A big middle finger to the Sox

[Tx Oriole]

1 hour ago, weams said:

The are Yankee hateable. 

I don't get it Weams. The umpire stopped  the game. Why is he crying about the O's? 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

1 hour ago, weams said:

The are Yankee hateable. 

Really the Red Sox are worse.  With the Yankees it’s more jealousy due to their history of success.

The Red Sox are sore winners.  Ortiz smashes the dugout phone.  It was likely roid rage, but who does that?  

 

[Sanfran327]

I'm certainly not taking the Sox' side here, but I have a feeling we did this on purpose to stick it to 'em a little bit. It was dumb to start the game last night, honestly, but we're playing for nothing, and they're playing for a division championship. 

Screw 'em. I could not care less about the burden we put on them (plus a late-season double header!), but it's not hard to see his point. And yeah, Buck would have also been mad.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

48 minutes ago, clapdiddy said:

Agreed.  Yankees fans are obnoxious, but Red Sox fans are worse.  

When I worked downtown in the mid 2000’s the Red Sox fans were the worst.

They were an over the top parody of how you would picture a Boston sports fan.

 

[esmd]

Eh, I'm not losing any sleep about ticking off Cora or the Red Sox, but he has a point.  Seems like of silly to start a game that endures a long delay in the first inning.  Even the one in the 2nd was kind of questionable.  If the roles were reversed, as was said, Buck would be complaining, and many or most of us would be agreeing with him.

[backwardsk]

8 minutes ago, Tx Oriole said:

I don't get it Weams. The umpire stopped  the game. Why is he crying about the O's? 

While the umpires stop the game, the home team makes the decision to start the game. (At least that's what I read)  That's what he's complaining about-they started a game when they knew the heavy storms were less than an hour away.

[Tx Oriole]

9 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

While the umpires stop the game, the home team makes the decision to start the game. (At least that's what I read)  That's what he's complaining about-they started a game when they knew the heavy storms were less than an hour away.

Okay. Thank you for that info. 

[OFFNY]

43 minutes ago, esmd said:

 

Eh, I'm not losing any sleep about ticking off Cora or the Red Sox, but he has a point. It seems like of silly to start a game that endured a long delay in the first inning. Even the one in the 2nd was kind of questionable. If the roles were reversed, as was stated, Buck would be complaining (and many or most of us would be agreeing with him.)

 

o

 

Last night, the Orioles were the beneficiaries of what is arguably the stupidest rule in professional sports.

The "5-inning rule" ........ which completely wipes out the results of a game that has been started ........  encourages teams with an early lead to intentionally make outs, and it encourages pitchers of the team that has the lead to rush their pitches.

And the worst part of the rule is when something like last night happens.

Why that rule has not been changed is one of the great mysteries of sports, along with Division I-A college football's refusing to institute a 16-team playoff for the last 50 years or so.

 

**********************************************

 

All of that said, I do think that Cora complaining about the delay/stoppages in play from the previous night's game was sour grapes. That game was played for the full 9 innings, not a single pitch in the game was wiped out/erased, and both teams had to deal with the delays on an equal level. In fact, Cotra complaining at all about that game takes away from the outrage from what happened last night, which is solely and squarely where the focus/complaints ought to be (in my rat's ass of an opinion.)

 

o

[FlipTheBird]

44 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

While the umpires stop the game, the home team makes the decision to start the game. (At least that's what I read)  That's what he's complaining about-they started a game when they knew the heavy storms were less than an hour away.

Yeah. I think the Sox are probably making a bigger deal about it than they need to, but I agree with the assertion that the Orioles never should have started that baseball game.

If this had been in Boston and gone against us during the 2012, 2014 or 2016 seasons (also known as when we were competing for a playoff spot) people here would have lost their minds.

[Morgan423]

MLB just needs to take the game start decision completely out of team hands and leave it with the umpires.  There have been far too many games started when they shouldn't have been in recent years.  Also far too many games started at the posted time that get stopped for an hour after the first inning for a storm they knew was going to come through, thus burning starters for the teams.  Let the umps make that call.

