another brawl note
Sam Monk
A quick note; Piazza didn't just go back to the ballpark
after he left, but literally went into the Dodger clubhouse
looking for Mota.
MSG cameras caught him on video walking out of the clubhouse
to his car.
This is even more bizarre than the "First baseline Fiasco"
last year.
So, during the brawl, the three guys behind Piazza in the
order, burnitz, mcewing (sp?), and wigginston (sp?) all
made kamakazii-like attacks at Mota. Mota back pedalled
and was herded into the dogout by the coaches. Burnitz
made it all the way to the dugout before being restrained
by three or four dodgers. Mcewing and wiginston wound up
on their backs under several dodgers each. The other 40
mets were no-shows.
Piazza looked like the energizer bunny with a 12 volt
automobile battery attached, but he did make the
universal "you're a p*ssy" sign at Mota after he had made
it into the dugout. Gotta admit, that made me laugh.
__________________________________________
Dodgers fan stuck in sevarB country
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
I would expect both to be suspended for this - Mota for throwing at
him, and Piazza for charging the mound, but especially for going
looking for him after having had a chance to cool down. Although at
least Piazza for the first time in his career did actually stand up
for himself. If he had ever done it against Clemens then maybe he
wouldn't have felt his manhood questioned last spring training.
Who's in charge of handing out suspensions now? It used to be Frank
Robinson, but he's no longer with the commissioner's office.
George Cutshaw
"Ima Pseudonym" <akra...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:mrd07vsmml272jgvn...@4ax.com...
Bob Watson, who is a very nice guy. I hope he takes it easy on Mota.
Agua Girl
I am embarrassed for Piazza...really. Charging the mound is one thing.
I suspect Mota deserved that; but to leave and then come back?
What a couple of babies.
AG
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
>I am embarrassed for Piazza...really. Charging the mound is one thing.
>I suspect Mota deserved that; but to leave and then come back?
>What a couple of babies.
And of course, what set up the hbp in the first place is that it's not
the first time that Piazza has taken his time to try to attack Mota.
Maybe if Piazza had been suspended the first time this incident
wouldn't have happened.
PiazzaGrrl
>>And of course, what set up the hbp in the first place is that it's not the
first time that Piazza has taken his time to try to attack Mota. Maybe if
Piazza had been suspended the first time this incident
wouldn't have happened.<<
And then there's the idea that if Tracy hadn't rather suspiciously held Mota
over for a second inning, it certainly wouldn't have happened. Is that setup I
smell?
97 mph pitch. Right up next to his head. Mota's not a good enough pitcher to
pull that shit and get away with it.
Piazzagrrl
The postess with the mostest.
Atlanta delenda est.
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
>And then there's the idea that if Tracy hadn't rather suspiciously held Mota
>over for a second inning, it certainly wouldn't have happened.
He is going to be the long man in the bullpen, in all likelihood.
Mota had pitched two innings twice previously this spring. Was he
throwing at players those times?
> Is that setup I
>smell?
No, it's paranoia.
Agua Girl
"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20030313104042...@mb-fo.aol.com...
> Ima:
> >>And of course, what set up the hbp in the first place is that it's not
the
> first time that Piazza has taken his time to try to attack Mota. Maybe if
> Piazza had been suspended the first time this incident
> wouldn't have happened.<<
>
> And then there's the idea that if Tracy hadn't rather suspiciously held
Mota
> over for a second inning, it certainly wouldn't have happened. Is that
setup I
> smell?
>
> 97 mph pitch. Right up next to his head. Mota's not a good enough
pitcher to
> pull that shit and get away with it.
No..he isn't ...and I think most of us recognize what Mota did was not only
ill advised but wrong. As for holding him over...get real. Tracy isn't
gunning
for Mike and he sure isn't out to get his pitchers stalked. It's spring
training...
lots of pitchers are going two and three innings now. You're totally
reaching
there.
I am curious...are you even the least bit concerned about Mikes actions?or
are you too big a fan to recognize the seriousness of coming back after the
fact? What if he had found Mota? You do realize that had he actually
assualted him in the clubhouse he could very well have gone to jail for it.
Throwing at the hitting, charging the mound...not my favorite part of the
game but at least one I recognize as being part of it. Coming back to the
field, go into the other players clubhouse, lying in wait down the base
paths..
those are signs of an unstable personality. The guy needs counseling.
AG
The Baba
>>those are signs of an unstable personality. >>
I see it as a sign of one very pissed of guy...There's a fine line between unstable
and royally pissed off, and I don't think Pizza Man crossed it...It ain't the first
time someone went looking for a guy after a game, and I'm sure it won't be the last
time...
--
*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*
The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.459 / Virus Database: 258 - Release Date: 2/25/2003
Sam Monk
> AG says:
> >>those are signs of an unstable personality. >>
>
> I see it as a sign of one very pissed of guy...There's a fine line between unstable
> and royally pissed off, and I don't think Pizza Man crossed it...It ain't the first
> time someone went looking for a guy after a game, and I'm sure it won't be the last
> time...
>
but, more to her point, this is the second time out of a _total_ of two altercations
in his entire career that he had an initial reaction, and then a *much* more severe
secondary reaction after some time had passed. Most folks settle down after 30
minutes or so; with this guy, his initial reaction is simply a starting point. The high
water mark -- or high temper mark -- is "yet to be determined".
I'm with AG here. "Sumthin' scrange 'bout 'dat boy."
--
____________________________________________
Dodgers fan stuck in sevarB country.
Agua Girl
"The Baba" <hoo...@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8Q2ca.3913$yr5...@news2.west.cox.net...
> AG says:
> >>those are signs of an unstable personality. >>
>
> I see it as a sign of one very pissed of guy...There's a fine line between
unstable
> and royally pissed off, and I don't think Pizza Man crossed it...It ain't
the first
> time someone went looking for a guy after a game, and I'm sure it won't be
the last
> time...
>
Really? this is only the second time I have heard of it. Do you have
any specifics (or stats..lol) or are you just going off memory. A legal
case could be made against someone who goes and waits by a players
car or comes back to the field an hour after the incident. Mikey better
hope he never catches up with anyone when he is in that delayed rage
mode cuz dat boy will be goin ta jail.
Personally I think the best revenge is a HR next AB. Charge the mound
if you must but if you can't get it out of your system in the next 10
minutes
or so you have issues bigger than being thrown at.
AG
Cody M. Stumpo
: "The Baba" <hoo...@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
: AG
Mota should get a restraining order. Then whenever we play the Mets,
Piazza couldn't even come to the ballpark!
---------------------------*************************------------------------
co...@soda.CSUA.berkeley.edu http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~cody/
Holding a titular Archbishopric since 1999.
PiazzaGrrl
>>No..he isn't ...and I think most of us recognize what Mota did was not only
ill advised but wrong. As for holding him over...get real. Tracy isn't
gunning for Mike and he sure isn't out to get his pitchers stalked. It's
spring
totally
reaching there.<<
Mabye. :)
>>I am curious...are you even the least bit concerned about Mikes actions? or
are you too big a fan to recognize the seriousness of coming back after the
fact?<<
False dichotomy. No, I'm not concerned, and you're the one reaching at this
point if you seriously think Piazza would have whaled the guy in the visitor's
clubhouse.
>>What if he had found Mota? You do realize that had he actually
assualted him in the clubhouse he could very well have gone to jail for it.<<
Yes, and so does Piazza, in all likelihood. That's why it's not likely to have
happened. I suspect the upshot would have been a severe chat with mutual
threats of bodily harm, followed by a good sulk all round.
>>Throwing at the hitting, charging the mound...not my favorite part of the
game but at least one I recognize as being part of it. Coming back to the
field, go into the other players clubhouse, lying in wait down the base
paths..those are signs of an unstable personality. The guy needs counseling.<<
So does Mota. That, or a smack in the jaw.
Sam Monk
> "PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> news:20030313104042...@mb-fo.aol.com...
[snip]
>
> lying in wait down the base
> paths..
> those are signs of an unstable personality. The guy needs counseling.
>
> AG
why do I suddenly see mikey as the subject of one of those horrific
movies on "The Lifetime Channel?"
Sam Monk
*sigh*
welcome back, PG.
PiazzaGrrl
>>[snip]
*sigh*
welcome back, PG.<<
You know you missed me.
MO
the part of the Dodger's coaching staff. If any fines are levied it
should be against the Dodgers, Mota but not Piazza.
"Cody M. Stumpo" <co...@soda.csua.berkeley.edu> wrote in message news:<b4qhbk$2es0$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>...
Agua Girl
"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
>>
> Yes, and so does Piazza, in all likelihood. That's why it's not likely to
have
> happened. I suspect the upshot would have been a severe chat with mutual
> threats of bodily harm, followed by a good sulk all round.
Well..that isn't exactly what happened last year when he went hunting
for him..unless by severe chat you mean with his hands around Mota's
neck. :-)
> >>Throwing at the hitting, charging the mound...not my favorite part of
the
> game but at least one I recognize as being part of it. Coming back to the
> field, go into the other players clubhouse, lying in wait down the base
> paths..those are signs of an unstable personality. The guy needs
counseling.<<
>
> So does Mota. That, or a smack in the jaw.
