early, then be it.  But please, no more giving game away on bad stupid defense.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaysofYaz. Show DaysofYaz's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    If Craig continued on instead of backing up he wouldn't have been anywhere near WMB

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to unhgrad's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AL34's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to isurfvb24's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sadly I agree with the call to an extent.  It just bothers me that it doesn't look like Middlebrooks was in 3rd base line.

    Embedded image permalink

    [/QUOTE]
    I don't agree with it at all. As seen in your pic, he pushes wm down with both hands then trips over wm when he's laying on ground. No obstruction there

    [/QUOTE]

    Craig was looking at the ball going down the third base line and then tripped over Midlebrooks and held him down. Craig completely sold it because with his bad ankle he knew it was going to be close at the plate.

    [/QUOTE]

    When you look at it Middlebrooks is actually between 3rd and second not 3rd and home therefore he was not impeding the runner advancing from 3rd to home by being in his path to home. If he was in the coaches box and the runner tripped over him would that be impeding him too. Seems like a bad call because the runner took an indirect path home. What is Middlebrooks supposed to do go stand in the dugout? 

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, as I mentioned, this is the argument I would be making.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Stonehill77. Show Stonehill77's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to unhgrad's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AL34's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to isurfvb24's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sadly I agree with the call to an extent.  It just bothers me that it doesn't look like Middlebrooks was in 3rd base line.

    Embedded image permalink

    [/QUOTE]
    I don't agree with it at all. As seen in your pic, he pushes wm down with both hands then trips over wm when he's laying on ground. No obstruction there

    [/QUOTE]

    Craig was looking at the ball going down the third base line and then tripped over Midlebrooks and held him down. Craig completely sold it because with his bad ankle he knew it was going to be close at the plate.

    [/QUOTE]

    When you look at it Middlebrooks is actually between 3rd and second not 3rd and home therefore he was not impeding the runner advancing from 3rd to home by being in his path to home. If he was in the coaches box and the runner tripped over him would that be impeding him too. Seems like a bad call because the runner took an indirect path home. What is Middlebrooks supposed to do go stand in the dugout? 

    [/QUOTE]

    The base path is not the chalk line. 2 or 3 feet either side is an acceptable path to next base. The problem was no throw should have been made. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    I have never been enamored with Saltalamachia. Theo had a crush on the guy. I have always thought that the Atlanta Braves saw something in him that they were never crazy about and traded him for Mark Teixeira.  He strikes out a ton and is bad defensively. Can I ask if he cannot throw anyone out and cannot hit, why is he in the World Series lineup ? Get Ross in there already, enough already. 

    I said way back that this team needed a 3rd baseman. I thought they should have picked up Michael Young but not trust the poition to Will Middlebrooks. Cherrington screwed the pooch there in not picking up a third baseman. Both of these guys have had a hand in two losses, including Breslow who put the first two guys on.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to Stonehill77's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The base path is not the chalk line. 2 or 3 feet either side is an acceptable path to next base. The problem was no throw should have been made. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Well of course since it didn't work out then that probably was a bad decision, Sherlock Holmes.  But had it worked out you would probably be on here praising the play.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    Did not see the game, but it sounds like we gave away another one. We are in the hole now and if we lose tomorrow this series is over. Time for Day to Day Clay Breakholz to man up.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from scubber. Show scubber's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Stonehill77's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The base path is not the chalk line. 2 or 3 feet either side is an acceptable path to next base. The problem was no throw should have been made. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Well of course since it didn't work out then that probably was a bad decision, Sherlock Holmes.  But had it worked out you would probably be on here praising the play.

    [/QUOTE]


    It looked like he had no chance to throw him out at third.  And the next batter would have been normally an easy out.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from futbal. Show futbal's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    No, he pinch hit Bernie Carbo at the appropriate time.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from blingblang. Show blingblang's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    So the throw to 3B in game 2 by Bres cost the game.

    And another throw to 3B in game 3 by Salty cost the game, as controversial as the obstruction call may be.

    Both throws had little chance of nailing the runners.

