Going for the Sweep (vs. NATIONALS, 8/09)

[CallMeBrooksie]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

The rule in question does state "unintentional".  Of course you have to prove intent.

Right.. incompetence isn't too difficult to fake in my experience

[VaBird1]

2 minutes ago, MurphDogg said:

Without grounds crew incompetence it would have resumed. The grounds crew failures, not the rain was the proximate cause of not being able to resume the game, thus it is resumed at a later date. 

Serious question, why can’t they just fix the field today?  Is it raining anymore?  I live 10 miles away and it never rained here.

[OFFNY]

o

 

Well, this could be a really nice precedent set for the future ........ if the home team is losing after 5 innings have been completed and it starts raining, have your grounds-crew screw up and take an hour to get the tarp on the field. That way, you get to play the rest of the game at a later date instead of just taking the loss, as is the case in all of the other games when it rains.

The visiting team would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the grounds-crew screwed up intentionally, right ???

 

o

[HowAboutThat]

2 minutes ago, MurphDogg said:

Here is the rule.

 

 

NOTE: Weather and similar conditions – Rules 7.02(a)(1) through 7.02(a)(5) – shall take precedence in determining whether a called game shall be a suspended game. If a game is halted by weather, and subsequent light failure or an intervening curfew or time limit prevents its resumption, the game shall not be a suspended game. If a game is halted by light failure, and weather or field conditions prevent its resumption, the game shall not be a suspended game. A game can only be considered a suspended game if stopped for any of the six reasons specified in Rule 7.02(a).

 

Sure sounds like this is a complete game that should not be suspended.

7.02(a) Specifically mentions unintentional malfunction of the tarp, But the weather clause seems to trump the equipment malfunction clause, so it should be a completed game, we win.

[schittenden]

9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Thanks but it's (3) not (4).

 

Thanks. That’s what I get for looking it up and then positing later based on memory rather than confirming. 

[SteveA]

12 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But it is weather related.

It rained, that is why the game was delayed.  Without rain, no delay.

I guess the determination is that the direct cause of the game not being able to resume is an equipment malfunction, and not the rain itself.

As I said....BS 

[Chavez Ravine]

9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

The rule in question does state "unintentional".  Of course you have to prove intent.

 

[schittenden]

4 minutes ago, Philip said:

 

NOTE: Weather and similar conditions – Rules 7.02(a)(1) through 7.02(a)(5) – shall take precedence in determining whether a called game shall be a suspended game. If a game is halted by weather, and subsequent light failure or an intervening curfew or time limit prevents its resumption, the game shall not be a suspended game. If a game is halted by light failure, and weather or field conditions prevent its resumption, the game shall not be a suspended game. A game can only be considered a suspended game if stopped for any of the six reasons specified in Rule 7.02(a).

 

Sure sounds like this is a complete game that should not be suspended.

7.02(a) Specifically mentions unintentional malfunction of the tarp, But the weather clause seems to trump the equipment malfunction clause, so it should be a completed game, we win.

I find that note incredibly confusing. When I read it, the first sentence seems to say if those things happen, it is a suspended game. Then the two examples seem to say exactly the opposite of the first sentence. 

[Ruzious]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But it is weather related.

It rained, that is why the game was delayed.  Without rain, no delay.

Exactly.  The rain come from... the weather, so obviously it's weather related.  I wonder if MLB changes this to a win by the O's.  

 

 

[scbalt52]

4 minutes ago, Philip said:

 

NOTE: Weather and similar conditions – Rules 7.02(a)(1) through 7.02(a)(5) – shall take precedence in determining whether a called game shall be a suspended game. If a game is halted by weather, and subsequent light failure or an intervening curfew or time limit prevents its resumption, the game shall not be a suspended game. If a game is halted by light failure, and weather or field conditions prevent its resumption, the game shall not be a suspended game. A game can only be considered a suspended game if stopped for any of the six reasons specified in Rule 7.02(a).

 

Sure sounds like this is a complete game that should not be suspended.

7.02(a) Specifically mentions unintentional malfunction of the tarp, But the weather clause seems to trump the equipment malfunction clause, so it should be a completed game, we win.

Yeah but it's this one:

 

7.02  Suspended, Postponed, and Tie Games

  (a) A game shall become a suspended game that must be completed at a future date if the game is terminated for any of the following reasons:

  (1) A curfew imposed by law;

  (2) A time limit permissible under league rules;

  (3) Light failure, malfunction of, or unintentional operator error in employing, a mechanical or field device or equipment under the control of the home club (e.g., a retractable roof, a tarpaulin, or other water removal equipment);

[CallMeBrooksie]

Considering the state that this season is in due to a pandemic, it seems beyond odd to me that they wouldn't just call this game so as to prevent more unnecessary travel and contact between two teams, especially when considering the building slate of make up games the league is going to have to accommodate.

[HowAboutThat]

1 minute ago, schittenden said:

I find that note incredibly confusing. When I read it, the first sentence seems to say if those things happen, it is a suspended game. Then the two examples seem to say exactly the opposite of the first sentence. 

That’s why lawyers make a lot of money. I remember my late stepdaughter was a lawyer and she was constantly Sending me legalese and asking me to edit it for her, which I did cheerfully, but I constantly mentioned it to her that it seems like lawyers are deliberately making things confusing as possible, and she would laugh and agree with me.

[OFFNY]

8 minutes ago, SteveA said:

 

I guess the determination is that the direct cause of the game not being able to resume is an equipment malfunction, and not the rain itself.

As I said ........ BS.

 

o

Sounds like a good reason to postpone a porno flick ........ MLB employees ought to be better prepared.

 

o

[schittenden]

3 minutes ago, Philip said:

That’s why lawyers make a lot of money. I remember my late stepdaughter was a lawyer and she was constantly Sending me legalese and asking me to edit it for her, which I did cheerfully, but I constantly mentioned it to her that it seems like lawyers are deliberately making things confusing as possible, and she would laugh and agree with me.

I am a lawyer. If I wrote that, I’d be fired. 

[Morgan423]

4 minutes ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

Considering the state that this season is in due to a pandemic, it seems beyond odd to me that they wouldn't just call this game so as to prevent more unnecessary travel and contact between two teams, especially when considering the building slate of make up games the league is going to have to accommodate.

There won't be any extra travel... they are going make it up next weekend at OPACY when we play the Nats again.