No argument here. I for one am embarrassed by Mota's behavior..unlike
the Mets fans who seem to savor Piazza's lack of self control. The only
thing Mike did was make himself look just as bad as Mota (if not worse
since he keeps taking it outside the context of the game).
AG
MO
ยป August 22, 1965: San Francisco's Juan Marichal, batting against LA's
Sandy Koufax, complains that C John Roseboro's return throws are too
close. He then turns and attacks Roseboro with his bat. A 14-minute
brawl ensues before Koufax, Willie Mays, and other peacemakers can
restore order. Roseboro suffers a considerable cut on the head.
Marichal is suspended eight playing days and levied a National
League-record $1,750 fine.
(see http://www.pubdim.net/baseballlibrary/ballplayers/K/Koufax_Sandy.stm)
"Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net> wrote in message news:<vb3ca.99$1B.1...@news3.news.adelphia.net>...
Agua Girl
"MO" <mopins...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ffe9f90a.03031...@posting.google.com...
> Why was Mota allowed to a second inning? There seems to be intent on
> the part of the Dodger's coaching staff. If any fines are levied it
> should be against the Dodgers, Mota but not Piazza.
Why wouldn't Mota go a second inning? There is every reason
to expect him to have to pitch more than one inning during the
regular season and it wasn't the first time he had pitched two
innings this spring. You guys didn't pull Mike out of the game
in order to avoid confrontation...why would they pull Mota?
AG
Agua Girl
"Sam Monk" <sm...@postandcourier.com> wrote in message
news:3E70F52A...@postandcourier.com...
> Agua Girl wrote:
>
> > "PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> > news:20030313104042...@mb-fo.aol.com...
>
> [snip]
>
> >
> > lying in wait down the base
> > paths..
> > those are signs of an unstable personality. The guy needs counseling.
> >
> > AG
>
> why do I suddenly see mikey as the subject of one of those horrific
> movies on "The Lifetime Channel?"
>
either starts waiting until the end of the season (which for him is
Sept.) to go after pitchers. Or worse yet..hiring someone. :-)
Better put Shapiro on retainer now.
AG
Agua Girl
>
> ยป August 22, 1965: San Francisco's Juan Marichal, batting against LA's
> Sandy Koufax, complains that C John Roseboro's return throws are too
> close. He then turns and attacks Roseboro with his bat. A 14-minute
> brawl ensues before Koufax, Willie Mays, and other peacemakers can
> restore order. Roseboro suffers a considerable cut on the head.
> Marichal is suspended eight playing days and levied a National
> League-record $1,750 fine.
1965???? LOL..is that the best you can do. Come one..there has
to be something more recent than that..
I was referring to Mikes penchant for taking it off the field. Mike
had good cause to charge the mound. Leaving the game, and then
waiting for Mota to exit the park, or going after him in the club house..
that's a little outside the norm donchathink? Mota was wrong..and
stupid. Mikey on the other hand is unbalanced. He shouldn't still
be enraged 30 minutes later. You don't go searching for the guy
off the field. What's next? staking out his car? his house? You don't
have to be a lawyer to know there are laws about that kind of stuff.
AG
Ima Pseudonym
>Why was Mota allowed to a second inning? There seems to be intent on
>the part of the Dodger's coaching staff. If any fines are levied it
>should be against the Dodgers, Mota but not Piazza.
This is the third time this spring training Mota had gone out for a
second inning of pitching. He is going to be called on to pitch more
than one during the season.
And while courts usually look the other way about fighting etc on the
playing field, tearing around the Dodger clubhouse looking for Mota
was dangerously near a criminal act for Piazza.
The Baba
>>I was referring to Mikes penchant for taking it off the field. >>
How many of these 'taking it off the field' episodes has he had?
--
*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
>AG says:
>>>I was referring to Mikes penchant for taking it off the field. >>
>
>How many of these 'taking it off the field' episodes has he had?
Two against Mota. How many have other players had? How many players
have done it twice?
Twice now he has sought to attack Mota well after the incident. Last
night there may have been some cause, but even then it was retaliation
for the first incident, when Piazza was totally at fault. And again,
if it was okay for Clemens to be thrown at for long ago incidents, why
shouldn't Mota retaliate for last spring training?
George Cutshaw
of Piazzagrrl, not to mention ChrisTM, I would have hoped it never happened.
"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20030313162816...@mb-dh.aol.com...
Chrisยฎ
>Charging the mound is one thing. I
>suspect Mota deserved that; but to leave
>and then come back? What a couple of
>babies.
Have you ever been hit deliberatley by a 97 MPH fastball?
"I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one
behind me" - General George S. Patton.
Chrisยฎ
>inning? There seems to be intent on the
>part of the Dodger's coaching staff. If any
>fines are levied it should be against the
>Dodgers, Mota but not Piazza.
No. Piazza will be fined. What he did was technically wrong, but
understandable.
Mota should be suspended.
Chrisยฎ
>first place is that it's not the first time that
>Piazza has taken his time to try to attack
>Mota. Maybe if Piazza had been
>suspended the first time this incident
>wouldn't have happened.
It's amazing how people defend the indefensible when the perpetrator of
the indefensible act wears the uniform of a team they happen to like.
Piazza was the victim of an unprovoked beanball. Piazza responds in
anger. A year passes. Piazza is the victim of yet another unprovoked
beanball. Piazza reacts. Will Mota hit Piazza next spring?
Sam Hutcheson
(Chrisลฝ) wrote:
>>And of course, what set up the hbp in the
>>first place is that it's not the first time that
>>Piazza has taken his time to try to attack
>>Mota. Maybe if Piazza had been
>>suspended the first time this incident
>>wouldn't have happened.
>
>It's amazing how people defend the indefensible when the perpetrator of
>the indefensible act wears the uniform of a team they happen to like.
Physician, heal thyself.
>Piazza was the victim of an unprovoked beanball. Piazza responds in
Piazza was not beaned last year. Guillermo Mota had the control of a
2 year old strung out on Taco Bell last spring. He hit Piazza on a
3-0 count in a game in which he recorded 0 outs. Calling last
spring's HBP a "beaning" begs the question of either your memory or
intelligence. Piazza waited in the dugout for an inning and a half
before assaulting Mota after he'd been removed from the game.
Mota had every right to be pissed off about that. *Piazza* instigated
this mess. You don't have to be wearing Dodger blue to figure that
much out. You might need to be wearing black and orange *not* to see,
though.
s/
*****
"...because democracies do not wage aggressive wars." - Richard Perle, Feb. 23, 2003 (MTP)
Bruce W. Goldstein
You will also note that, that was the fourth time Piazza had been hit
that spring. The talk during that spring was that it was "open season"
on Piazza because he had not retaliated in both Clemens' incidents. This
was a one fed up guy. Mota was in the wrong place with the wrong guy.
BWG
Sam Hutcheson
<metf...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> Mota had every right to be pissed off about that. *Piazza* instigated
>> this mess. You don't have to be wearing Dodger blue to figure that
>> much out. You might need to be wearing black and orange *not* to see,
>> though.
>
>You will also note that, that was the fourth time Piazza had been hit
>that spring. The talk during that spring was that it was "open season"
>on Piazza because he had not retaliated in both Clemens' incidents. This
>was a one fed up guy. Mota was in the wrong place with the wrong guy.
Definitely. Piazza was not *completely* irrational last year (just
mostly irrational), but he should have been able to get his act
together before Mota walked past the Mets' dugout, IMHO.
With that said, Mota wasn't exactly acting on the best principles of
rational humanism by holding the grudge all year and taking it up
again this ST. His first brushback served to delivery his message.
He didn't need to come back with the beaner again.
The Baba
>>Two against Mota.>>
Last year he grabbed him while they were still on the field...Not out in the parking
lot, like he was hoping to do last night...Granted, I don't think he should have gone
looking for him after the game, but some people in here are labeling him psycho,
unbalanced, and in need of help...I'm sure a 97 MPH fastball up and in will give
anyone flashbacks to being knocked out, and make one fly off the handle a little, and
it probably didn't help that the big pussy ran like a little girl into the
dugout...It's not like Piazza went looking for him with a gun, or a bat in his
hand...He was pissed, he dwelled on it too much, he did something stupid, and
hopefully it's out of his system (at least until they get back on the filed again
that is ;-))...If it was anyone other than Piazza, it wouldn't even be a blip on the
asbla-d NG map...
--
*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*
Following the rules will not get the job done.
Dev Null
Mota who didn't leave well enough alone by going inside, then
blatantly throws at the body of the guy he's pitching against? Mota is
a pussy and a fraud, and shoudl be kicked out of the league. I'll be
glad to kick both his and your ass if you don't agree.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 08:46:20 -0500, "George Cutshaw"
<cut...@bklyndodgers.org> wrote:
>
>"Ima Pseudonym" <akra...@nospam.net> wrote in message
>news:mrd07vsmml272jgvn...@4ax.com...
>> On 12 Mar 2003 23:05:00 -0800, Sam Monk <sm...@postandcourier.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >A quick note; Piazza didn't just go back to the ballpark
>> >after he left, but literally went into the Dodger clubhouse
>> >looking for Mota.