    I guess don't throw unless it's a good throw into the gloves of the fielder.  Take time to be accurate with throws.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from blingblang. Show blingblang's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    Joyce screwed up the kid Gallaraga off a perfect Game, now he has fans all over St Louis.  That obstruction is a judgement call, and he never gave a chance to WMB after the natural act of going for the ball.  He went with the weaker call at the biggest stage of the game.

    Dont know how his conscience is going to let him live peacefully after the screwy calls.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from painter. Show painter's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to jozee76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Salty is so god awful, but how on earth does Middlebrooks not catch that ball? AGAIN???

    [/QUOTE]

    Because he was obstructed by Craig.  And if that wasn't the case, then there was no alleged obstruction by Middlebrooks either - they were parallel plays. It's called baseball.  Players slide, dive, fall and then try to get up.  It was a simple play made complex by poor umpiring.  

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from painter. Show painter's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You dont think it was a one for Dana? after being embarrased on national TV game 1? Trust me, they said there would be payback, and tonight was. Period. They could have called no interference. The fielder has priority on a ball he laid out for it. Craig initiated the contact. Complete utter BS along with the rest of this series. Baseball has gone the way of basketball, football, and hockey. Joke. Period.  How do you know whats legit or not anymore?

    [/QUOTE]

    Lest we forget, "Crazy Joey" Crawford's father was Shag Crawford, one of the worst umpires ever, and his son is one of the worst NBA referees ever.  Bad umpiring/officiating is not a new thing, and in this case, it runs in the family.  Last night gives a whole new meaning to "bad".

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to painter's comment:

     

    In response to jozee76's comment:

    Salty is so god awful, but how on earth does Middlebrooks not catch that ball? AGAIN???

     



    Because he was obstructed by Craig.  And if that wasn't the case, then there was no alleged obstruction by Middlebrooks either - they were parallel plays. It's called baseball.  Players slide, dive, fall and then try to get up.  It was a simple play made complex by poor umpiring.  

     



    He was. For all those on Salty for trying to make the play, the ball was catchable. Craig started the obstruction and was a domino effect. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    Embedded image permalink

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals

    In response to J-BAY's comment:

    In response to painter's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to jozee76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Salty is so god awful, but how on earth does Middlebrooks not catch that ball? AGAIN???

     



    Because he was obstructed by Craig.  And if that wasn't the case, then there was no alleged obstruction by Middlebrooks either - they were parallel plays. It's called baseball.  Players slide, dive, fall and then try to get up.  It was a simple play made complex by poor umpiring.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    He was. For all those on Salty for trying to make the play, the ball was catchable. Just keeping it in the infield, saved the run, for the time being. Craig started the obstruction and was a domino effect. 

    [/QUOTE]

    JBay

    The Cardinals know about Saltalamachia and his shakey throws and defense and they are being smart to exploit it. He is not an elite defensive catcher nor even decent and unfortunately it is rearing its ugly head at in inopportune time like the World Series. Even his throws to second base more often than not bounce into second base. He should have been replaced by Ross earlier. I think Farrell is of the mindset that Francona had in case of injury to the catching position, you have to have a backup catcher on the bench. 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from OCONNOR6. Show OCONNOR6's posts

    Re: World Series Game 3 Thread: Red Sox at Cardinals


    I know this is going to make a lot of people angry, but I think the obstruction was intentional.  I have watched the replay over and over.  Middlebrooks clearly raises his legs a second time--why?
    Many have argued he was trying to get up.  Two points:  1)  Lie down on the floor with your legs kicked up behind you (his orginal fallen position).  Now what do you do to get up?  Try it.  You put your toes to the ground before shifting weight to your knee/knees.  You don't kick your legs back up again.  2)  If Middlebrooks was trying to get up, why did he stay on the ground after Craig got away?  He stayed on the ground for Craig's entire run home.
    I just want us to try to take the emotion away for a second and look at the replay honestly.  If I were Middlebrooks, I may have done the same thing.  At any rate, he should have just lied flat to try to avoid an interference/obstruction call. 
    If you watch the replay devoid of emotion, you may come to the realization that it was intentional.
    Not that it matters.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share