J'Accuse

[Dipper9]

I haven't had a chance to surf today, but is this story being discussed anywhere around the web? On MLB Network? Etc?

[Dipper9]

I haven't had a chance to surf today, but is this story being discussed anywhere around the web? On MLB Network? Etc?

Never mind, just did a quick Google search and its out there....everywhere. And as expected, all the fans are telling him to shut up and accept it. They're saying Hammel and the Birds are coming back to earth, "as expected." MAN, I want to win just to shut these idiots up! :angryfire:

[olehippi]

Stealing signs.....why use visual signals? Why not high tech cheating.....like micro audio receivers in the batters ear? They are so tiny, and sit so deep in the ear canal, that they are virtually invisible.

http://microears.com/micro-invisible-earpiece/micro-skin-earpiece.html

[El Gordo]

Anyone actually reading the article could see that Hammel wasn't in any way connecting the HR with sign stealing He clearly said that if you locate FB up to this club, as he did you get hit hard. He simply observed that he was surprised at the swings they took on breaking pitches, and that it was as if they knew what was coming. He didn't connect to two. IMO the BJ's steal signs, the Birds had a poor approach at the plate, and Hammel pitched well, except for 4 FB he left up.

[El Gordo]

Stealing signs.....why use visual signals? Why not high tech cheating.....like micro audio receivers in the batters ear? They are so tiny, and sit so deep in the ear canal, that they are virtually invisible.

http://microears.com/micro-invisible-earpiece/micro-skin-earpiece.html

You'd never find one of those in Batista's ears. :laughlol:

[Spoonless]

I find it funny that you say "there's no question" on what is clearly an opinion. Almost as funny? That you call home/road splits meager when they are the basis for that ESPN article that has been quoted in this thread.

I can't seriously be the only rational person on this board that believes the BJ's weren't stealing signs last night right?

He said there's no question in a hypothetical environment that suppresses the pitcher's two best pitches. He's not saying that there's no question that the Rogers Centre is such an environment.

[sangar]

Stealing signs.....why use visual signals? Why not high tech cheating.....like micro audio receivers in the batters ear? They are so tiny, and sit so deep in the ear canal, that they are virtually invisible.

http://microears.com/micro-invisible-earpiece/micro-skin-earpiece.html

I brought up this point the last time we dicsusses sign stealing. It would seem obvious to have someone sitting in the bleachers waving his arms when each sign is shown by the catcher.

[olehippi]

You'd never find one of those in Batista's ears. :laughlol:

Yikes!! I could hide my stereo system in those appendages!!

[sangar]

Good thought. No matter what, I am sure just like Belichick, it's cheating.

Probably. I remember a lot of complaints about Earl Weaver's groundskeeper tapering the infield foul lines to make bunt attempts roll foul. I didn't regard that as cheating, but isn't it along the same vein?

[El Gordo]

Probably. I remember a lot of complaints about Earl Weaver's groundskeeper tapering the infield foul lines to make bunt attempts roll foul. I didn't regard that as cheating, but isn't it along the same vein?

How is tailoring the field to suit your teams strengths and weaknesses the same as using high tech equipment to steal signs from an off field vantage point. Most likely they have someone with a CC video feed from the CF camera, relaying the signs to a plant in the stands via some of ear piece device, who then signals the players.

[weams]

Probably. I remember a lot of complaints about Earl Weaver's groundskeeper tapering the infield foul lines to make bunt attempts roll foul. I didn't regard that as cheating, but isn't it along the same vein?

I think that the manicuring of the field is at the home team's digression. I think several infields are like that even today. I don't think it is quite the same, but I am certain that Earl was not above cheating if the circumstances allowed for it. SO yeah, I guess I am taking the side of the argument that I choose and not the high road.

[weams]

Pat Santarone

[Dipper9]

I think that the manicuring of the field is at the home team's digression. I think several infields are like that even today. I don't think it is quite the same, but I am certain that Earl was not above cheating if the circumstances allowed for it. SO yeah, I guess I am taking the side of the argument that I choose and not the high road.

Two relevant quotes:

1. "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying."

2. "Win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat!"

[weams]

Two relevant quotes:

1. "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying."

2. "Win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat!"

“If you know how to cheat, start now.”

[Stotle]

If you are worried someone is signaling your signs, use a system that the other team can't break. Not really that complicated.