>> >
>> >MSG cameras caught him on video walking out of the clubhouse
>> >to his car.
>> >
>> >This is even more bizarre than the "First baseline Fiasco"
>> >last year.
>> >
>> >So, during the brawl, the three guys behind Piazza in the
>> >order, burnitz, mcewing (sp?), and wigginston (sp?) all
>> >made kamakazii-like attacks at Mota. Mota back pedalled
>> >and was herded into the dogout by the coaches. Burnitz
>> >made it all the way to the dugout before being restrained
>> >by three or four dodgers. Mcewing and wiginston wound up
>> >on their backs under several dodgers each. The other 40
>> >mets were no-shows.
>> >
>> >Piazza looked like the energizer bunny with a 12 volt
>> >automobile battery attached, but he did make the
>> >universal "you're a p*ssy" sign at Mota after he had made
>> >it into the dugout. Gotta admit, that made me laugh.
>>
>> I would expect both to be suspended for this - Mota for throwing at
>> him, and Piazza for charging the mound, but especially for going
>> looking for him after having had a chance to cool down. Although at
>> least Piazza for the first time in his career did actually stand up
>> for himself. If he had ever done it against Clemens then maybe he
>> wouldn't have felt his manhood questioned last spring training.
>>
>> Who's in charge of handing out suspensions now? It used to be Frank
>> Robinson, but he's no longer with the commissioner's office.
>
>
>Bob Watson, who is a very nice guy. I hope he takes it easy on Mota.
>
Dev Null
Mota deserves to have his ass kicked, and who better than the guy he
intentionally beaned doing the kicking?
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 15:55:41 GMT, "Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net>
wrote:
>
>"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
>news:20030313104042...@mb-fo.aol.com...
>> Ima:
>> >>And of course, what set up the hbp in the first place is that it's not
>the
>> first time that Piazza has taken his time to try to attack Mota. Maybe if
>> Piazza had been suspended the first time this incident
>> wouldn't have happened.<<
>>
>> And then there's the idea that if Tracy hadn't rather suspiciously held
>Mota
>> over for a second inning, it certainly wouldn't have happened. Is that
>setup I
>> smell?
>>
>> 97 mph pitch. Right up next to his head. Mota's not a good enough
>pitcher to
>> pull that shit and get away with it.
>
>No..he isn't ...and I think most of us recognize what Mota did was not only
>ill advised but wrong. As for holding him over...get real. Tracy isn't
>gunning
>for Mike and he sure isn't out to get his pitchers stalked. It's spring
>training...
>lots of pitchers are going two and three innings now. You're totally
>reaching
>there.
>I am curious...are you even the least bit concerned about Mikes actions?or
>are you too big a fan to recognize the seriousness of coming back after the
>fact? What if he had found Mota? You do realize that had he actually
>assualted him in the clubhouse he could very well have gone to jail for it.
>Throwing at the hitting, charging the mound...not my favorite part of the
>game but at least one I recognize as being part of it. Coming back to the
>field, go into the other players clubhouse, lying in wait down the base
Dev Null
ex-teammates. Wake up.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 12:02:02 -0500, Sam Monk
<sm...@postandcourier.com> wrote:
>The Baba wrote:
>
>> AG says:
>> >>those are signs of an unstable personality. >>
>>
>> I see it as a sign of one very pissed of guy...There's a fine line between unstable
>> and royally pissed off, and I don't think Pizza Man crossed it...It ain't the first
>> time someone went looking for a guy after a game, and I'm sure it won't be the last
>> time...
>>
>
>but, more to her point, this is the second time out of a _total_ of two altercations
>in his entire career that he had an initial reaction, and then a *much* more severe
>secondary reaction after some time had passed. Most folks settle down after 30
>minutes or so; with this guy, his initial reaction is simply a starting point. The high
>water mark -- or high temper mark -- is "yet to be determined".
>
>I'm with AG here. "Sumthin' scrange 'bout 'dat boy."
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
> Easy? What the hell should he take it "easy" on a coward like
>Mota who didn't leave well enough alone by going inside, then
>blatantly throws at the body of the guy he's pitching against? Mota is
>a pussy and a fraud, and shoudl be kicked out of the league. I'll be
>glad to kick both his and your ass if you don't agree.
By that standard Piazza should be kicked out of the league, since
storming into the Dodger clubhouse and searching for Mota is clearly
against league rules (and against the law, I suppose).
Oh, and it is against giganews' policy to post from them and threaten
violence. If George complained, you'd stand a good chance of losing
your account.
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
> Uh, dumbass, there is a history between these two
>ex-teammates. Wake up.
Um, dumbass, Mota and Piazza were never teammates.
Thanks for playing, however.
Ima Pseudonym
(Chrisลฝ) wrote:
>>Why was Mota allowed to a second
>>inning? There seems to be intent on the
>>part of the Dodger's coaching staff. If any
>>fines are levied it should be against the
>>Dodgers, Mota but not Piazza.
>
>No. Piazza will be fined. What he did was technically wrong, but
>understandable.
Actually, baseball cannot allow players to storm into opposing
clubhouses looking for players. Even more so when the player who did
it was fined last season for waylaying Mota. Evans has already filed
a formal complaint on it.
Piazza will be suspended this time.
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
>Ima says:
>>>Two against Mota.>>
>
>Last year he grabbed him while they were still on the field..
Piazza left the field, went to the clubhouse, waited a few innings,
and then came looking for Mota after he was leaving the dugout.
That's radically different than charging him when he was on the field.
That shows a premeditation, and a willingness to go away from the
field of play to get revenge.
.Not out in the parking
>lot, like he was hoping to do last night...Granted, I don't think he should have gone
>looking for him after the game, but some people in here are labeling him psycho,
>unbalanced, and in need of help...I'm sure a 97 MPH fastball up and in will give
>anyone flashbacks to being knocked out, and make one fly off the handle a little, and
>it probably didn't help that the big pussy ran like a little girl into the
>dugout...It's not like Piazza went looking for him with a gun, or a bat in his
>hand...He was pissed, he dwelled on it too much, he did something stupid, and
>hopefully it's out of his system (at least until they get back on the filed again
>that is ;-))...If it was anyone other than Piazza, it wouldn't even be a blip on the
>asbla-d NG map...
And when he's suspended, it will be another blip. Baseball can't just
fine him this time, since he was fined for last year's incident, and
he escalated it this time.
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
> If Piazza had found Mota, then he would have kicked his ass.
>Mota deserves to have his ass kicked, and who better than the guy he
>intentionally beaned doing the kicking?
Actually, Piazza deserved something, the way he waylaid Mota last
spring training. And throwing at him is an acceptable method, since
that's what the Mets did to Clemens (twice, I might add) for the sake
of revenge. The thug can't have it be okay for the Mets to throw at
Clemens, and not have it be okay for the player he attacked last year
to throw at him.
Ima Pseudonym
(Chrisลฝ) wrote:
>>I am embarrassed for Piazza...really.
>>Charging the mound is one thing. I
>>suspect Mota deserved that; but to leave
>>and then come back? What a couple of
>>babies.
>
>Have you ever been hit deliberatley by a 97 MPH fastball?
No, but then I've never laid in wait for somebody and attacked them
either. I've also never had a teammate throw at somebody for the sake
of retaliation, like Piazza had his teammate throw at Clemens.
Mota should have taken the high ground. He didn't, which is bad.
Which doesn't mean that Piazza didn't have it coming, and that Piazza
didn't act like a thug last night.
Gnork
"Chrisยฎ" <headba...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:9366-3E7...@storefull-2235.public.lawson.webtv.net...
> >And of course, what set up the hbp in the
> >first place is that it's not the first time that
> >Piazza has taken his time to try to attack
> >Mota. Maybe if Piazza had been
> >suspended the first time this incident
> >wouldn't have happened.
>
> It's amazing how people defend the indefensible when the perpetrator of
> the indefensible act wears the uniform of a team they happen to like.
>
> Piazza was the victim of an unprovoked beanball. Piazza responds in
> anger. A year passes. Piazza is the victim of yet another unprovoked
> beanball. Piazza reacts. Will Mota hit Piazza next spring?
Neither one were beanballs, which by definition hits the batter in the head. I
have no doubt Mota threw at him intentionally THIS TIME. Last year it may well
have been an accident. Piazza overreacted last year. Mota remembered and
drilled him this year. The moral of the story: If you get hit by a pitch, drop
your bat and trot down to first base. Piazza violated that last year, got hit
again for his troubles this year and overreacted even more. Mota should not
have done it. Piazza should not have gone after him. This should be the end of
it.
>
> "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one
> behind me" - General George S. Patton. LOL, Patton ought to know.
>
Agua Girl
"Dev Null" <Dev...@init0.org> wrote in message
news:mlg27v0063jufi5lh...@4ax.com...
> Easy? What the hell should he take it "easy" on a coward like
> Mota who didn't leave well enough alone by going inside, then
> blatantly throws at the body of the guy he's pitching against? Mota is
> a pussy and a fraud, and shoudl be kicked out of the league. I'll be
> glad to kick both his and your ass if you don't agree.
ricky????? nah..couldn't be..neither ricky nor Piazza would
recognize a pussy if they saw one..must be some other moron troll.
