NashLumber

I just watched all the "action" clips on Gameday. Wow. Lots of HBP and bad blood. I think there were some lingering issues from their recent NYC series?

And I think the aim is to keep the discussions organized instead of multiple threads about the same topic / player. I see no problem with this method. Maybe crossing out / editing the Gunkel part of the topic line would help, but other than that, fine.

I think that may be right. And I'm superstitious. I really dislike the Friday black unis. So yes, Friday losses and that look give me the willies. This will be one that stands out.

This week, especially... https://m.imgur.com/a/qrIUe

Obligatory post game swipe at MFYs.

For OFFNY

[video=youtube;EwigZgGvwd4] Wife and daughter and their Orioles Happy Dance.

Great post. The "woe is me" has been strong lately. While it may not look like it sometimes, we forget these guys are professionals and we are unpaid arm chair quarterbacks. Thank goodness they don't fold up as easily as we do. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ditto. "Run it out, you juiced up tub of lard "! * * Paraphrased. I'm certain that last bit was in fewer, more profane and pointed words. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Red Sox threw inside all year to the O's batters (and everyone else) and even plunked O's, yet when the O's threw inside, it was not ok, apparently. It was clear that Ortiz was not going to tolerate pitching inside to him or challenging his alleged propriety to the inside of the plate. Ortiz definitely heated up the scenario by gesturing at Gregg and leaving the box towards him. Gregg was playing baseball. Ortiz was playing something else. Yes, Gregg taunted him on his way to first *after* that, but Gregg did not instigate the entire incident.

This has been in the back of my mind, too. A friend who watched Tuesday's game with me, told me that he sees no reason why about 6 of those Sox won't continue to rake all season. I told him I have my doubts and that I can't see them keeping up with the runs scored pace or all the mashing. I didn't bring up the PED suggestion, but something smells fishy. It seems unnatural. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Anytime. Yeah, it's just a informal term that has been used forever for someone with good control. Has nothing to do with the rule book. Good pitchers don't groove one down the middle unless they think they can overpower someone who can't handle their fastball. It's why you don't hang curves, sliders or cutters right down the middle. The edge of the black itself per the rule book is outside 3/4 an inch beyond the 17" specified for the plate's top border.

And yes, it's a good thing if you can fool the batter with that kind of control. And tonight, if the ump feels generous as Palmer alluded to. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it's mainly used to describe a pitcher with good control and someone who can throw one at the edge of the plate or the illusion of the edge as opposed to grooving it down the middle where it's going to get clobbered. As mentioned in the article and using the Lou Brock example, the black is beveled and in more cases than not, under dirt. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We're fine. I think we both got a little hot. We were posting so fast, that I missed your reply and you missed mine and I went back to edit to show my apology. You are contending though that the black is a part of home plate? It isn't. The term "touched the black" has been used forever in the game, but the plate itself is 17" across and what Palmer was referring to is that if the ump is feeling generous, he'll give the pitcher the black as a strike. The black is 3/4" of an inch around the plate but not included in the strike zone. I am guilty of exaggerating that it looked 2" outside, but if it edged the very back of the black of the plate on its path, to my eyes and probably Joe Angel's (alluded to earlier by another poster), it looked outside. I was off by 1.25 of an inch of my 2" outside proclamation before rewinding and taking the pics. By the book ,it was a ball and that's what Palmer was alluding to.

Posts crossed. Back up one.

Please don't insult me. I've seen more baseball than you've been alive. Edit: I see you were nice in a message that crossed. Cheers.

He equivocated. He said "If an ump thinks it touched the black, then he's going to call you out and I think this was the case." But he said it was a ball after the overhead view. He was referring to the ump's opinion. Not the pitch.

You and I are apparently genetically fated to disagree. Always. Go forth young feller.

And then on the replay he changed his mind when he saw the last view (and I posted the pic just above). "Here's the definitive ... It's a ball. It's very close." Keep in mind, I'm watching the game about 3 hours later than the rest of you. I only saw it a few minutes ago and rewound and rewound. I usually am pissed at Davis when he takes a 3rd strike, but that was not a strike.