[Dipper9]

3 minutes ago, Morgan423 said:

MLB just needs to take the game start decision completely out of team hands and leave it with the umpires.  There have been far too many games started when they shouldn't have been in recent years.  Also far too many games started at the posted time that get stopped for an hour after the first inning for a storm they knew was going to come through, thus burning starters for the teams.  Let the umps make that call.

Agreed.  Does anyone know the reasoning behind allowing the home team to make the call to start a game?  I mean, as soon as one pitch is throw, the umps are conferring with Nicole anyway, so why not just do that before the game starts?  Why does MLB put that initial decision on the home team?

[glenn__davis]

6 minutes ago, Dipper9 said:

Agreed.  Does anyone know the reasoning behind allowing the home team to make the call to start a game?  I mean, as soon as one pitch is throw, the umps are conferring with Nicole anyway, so why not just do that before the game starts?  Why does MLB put that initial decision on the home team?

I'd assume it's for the financial benefit of the home team.  The home team has sold tickets which would need to be refunded or exchanged.  Most likely the make-up game is not going to be as well attended - less people, less concessions, etc.  The home team also is largely responsible for the logistics of the make-up date.  So I'm guessing all of that is the reasoning.

With all of that said - really dumb to try to play last night, and I agree that the umps should be making these calls,

[Aristotelian]

I would be pissed if it happened to us. They should not be starting a game with obvious weather imminent. Even if the game is played it really screws up the starting pitchers.

[spiritof66]

Here's the problem, as I see it.

The rule has been, for at least 60 years and probably much longer, that the home team decides whether to start a game and thenall decisions are in the hands of the umpire(s). I would guess that was because the decision to postpone the game (which when each team played only seven other teams typically meant an additional double-header) had its primary financial impact on the home team that would give up the gate receipts if there were no game. It's possible that there was some deference to the home team's access to weather information in those pre-internet, pre-Weather Channel days or its superior knowledge of the field's drainage capacity and the difficulty/cost of repairing a  wet field beaten up by spikes.

But for a long time, and I can't put dates on it,  the home team's decision didn't count for much. Once it started raining hard, the umpires would delay or call the game. The only way in which the home team could game that system very effectively was to call off a game when the rain was light if they thought a postponement would be in their interest. (Bill Veeck claims to have done that.)

Now, with large, complex and multiple media commitments and ad revenues dependent on a game being played, great improvements in drainage,  a reluctance to play double-headers, and what appears to be virtually zero regard for the fans who have bought tickets and for those who have shown up, the umpires will continue a game (and will delay it but defer the decision to postpone it)  pretty much as long as they can see and there are islands of dry land on the playing field. I assume that's the result of pressure from MLB rather than the umpires' own views of when a game should continue, but I sure don't know that. So the home team's decision to start a game now sets in motion a game that will go on in pretty terrible conditions. That's Cora's gripe, and it's legitimate -- though usually such complaints are directed at the umpires for continuing a game rather than the home team for starting it. 

There's no reason the home team should have any control over whether to start a game, and hat rule should be changed. But it would help if the umpires would not insist that games be started (if they get the authority to decide that)  or continued in ridiculous conditions. The umpires seem to show little regard for the quality of the product, the safety of the players or the welfare of the fans -- and that should change. Jeez, make them play triple headers if the pennant race demands it. But we should get baseball, not the bizarre imitation of it that you see in a driving rain on a soaked field. This ain't football.   

[theocean]

15 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

I would be pissed if it happened to us. They should not be starting a game with obvious weather imminent. Even if the game is played it really screws up the starting pitchers.

Yeah - I don't think Cora is out of line at all. They should have postponed the game entirely. The rain has been crazy. Buck would have complained just as much.

This isn't like a Brian Dozier bunting against the shift complaint. I can understand it.