AG (who can't believe she just used that word)
Agua Girl
"The Baba" <hoo...@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bkbca.4519$yr5...@news2.west.cox.net...
Attacking someone on the field AFTER THE FACT is still doing so after
the fact. You keep chalking it up to anger about being hit..well lots of
batters
get hit and I don't know of any of them that lie in wait for the pitcher
hours (or even 1 hour) afterwards. That my friend is psychotic unbalanced
behavior. One has to ask why Mike can't better control his emotions.
Lots of better pitchers have hit Mike, lots of better hitters than Mike have
been thrown at. Mota may be a chicken sh*% but Mike has some
serious issues.
AG
Agua Girl
"Sam Hutcheson" <sigma.alpha...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:2tc27vkoad7mbih6b...@4ax.com...
I have read yet. I agree completely. Mota isn't a good enough
pitcher to waste pitches and he isn't "important" enough for
Piazza to waste energy on. I am sure the Dodgers will deal
with Mota..assuming he even makes the team. Sadly, I see
the Mets and the Mets fans applauding Mikes irrational
behavior. Mike isn't the first guy to be hbp but he is the
first one that I ever heard that charged the pitcher hours later.
This is not normal behavior for Mike. Being hit 5 times in
ST isn't reason enough. (How many pitchers have complete
control during the season much less during ST) Something
is wrong with him.
AG (wondering what the male equivalent of PMS is)
Agua Girl
> >I am embarrassed for Piazza...really.
> >Charging the mound is one thing. I
> >suspect Mota deserved that; but to leave
> >and then come back? What a couple of
> >babies.
>
> Have you ever been hit deliberatley by a 97 MPH fastball?
Is Piazza the only hitter who has ever been deliberately hit
by a 97mph (mota throws that hard????damn) fastball?
Cuz he is the only one I know of that goes after the opposing
pitcher hours later. Seriously guys..where do you draw the line?
No one has answered that. If it is ok to wait a couple of innings
and catch him going towards the bull pen, is it ok to wait by
his car in the parking lot? If you can go looking for him in his
own club house can you also go to his home? I am shocked
that you don't see problem here. How would you feel if Mota
waited until Mikey was exciting the local burger joint and then
drilled him with a "97mph" fastball?
AG
Grobins
"Dev Null" <Dev...@init0.org> wrote
> Uh, dumbass, there is a history between these two
> ex-teammates. Wake up.
-- and you just established a history of stupid guesses.
Nope. If you're going to call people dumbasses, get your facts straight.
Meanwhile, just go back to rec.games.video.arcade.collecting.
Traveler
> "PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> news:20030313104042...@mb-fo.aol.com...
> > Ima:
> the
> > first time that Piazza has taken his time to try to attack Mota. Maybe if
> > Piazza had been suspended the first time this incident
> > wouldn't have happened.<<
> >
> Mota
> > over for a second inning, it certainly wouldn't have happened. Is that
> setup I
> > smell?
> >
> pitcher to
> > pull that shit and get away with it.
>
> No..he isn't ...and I think most of us recognize what Mota did was not only
> ill advised but wrong. As for holding him over...get real. Tracy isn't
> gunning
> for Mike and he sure isn't out to get his pitchers stalked. It's spring
> training...
> lots of pitchers are going two and three innings now. You're totally
> reaching
> there.
> I am curious...are you even the least bit concerned about Mikes actions?or
> are you too big a fan to recognize the seriousness of coming back after the
> fact? What if he had found Mota? You do realize that had he actually
> assualted him in the clubhouse he could very well have gone to jail for it.
> Throwing at the hitting, charging the mound...not my favorite part of the
> game but at least one I recognize as being part of it. Coming back to the
> field, go into the other players clubhouse, lying in wait down the base
> paths..
> those are signs of an unstable personality. The guy needs counseling.
>
> AG
Please don't talk anymore. I find you more than pretty stupid. You've
obviously never been beaned with a 90+ fastball near your spine. Why
don't you go get a lobotomy...if you haven't had one already.
Ben Robbins
Since when did we allow baseball to become so darned politically correct?
It's always been part of the game. Successful pitchers need to pitch inside.
Sometimes they hit players unintentionally, and sometimes they throw a
purpose pitch. And in both cases, sometimes batters rush the mound without
seeking mediation or a psychoanalyst.
ChuckPro
wrote:
> If Piazza had found Mota, then he would have kicked his ass.
>Mota deserves to have his ass kicked, and who better than the guy he
>intentionally beaned doing the kicking?
>
>
>
Mota would have gotten his ass kicked, in his own clubhouse,
surrounded by the rest of the Dodgers?
If the setting was reversed, I can imagine the rest of the Mets,
peering red-eyed through the clouds of smoke as the confrontation
ensues, rousing themselves to a collective "Oh wow, man"...
-chuckpro
"Not all the treasures of the world, so far as I believe, could
have induced me to support an offensive war, for I think it
murder; but if a thief breaks into my house, burns and destroys my
property, and kills or threatens to kill me, or those that are in
it, and to 'bind me in all cases whatsoever' to his absolute will,
am I to suffer it?" --Thomas Paine
Ima Pseudonym
And do they also seek to attack the pitcher later on, away from the
field? Because that's the second time Piazza's done it.
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
>
>Just one of the typical responses of chess club geeks who have
>probably never played sports in real life.
What an asshole you are. You don't know anything about me, except
that I'm rational and you, apparently, are not.
>You fucktards seem to
>forget that Piazza *didn't* catch Mota.
Which is relevant how?
> Had the little coward not
>escaped Mike would've roughed him up a little and that would have been
>the end of it right there and then. Personally, I am happy that Mike
>didn't find Mota in the clubhouse because it might have escalated to a
>seriousness beyond sports, but I can completely understand why he
>went.
So not having had a chance this time to rough him up, he went berserk
and sought to assault him elsewhere. Which is the action of a thug.
> For you to call him a thug is a typical bitch response and I can
>only hope you and Aquagirl somehow meet painful, untimely deaths.
No real need to comment on this, I suppose. It shows that you have
the same thug mentality as Piazza, Gambino, etc.
Slowhand
administration. And if you think this is all, you're wrong. It will continue
to get much worse. Soon the player will have to ask permission to take a
base on a walk or hbp.
BOB COSTAS FOR COMMISSIONER
Ima Pseudonym
wrote:
What is politically correct about being concerned about violence in
sports spilling away from the playing field?
Slowhand
that were the case then Football and Hockey, rugby, lacrosse, and many other
sports would be outlawed.
Baseball, whether some may believe it or not, is a game of strategy. There
were many times that player had been hit intentionally or not but it was the
way they did it that is important.
Mickey Mantle was hit many times after hitting a home run. But he wasn't hit
in the head. That's the point here. Mota came too close to hitting Piazza in
the head. I don't think that the situation would have been the same if Mota
hit him in the thigh.
Too many people are trying to pacify sports and it's going to far. If a
pitcher throws an inside curve that gets away and hits a player why should
there be a reprimand? It was an accident. None of these pitchers are Nolan
Ryan or Steve Carlton. Even they didn't have pin-point precision. So what is
the alternative? A pitcher can only pitch if he thows underhand?
As for the violence spilling away from the playing field this is my opinion
and you can take it or leave it. The two of them should handle it like men.
I don't believe that Piazza should have gone into the clubhouse looking for
Mota if that is true. I really don't believe that because I only believe
about 5% of what the press reports anyway. For all we know Piazza could have
been looking for a lost contact and a Dodger employee made the rest up. I
don't know and I don't care. All I personally care about is how my team is
going to do this season. I leave the rest up to the players and coaches,
etc.
Remember this: Political Correctness in all of its forms is NOT A LAW. It is
a fad like Britney Spears and wearing your underwear outside of your pants.
It too will soon fade away.
LETS GO METS
Agua Girl
"Traveler" <hin...@student.wpunj.edu> wrote in message
> Please don't talk anymore. I find you more than pretty stupid. You've
> obviously never been beaned with a 90+ fastball near your spine. Why
> don't you go get a lobotomy...if you haven't had one already.
wow...what sharp wit...what a cutting repartee...I am humbled.
Guess what homer....Mikey isn't the first hitter ever drilled by
a fastball...not even the best hitter ever drilled. It happens and
if he can't handle it than he should either back off the plate a little
bit or maybe get out of the game altogether. What is it with the
Piazza fan club? Ya'all come crawlin out of the woodwork
ignoring 100 years of precedent and acting like Mikey gets
to rewrite the rules just because he is ...well..Mikey. Get over
it already. You don't get to attack the opposing pitcher
after the game or off the field. It's like every other baseball
scenario. Once the next pitch is thrown the preceding play
is done. Mike Piazza is the only one who doesn't get that...him
and the dozens of fans so busy blindly worshipping at his feet
that they can't see where he might be wrong.
Get a life.
AG
Agua Girl
"Ben Robbins" <berg...@australia.edu> wrote in message
news:b4t5pj$23cmdl$1...@ID-15187.news.dfncis.de...
>
> Since when did we allow baseball to become so darned politically correct?
> It's always been part of the game. Successful pitchers need to pitch
inside.
> Sometimes they hit players unintentionally, and sometimes they throw a
> purpose pitch. And in both cases, sometimes batters rush the mound without
> seeking mediation or a psychoanalyst.
I have no issue with him rushing the mound. I don't like that aspect
of the game ..but I recognize it as having been a part of the game
for a long time. What's worrisome to me is the incident last year
where he waylaid Mota innings later as he left the game ( a much
smaller Mota) and the club house incident this year. It bothers me
and it should bother you too. Mike's done it twice and I have never
heard of anyone else doing it once. Where do you draw the line?
If it's ok to go into the club house a couple of innings later is it ok
to go to his home a couple of days later? Do the hitters get to start
hiring "protection" to take care of pitchers that throw at them?
It has to stay on the field..within the context of the game. If Mikey
had left it there like every other hitter before him than we wouldn't
be having this debate.
AG
Agua Girl
"Slowhand" <CBe...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Ijzca.61439$lW3.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
>> Mickey Mantle was hit many times after hitting a home run. But he wasn't
hit
> in the head. That's the point here. Mota came too close to hitting Piazza
in
> the head. I don't think that the situation would have been the same if
Mota
> hit him in the thigh.
So what was Mikes excuse last year. Mota was wild, hadn't thrown
a strike yet and the ball was a breaking ball that just came inside.
Wasn't even near his head. Mike laid in wait and collared him
(literally) innings later when Mota was leaving the field. This isn't
about how close it came to his head (btw..how close is his back
to his head? Never considered Mike a hunch back)
> Too many people are trying to pacify sports and it's going to far. If a
> pitcher throws an inside curve that gets away and hits a player why should
> there be a reprimand? It was an accident. None of these pitchers are Nolan
> Ryan or Steve Carlton. Even they didn't have pin-point precision. So what
is
> the alternative? A pitcher can only pitch if he thows underhand?
>
> As for the violence spilling away from the playing field this is my
opinion
> and you can take it or leave it. The two of them should handle it like
men.
> I don't believe that Piazza should have gone into the clubhouse looking
for
> Mota if that is true. I really don't believe that because I only believe
> about 5% of what the press reports anyway. For all we know Piazza could
have
> been looking for a lost contact and a Dodger employee made the rest up. I
> don't know and I don't care. All I personally care about is how my team is
> going to do this season. I leave the rest up to the players and coaches,
> etc.
Don't believe it if you want but Evans, several Dodger players, a couple of
club house employee's and several reporters all saw Piazza come into the
club house asking (yelling) "where is Mota?". The press blows a lot of
stuff out of porportion for sure...this just wan't one of them.
And..btw..this
is the second time. Lets not forget last year.
> Remember this: Political Correctness in all of its forms is NOT A LAW. It
is
> a fad like Britney Spears and wearing your underwear outside of your
pants.
> It too will soon fade away.
Well...I don't see it as a matter of political correctness. I see it as a
disturbing trend that needs to be nipped in the bud. You can't have
players taking these things outside the game. What will happen to the
game if hitters get to go around beating up pitchers because they hit
them during a game a couple of hours or even days ago? If Mike can
do it, why not Bonds, Sosa, or every other hitter that ever gets hit?
And then, what about the catcher that gets upended blocking the
plate. Does he wait around after the game for the guy who mowed
him down or visa versa?
Nope, I don't see this as being about "political correctness" at all.
AG
P Troy
"Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net> wrote:
> I have no issue with him rushing the mound. I don't like that aspect
> of the game ..but I recognize it as having been a part of the game
> for a long time. What's worrisome to me is the incident last year
> where he waylaid Mota innings later as he left the game ( a much
> smaller Mota) and the club house incident this year. It bothers me
> and it should bother you too.
It bothers me. I'm not a professional baseball player. Possibly after
you've had several 97+ -mph fastballs thrown at you, plus a shattered
bat, and been criticized for every reaction, no matter what it was, you
might feel differently?
> Mike's done it twice and I have never
> heard of anyone else doing it once. Where do you draw the line?
> If it's ok to go into the club house a couple of innings later is it ok
> to go to his home a couple of days later?
It's not okay. Unfortunately, Piazza seems to be slow to anger and slow
to recover. Some people are suggesting this was some kind of
premeditated act, or that he had plenty of time to calm down, and is
therefore not entitled to a display of temper. Again, none of these
people are speaking from his specific experience, and can't say how
they'd react.
> Do the hitters get to start
> hiring "protection" to take care of pitchers that throw at them?
Not unprecedented in other sports.
> It has to stay on the field..within the context of the game. If Mikey
> had left it there like every other hitter before him than we wouldn't
> be having this debate.
Every other hitter before him? Are you joking? Yeah, this is a
developing trend, but are you seriously suggesting Piazza's actions are
a cause, rather than a symptom, of this trend?
And if Mota hadn't waited _a year_, allowing a questionable grudge to
fester, throwing at the man more than once, and then lacking the courage
in his convictions to simply stand there and face Piazza, we wouldn't
be having this debate. No matter what Piazza may have done to earn those
throws (and the LA press and Tracy's accounts leave in doubt what he
actually did when you compare them with the videos of last year's
incident), if Mota had simply stood there with his arms at his sides,
and Piazza still had found it necessary to assault him, we'd be
discussing Piazza's retirement and possibly his prison sentence, right
now.
At this point this debate is just a "he said, she said" thing, and
nobody is ever going to clearly establish that one side is absolutely
right and the other, wrong. Both players did wrong, and that's a symptom
of a changing sport. Players are now able to commit acts which, off the
field, would be considered assault, and actionable, if not clearly
criminal.
Therefore I think we should lock up Mota for throwing his glove so
viciously at Mike. That meanie! ;-)
--
Phil Troy
Agua Girl
"P Troy" <phil.d...@atverizon.dot.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:phil.dot.troy-124...@news.bellatlantic.net...
> In article <LeAca.384$1B.3...@news3.news.adelphia.net>,
> "Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > I have no issue with him rushing the mound. I don't like that aspect
> > of the game ..but I recognize it as having been a part of the game
> > for a long time. What's worrisome to me is the incident last year
> > where he waylaid Mota innings later as he left the game ( a much
> > smaller Mota) and the club house incident this year. It bothers me
> > and it should bother you too.
>
> It bothers me. I'm not a professional baseball player. Possibly after
> you've had several 97+ -mph fastballs thrown at you, plus a shattered
> bat, and been criticized for every reaction, no matter what it was, you
> might feel differently?
I might..but if I was concerned with being hit by a 97+mph fast ball
I probably wouldn't have started playing the game. Eckstein lead
the league in HBP last year...27 times 27!!! How many times did
he go after the pitcher during the game much less after the fact. I
don't expect him to handle it like I would, I expect him to handle it
as well as the 180 hitters that were hit more than he was last year.
> > Mike's done it twice and I have never
> > heard of anyone else doing it once. Where do you draw the line?
> > If it's ok to go into the club house a couple of innings later is it ok
> > to go to his home a couple of days later?
>
> It's not okay. Unfortunately, Piazza seems to be slow to anger and slow
> to recover. Some people are suggesting this was some kind of
> premeditated act, or that he had plenty of time to calm down, and is
> therefore not entitled to a display of temper. Again, none of these
> people are speaking from his specific experience, and can't say how
> they'd react.
Well I would hope they would react the way the rest of the people
playing the game would react. You can't equate my responses with
someone who does this for a living. Shit happens...in baseball, HBP
is part of that shit. BTW...I don't think charging the mound is
premeditated, I *know waiting down the side lines for Mota to leave
the game last year, and then going into the club house this year looking
for Mota was premeditated. He was no longer reacting to the situation
at hand since that had ended.
>
> > Do the hitters get to start
> > hiring "protection" to take care of pitchers that throw at them?
>
> Not unprecedented in other sports.
The idea of making baseball just like other sports is chilling.
If I want to see cromagnum displays of aggression I will watch
hockey.
> > It has to stay on the field..within the context of the game. If Mikey
> > had left it there like every other hitter before him than we wouldn't
> > be having this debate.
>
> Every other hitter before him? Are you joking? Yeah, this is a
> developing trend, but are you seriously suggesting Piazza's actions are
> a cause, rather than a symptom, of this trend?
No, I am suggesting that Piazza's actions (taking it off the field) are the
problem. There is no cause and effect here. Mota was stupid, Mota
threw at Piazza. Mota should and will be suspended. He is also not the
first pitcher or last to do that. I don't like that part of the game but it
has been a part of the game for a long time.
Piazza charged the mound. Piazza shouldn't be suspended or even
fined for that. Now..when the hitter starts tackling the pitcher or
striking him in any way. Suspension...end of story. ( you can't have
them all assume intent every time. I still think this was the first time
Mota intentionally hit Piazza).
The laying in wait while he left the field and going after him in the club
house is new. I didn't hear of anyone doing that last year and hope
I don't hear of it this year. That is what is disturbing to me. It's
"new". It is it's own trend and yes..Mike is absolutely responsible
for it since he is the only one doing it.
> And if Mota hadn't waited _a year_, allowing a questionable grudge to
> fester, throwing at the man more than once, and then lacking the courage
> in his convictions to simply stand there and face Piazza, we wouldn't
> be having this debate. No matter what Piazza may have done to earn those
> throws (and the LA press and Tracy's accounts leave in doubt what he
> actually did when you compare them with the videos of last year's
> incident), if Mota had simply stood there with his arms at his sides,
> and Piazza still had found it necessary to assault him, we'd be
> discussing Piazza's retirement and possibly his prison sentence, right
> now.
So Mikey is being abolished of taking what should be left on the
field...off the field...because Mota didn't stand there and get beat up
like a man????? OK. At least I see where ya'all are coming from.
The hitter has a right to his anger and needs to be allowed to vent it
physically on the pitcher. First off, I agree about carrying a grudge
a year but I think the grudge was for being collared off the field
after the fact, not for what happened on the field last year. You talk
about how I would react to being hit with a 97mph fast ball..how
would you react to having a bigger stronger guy charging at you
with intent to do bodily harm? Would you stand there with your hands
at your sides knowing he will get in trouble after he beats the stuffing
out of you? Mota is obviously a coward. (me too), but that doesn't
give Mikey the right to re-write the rules.
> At this point this debate is just a "he said, she said" thing, and
> nobody is ever going to clearly establish that one side is absolutely
> right and the other, wrong. Both players did wrong, and that's a symptom
> of a changing sport. Players are now able to commit acts which, off the
> field, would be considered assault, and actionable, if not clearly
> criminal.
Uhhh..but you said they would be considered assault off the field. Thing
is, Mikey took it off the field. Last year he assaulted Mota, this year
he didn't find him but sure went out of his way to do so. Actionable?
criminal? I don't give a rats ass if he is slow to temper. He needs know
that he isn't the only guy ever to get hit. Heck..he isn't even hit the
most.
What...a whopping 3 times last year.
> Therefore I think we should lock up Mota for throwing his glove so
> viciously at Mike. That meanie! ;-)
Well sure...cept that actually happened on the field during the course
of the incident so if we did that we would have to lock up ever other
player who got involved. I consider the two things separate incidents
even though the first led to the second. Mota threw a Mikey, Mikey
charged Mota...(mota runs like a girl). Fine and suspension for Mota.
Mikey maybe gets a little hand slap for charging the mound. Kudo's
to both teams for keeping it from escalating. End story except the
fans are abuzz with jokes about Mota.
Second incident..Mikey going after Mota in the club house. Suspension,
anger management counseling and the fans are more abuzz about
Mikey's bizarre behavior. I think Mikes problem is he hasn't
been hit enough. (not saying he should get hit more). He takes
it way to personal. It's not about Mota trying to dominate a batter,
it's about Mota trying to ruin his career and maybe disfigure him so
he can't act. I don't mean he thinks that consciously, I mean I think
he takes it way more personal than anyone else. Why else would
a guy who is hit so rarely be so aggressive about it, and by rarely
I mean every 243 times at bat versus say Burnitz who is hit every
72 times at bat or Eckstein who has been hit 48 times in just two
years. I don't know if he would be less aggressive if he was hit
more often or if he would be in jail by now. I just know that he
needs to learn how to deal with it in the same way all the other
hitters in the league do.
AG
Ima Pseudonym
<Bear...@ix.spamoff.netcom.com> wrote:
>And sometimes the batter's actions are 100% justified. I don't
>approve of what Piazza did to Mota last spring, but it seems to me
>that if it's okay for a pitcher to throw at Piazza in anger over an
>incident that happened a year ago,
Like it was okay for Clemens to be thrown at for incidents for years
past?
then it's equally fair to allow
>Piazza to respond in kind to a pitcher who was clearly taking
>potshots at him.
And the objections haven't been to his charging the mound at the time.
It's that this is the second time Piazza has waited and tried to take
it off of the field. Charging the mound is one thing. Leaving the
field, and then later on going to attack the pitcher (as Piazza has
done twice now) is the problem. That is what is going to lead to his
suspension tomorrow. And that is what has people questioning his
stability.
Ben Robbins
"Barry S. Mandel" <Bear...@ix.spamoff.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:vfj67vghhb60kccm2...@4ax.com...
>
> who's trying to throw at Mike Piazza?
>
In other words, there are some people who are trying to smooth over what
they see as gruffness in the game. Meanwhile, networks such as ESPN are
trying to exploit the ugliest most isolated incidents to their fullest. But
neither side sees the beauty of the - sometimes heated - struggle between
pitcher and batter for the inside of the plate. :)
I snipped the rest, since we're in basic agreement about everything else.
Ima Pseudonym
<Bear...@ix.spamoff.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>I'm responding to a post about perceived "political correctness"
>in baseball, not a post about Mike Piazza's behavior. If you want
>to take Piazza to task for going into an opposing dugout, that's
>your prerogative, but it has nothing to do with the issue that I was
>addressing.
And the post about political correctness was in response to a post of
mine about Piazza taking it off field. So what I was talking about is
indeed relevant. He was saying that complaints about Piazza's
behavior were acts of PC, but PC is irrelevant to objecting to
athletes engaging in violence away from the playing field.
Agua Girl
> That's all well and good until somebody gets hurt. I've got no
> problem at all with pitching inside or the odd brushback pitch, but
> I _do_ have a problem with pitchers who think they can throw at
> people with impunity and that it's the batter's responsibility to get
> the hell out of the way. As I said, a baseball traveling at 90+ mph
> in the direction of another human being is a potentially deadly
> weapon. It's not too much to ask that the person in possession of
> that baseball should use it responsibly.
Not all hit batters are intentional, in fact most aren't. I truly
don't believe Mota intentional hit Piazza last year, his control
wasn't that good...and yet Piazza went after him anyway.
When you pitch inside, try and protect the plate against
hitters who are standing in on the plate..then odds are someone
will get hit. Pitching is an awesome responsibility but it is also
a difficult task. Pitchers who throw upwards of 95mph are
often wild because it requires so much to throw that hard
you often sacrafice accuracy. Your assumption that
pitchers are "throwing at" batters is just that, an assumption.
Certainly it happens but not nearly as often as your statement
would apply.
AG
Agua Girl
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 20:26:16 GMT, "Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net>
> >
> >> That's all well and good until somebody gets hurt. I've got no
> >> problem at all with pitching inside or the odd brushback pitch, but
> >> I _do_ have a problem with pitchers who think they can throw at
> >> people with impunity and that it's the batter's responsibility to get
> >> the hell out of the way. As I said, a baseball traveling at 90+ mph
> >> in the direction of another human being is a potentially deadly
> >> weapon. It's not too much to ask that the person in possession of
> >> that baseball should use it responsibly.
>
> >Not all hit batters are intentional, in fact most aren't.
>
> I don't think I even addressed the element of intent above. The
> only thing I've said is that a pitcher should be held accountable
> for his own actions, and that "pitching inside" should not be used
> as an excuse to cast aside all regard for the safety of the hitter.
Held accountable how? They already award the batter the base..
explain how you expect them to be accountable for their actions?
> >I truly don't believe Mota intentional hit Piazza last year, his control
> >wasn't that good...and yet Piazza went after him anyway.
>
> I'm not interested in what happened last year. I'm interested in
> what happened _this_ year. Do you really believe that there was
> no element of intent with respect to the _two_ pitches that Mota
> threw in Piazza's direction the other day? Brian Jordan certainly
> appeared to think so, judging from his post-game comments.
I guess I just didn't understand what you meant by "accountable".
It sounds as if your making a case for the hitter to charge the mound.
Last year, Mike held Mota accountable even though the pitch was
unintentional...and while I know you don't care about last year it directly
led up to what happened this year. Once, unintentional, once intentional..
Mikes response was the same. So..if it doesn't matter what the intent
was...if the pitcher just accidentally hits the batter...does this give the
batter the right to go after the pitcher? and if that isn't what your
implying then what "accountability" do you seek? Apart from awarding
the base of course.
> >When you pitch inside, try and protect the plate against
> >hitters who are standing in on the plate..then odds are someone
> >will get hit.
>
> Which means that, as a pitcher, you're consciously assuming this risk
> when you undertake to do so. Knowing that, I don't think it's fair
> to suggest that the pitcher is blameless when the batter gets hit.
Of course the pitcher isn't blameless...but if the intent was just to
pitch the ball which is his job than the only accounting he should have
to do is allowing hitters the base. I just don't get what your asking
for. Do you want the pitcher to beg mercy? public apologies?
> >Pitching is an awesome responsibility but it is also
> >a difficult task. Pitchers who throw upwards of 95mph are
> >often wild because it requires so much to throw that hard
> >you often sacrifice accuracy.
>
> So what? Why should a pitcher's inability to control the baseball
> absolve him from responsibility if he hits someone? AFAIC, you're
> making my argument for me -- if anything, a pitcher who throws that
> hard should be taking greater care not to injure someone when he
> elects to come inside. And despite what you seem to be
> suggesting, it _is_ possible for a pitcher to have some regard for the
> safety of the batter and still be successful. Walter Johnson, for
> instance, was reportedly terrified about the prospect of killing
> somebody with his fastball, and he still managed to do all right for
> himself on the mound.
What greater care? What exactly are you asking for? For them to try
not to hit the batter? well...most of the time...99% of the time they do
try "not to hit the batter". I don't think you can expect much more care
than that. You are taking the isolated instances of a pitcher specifically
throwing at a hitter and applying it to all of the game. Mota probably
did try and hit Piazza this year, and he will get suspended for it. He will
be held accountable..but you can't try and hold every pitcher accountable
for every hit batter other than allowing the batter the base..and if you
are only talking about this one isolated instance than what should be done
when hitters try and hold the pitcher accountable even when it wasn't
intentional?
> >Your assumption that pitchers are "throwing at" batters is just that,
> >an assumption.
>
> I'm not assuming anything. What I'm saying is that a pitcher should
> understand that he's taking a risk when he elects to come inside
> on a hitter. Frankly, I don't see why that should be such a
> controversial position.
Of course they are taking a risk. Which is why they award the batter the
base. It's not controversial..what's controversial is what that risk
should entail. So, should the "risk" they take include a beating by the
batter? Again, not sure what exactly you are getting at.
>
> >Certainly it happens but not nearly as often as your statement
> >would apply.
>
> Once again, I have no idea what you're responding to here. My
> post said absolutely nothing about the frequency with which this
> supposedly occurs. You're reading all sorts of things into
> my post that simply aren't there.
That's because it wasn't very clear. I apologize if I misinterpreted it
but you didn't explain what the "risk" was so I have to assume.
Make it clear. When you say the pitcher should have to assume
the risk when he pitches inside...what exactly do you mean. He already
loses the battle at the plate since the batter takes a base, it goes on
his permanent record as hbp...<g>, if it is believed by the league to
be intentional he gets fined and/or suspended... what further punishment or
accountability are you suggesting? Because this was about the hitters
retaliation then I assumed it was the whole charging the mound lying in
wait thing but if that's not it...tell me what it is? How do you want them
to pay for their sin of coming inside with a pitch?
AG
Mike De Leon
What's in the pipe you've been smoking?
Dan Evans was in the clubhouse as well as several sports writers and
Evans called Phillips about it, who acknoledged that he spoke to Evans.
that enough proof for you?
>
> Remember this: Political Correctness in all of its forms is NOT A LAW. It is
> a fad like Britney Spears and wearing your underwear outside of your pants.
> It too will soon fade away.
>
> LETS GO METS
>
>
--
"I am just a worthless liar
I am just an imbecile
I will only complicate you
Trust in me and fall as well
I will work to elevate you
Just enough to bring you down
Trust me...trust me....trust me"
Sober - Tool
Mike De Leon
Barry S. Mandel wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 20:26:16 GMT, "Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>"Barry S. Mandel" <Bear...@ix.spamoff.netcom.com> wrote in message
>>news:12177vktme2j4nfih...@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>>That's all well and good until somebody gets hurt. I've got no
>>>problem at all with pitching inside or the odd brushback pitch, but
>>>I _do_ have a problem with pitchers who think they can throw at
>>>people with impunity and that it's the batter's responsibility to get
>>>the hell out of the way. As I said, a baseball traveling at 90+ mph
>>>in the direction of another human being is a potentially deadly
>>>weapon. It's not too much to ask that the person in possession of
>>>that baseball should use it responsibly.
>>
>
>>Not all hit batters are intentional, in fact most aren't.
>
>
> Where did I ever suggest that all hit batters are intentional?
> I don't think I even addressed the element of intent above. The
> only thing I've said is that a pitcher should be held accountable
> for his own actions, and that "pitching inside" should not be used
> as an excuse to cast aside all regard for the safety of the hitter.
>
>
>>I truly don't believe Mota intentional hit Piazza last year, his control
>>wasn't that good...and yet Piazza went after him anyway.
>
>
> I'm not interested in what happened last year. I'm interested in
> what happened _this_ year. Do you really believe that there was
> no element of intent with respect to the _two_ pitches that Mota
> threw in Piazza's direction the other day? Brian Jordan certainly
> appeared to think so, judging from his post-game comments.
>
>
>>When you pitch inside, try and protect the plate against
>>hitters who are standing in on the plate..then odds are someone
>>will get hit.
>
>
> Which means that, as a pitcher, you're consciously assuming this risk
> when you undertake to do so. Knowing that, I don't think it's fair
> to suggest that the pitcher is blameless when the batter gets hit.
>
>
>>Pitching is an awesome responsibility but it is also
>>a difficult task. Pitchers who throw upwards of 95mph are
>>often wild because it requires so much to throw that hard
>>you often sacrafice accuracy.
>
>
> So what? Why should a pitcher's inability to control the baseball
> absolve him from responsibility if he hits someone? AFAIC, you're
> making my argument for me -- if anything, a pitcher who throws that
> hard should be taking greater care not to injure someone when he
> elects to come inside. And despite what you seem to be
> suggesting, it _is_ possible for a pitcher to have some regard for the
> safety of the batter and still be successful. Walter Johnson, for
> instance, was reportedly terrified about the prospect of killing
> somebody with his fastball, and he still managed to do all right for
> himself on the mound.
When a batter starts crowding the plate he KNOWS he's going to get
brushed back. That's the pitchers JOB. If it comes in to far and the
better gets hit then he gets hit, next time maybe he'll stay off the
plate. I never pitched but I KNEW the pitcher thought the inside of the
plate was his and he let me know when I was crowding it. That's part of
the game, if you don't want to get pitched inside or brushed back stay
off the plate, you wont be a very good hitter but chances are you won't
be playing very long anyway. And if your afraid of getting hbp then your
out of BB anyway.
>
>
>>Your assumption that pitchers are "throwing at" batters is just that,
>>an assumption.
>
>
> I'm not assuming anything. What I'm saying is that a pitcher should
> understand that he's taking a risk when he elects to come inside
> on a hitter. Frankly, I don't see why that should be such a
> controversial position.
>
>
>>Certainly it happens but not nearly as often as your statement
>>would apply.
>
>
> Once again, I have no idea what you're responding to here. My
> post said absolutely nothing about the frequency with which this
> supposedly occurs. You're reading all sorts of things into
> my post that simply aren't there.
>
> -- BSM
>
> [To reply via e-mail, please remove "nospam" from address]
Agua Girl
>>
> I'll say it one more time: I'm not suggesting further punishment is
> in order. I'm arguing against those who who would criticize the
> current system of policing such events as being overly protective of
> hitters, overly intrusive upon the game, or a product of "politically
> correctness."
My bad, I stand corrected. I either missed the post you were
responding too or read it out of order. It appeared you were
arguing the situation, not the "political correctness theory.
I will go along with immediate ejection for hitting a batter
in the head...mostly because if it was intentional it's deserved
and if it was unintentional you are doing the pitcher a favor
Can't imagine it's easy to compose yourself after accidentally
beaning someone.
I also suggest that charging the mound earn automatic ejection.
I know they are operating on adrenaline but it is disruptive
to the game, often results in brawls and is bad for the sport in
general.
I still believe the frequency of intentional hit batters is much less
than the majority assume....but I do apologize for putting you in
that majority.
AG
P Troy
"Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net> wrote:
> if I was concerned with being hit by a 97+mph fast ball
> I probably wouldn't have started playing the game. Eckstein lead
> the league in HBP last year...27 times 27!!! How many times did
> he go after the pitcher during the game much less after the fact. I
> don't expect him to handle it like I would, I expect him to handle it
> as well as the 180 hitters that were hit more than he was last year.
Are you telling me none of them rushed the mound, or that none of them
waited around or went into an opposing team's clubhouse? Either way,
neither possibility indicates any necessarily better grasp of anger
management. We don't really know what Piazza would have done had he
either reached Mota near the mound or in the clubhouse; all we really
know is that whatever he did, he would be lined up for approximately the
same amount of criticism either from Mets fans, Dodger fans, or both.
Part of the extreme anger he seemed to be displaying was not only the
Mota situation, but the fact that he has become an open target to both
cockroaches like Mota and psycho domination freaks like Clemens alike,
and he never rushed the mound or even spoke in an especially hostile
manner before the first incident with Mota. I'm not defending this
behavior, but I can certainly understand where it came from.
> > > Mike's done it twice and I have never
> > > heard of anyone else doing it once. Where do you draw the line?
> > > If it's ok to go into the club house a couple of innings later is it ok
> > > to go to his home a couple of days later?
> >
> > It's not okay. Unfortunately, Piazza seems to be slow to anger and slow
> > to recover. Some people are suggesting this was some kind of
> > premeditated act, or that he had plenty of time to calm down, and is
> > therefore not entitled to a display of temper. Again, none of these
> > people are speaking from his specific experience, and can't say how
> > they'd react.
>
> Well I would hope they would react the way the rest of the people
> playing the game would react. You can't equate my responses with
> someone who does this for a living. Shit happens...in baseball, HBP
> is part of that shit. BTW...I don't think charging the mound is
> premeditated, I *know waiting down the side lines for Mota to leave
> the game last year, and then going into the club house this year looking
> for Mota was premeditated. He was no longer reacting to the situation
> at hand since that had ended.
Really? False. If that were the case, Mota would not have thrown high
and inside the first time, nor drilled him with the second pitch.
Clearly it is possible to nurse anger and resentment for up to a year or
more, even after situations "end"
> >
> > > Do the hitters get to start
> > > hiring "protection" to take care of pitchers that throw at them?
> >
> > Not unprecedented in other sports.
>
> The idea of making baseball just like other sports is chilling.
> If I want to see cromagnum displays of aggression I will watch
> hockey.
It's a shame that everyone thinks of hockey in those terms; it really is
a beautiful game of speed, grace, and strategy; it changed in my
lifetime into what it is now, where the easiest way to win is to hurt
the other team, and I regret seeing baseball change in a similar way.
But I don't see Piazza's actions as being an especially contributing
factor. More symptomatic than causal, if that's the right word.
I'm not sure you do. Let's see.
> The hitter has a right to his anger and needs to be allowed to vent it
> physically on the pitcher.
Umm, okay. I never said or implied that. I think that if intentional
beanballs are going to be part of the game, then consequences, be they
fines, suspensions, or raps in the mouth, are also part of the game. And
all equally regrettable.
> First off, I agree about carrying a grudge
> a year but I think the grudge was for being collared off the field
> after the fact, not for what happened on the field last year.
And that grudge was addressed by Mota on the field, for an incident
which, while not necessarily on the field, was televised nationally and
witnessed, as far as I know, by thousands of baseball fans (please
correct me if I'm wrong on that). It sure seems like Mota felt his
masculine honor (or whatever you'd call it) was compromised by Piazza's
grabbing him by the collar.
> Would you stand there with your hands
> at your sides knowing he will get in trouble after he beats the stuffing
> out of you?
Maybe I'm the wrong person to ask. It's an interesting point, but there
are worse things than a beating, especially when there are police,
several teammates, and umpires present to keep it from getting too
lethal. Let's say that I, while not a professional athlete nor a trained
martial artist, but a large, healthy guy, would risk the possibility of
taking a punch or two if I felt it was sufficiently necessary to make my
point to deliberately endanger the life of the guy I was ticked off at
by beaning him, especially if I knew it would seriously derail the
career and life of my attacker. As for throwing my glove at him, well,
only in lieu of hitting him with my purse ;-).
> Mota is obviously a coward. (me too), but that doesn't
> give Mikey the right to re-write the rules.
No, it doesn't, and I'm sure, if he had not been provoked beyond
considering those rules, he would not have broken them. It would not be
inappropriate to punish him, and I'm sure, if that is what occurs, he'll
accept it. I hope Mota does the same.
> > At this point this debate is just a "he said, she said" thing, and
> > nobody is ever going to clearly establish that one side is absolutely
> > right and the other, wrong. Both players did wrong, and that's a symptom
> > of a changing sport. Players are now able to commit acts which, off the
> > field, would be considered assault, and actionable, if not clearly
> > criminal.
>
> Uhhh..but you said they would be considered assault off the field. Thing
> is, Mikey took it off the field. Last year he assaulted Mota, this year
> he didn't find him but sure went out of his way to do so. Actionable?
> criminal?
Possibly, but since we don't know what would have occurred had he found
him, and this is not "Minority Report", it's a moot issue. If you can
make a case that invading a clubhouse is trespassing, than the army of
lawyers I'm sure the Dodgers have at their disposal should go for it, if
they want to. In addition, taking it off the field to the clubhouse is
at least both geographically close and, in this case, close enough
chronologically to seriously argue any suggestion that there's any huge
difference between "on-the-field" and "off-the-field behavior, as if to
suggest that the clubhouse after a few innings have passed is like
challenging him to a duel on an island in the Hudson River or something,
is ridiculous. Or, at least, about as ridiculous as to suggest that Mota
took it off the field, held onto it for a year, then brought it back
onto the field, so it's okay. As for what he actually did do, he grabbed
his collar, as far as I could see, in spite of Tracy's and others'
claims that he tried to choke him. Again, there's no telling what was
actually intended, other than a reasonable assumption that he didn't
want him running away before he was finished doing [whatever it was]. If
his dealings with Clemens are any indication, he may very well have
intended to simply scream at him, possibly in some intimidating fashion.
But, again, taking this off the field, take two assault cases and put
them before judges and juries; one where the defendant grabs a guy's
shirt and shakes him, and yells at him, and is pulled off the victim
before further injury can occur (the likelihood of this to be
determined), and another case where the defendant throws a 6-ounce rock
at the victim at 97 mph, hitting him either in the torso, or possibly in
the shoulder, later to ricochet into the head of the victim. Honestly,
which seems more premeditated, and more potentially injurious?
> I don't give a rats ass if he is slow to temper. He needs know
> that he isn't the only guy ever to get hit. Heck..he isn't even hit the
> most.
> What...a whopping 3 times last year.
Apart from the fact that the alleged, evidently traditional sanctity of
the opposing team's clubhouse was violated (does this happen often
enough for it to be traditionally off limits, or for it to be an issue?
Did Piazza break some unwritten rule that was established because of Ty
Cobb's Great Clubhouse Raid of 1917?), there's really no cause to
consider his reaction any more angry or violent than that of any of the
other batters who have rushed the mound after being hit. All we know is
he was pissed off, and remained so for several minutes. At least it
wasn't a year.
> > Therefore I think we should lock up Mota for throwing his glove so
> > viciously at Mike. That meanie! ;-)
>
> Well sure...cept that actually happened on the field during the course
> of the incident so if we did that we would have to lock up ever other
> player who got involved.
I was joking, trying to salvage some shred of dignity for the entire
situation, defuse some of the intensity, while underscoring my belief
that Piazza is not the chief villain of this piece, if there is one at
all.
> I consider the two things separate incidents
> even though the first led to the second. Mota threw a Mikey, Mikey
> charged Mota...(mota runs like a girl). Fine and suspension for Mota.
> Mikey maybe gets a little hand slap for charging the mound. Kudo's
> to both teams for keeping it from escalating. End story except the
> fans are abuzz with jokes about Mota.
> Second incident..Mikey going after Mota in the club house. Suspension,
> anger management counseling and the fans are more abuzz about
> Mikey's bizarre behavior. I think Mikes problem is he hasn't
> been hit enough. (not saying he should get hit more). He takes
> it way to personal. It's not about Mota trying to dominate a batter,
> it's about Mota trying to ruin his career and maybe disfigure him so
> he can't act. I don't mean he thinks that consciously, I mean I think
> he takes it way more personal than anyone else. Why else would
> a guy who is hit so rarely be so aggressive about it, and by rarely
> I mean every 243 times at bat versus say Burnitz who is hit every
> 72 times at bat or Eckstein who has been hit 48 times in just two
> years. I don't know if he would be less aggressive if he was hit
> more often or if he would be in jail by now. I just know that he
> needs to learn how to deal with it in the same way all the other
> hitters in the league do.
Yeah, he needs to accept the unfortunate changes the game is undergoing
(beanballs are nowhere near unprecedented among pitchers like Bob
Gibson, but both HBP cases and pitches to the head seem to be on the
rise) because they are part of the game, but if his reaction goes beyond
what would have been an acceptable reaction upon being hit in the butt
by a 75 mph pitch in 1965, he needs anger management counselling or to
get out of the game? All I can say is, wait until it happens to one of
the Dodgers. The era of Gaylord Perry or Bob Gibson are gone, and for
all the intentional HBP's that have occurred in the past, we need to
acknowledge the fact that the situation is changing, and pretending it
isn't is going to get someone killed.
--
Phil Troy
Agua Girl
"P Troy" <phil.d...@atverizon.dot.net.invalid> wrote in message
> > Yeah, he needs to accept the unfortunate changes the game is undergoing
> (beanballs are nowhere near unprecedented among pitchers like Bob
> Gibson, but both HBP cases and pitches to the head seem to be on the
> rise) because they are part of the game, but if his reaction goes beyond
> what would have been an acceptable reaction upon being hit in the butt
> by a 75 mph pitch in 1965, he needs anger management counselling or to
> get out of the game? All I can say is, wait until it happens to one of
> the Dodgers. The era of Gaylord Perry or Bob Gibson are gone, and for
> all the intentional HBP's that have occurred in the past, we need to
> acknowledge the fact that the situation is changing, and pretending it
> isn't is going to get someone killed.
First off, you keep saying threw at his head...beanball..etc. It
hit him in the back. The first pitch wasn't at his head either. The
pitch hit him in the back after he turned away and even ducked a
tad so it wasn't aimed at his head...period. Unless your trying to
say that Mota had enough control to hit him intentionally but
not enough control to aim higher..like at his head..then lets stop
calling it a bean ball since it clearly wasn't.
Secondly..I don't like the hbp trend. I dislike it so much I hope
the Dodgers get rid of Mota. He isn't Nolan Ryan, can't afford
to be wasting pitches...and I abhor the thug mentality..don't want them
on my team. But...his actions were all out on the field for everyone
to see and judge. He may have taken the grudge off the field and
then back on but he didn't try and settle it off the field...there
is a difference. And again..he didn't throw at his head..if he had..
he would have hit him there.
Lastly...there is a right and wrong here. Sadly neither player
was "right". I am not trying to make Piazza out a villian. I am truly
concerned with someone, anyone, who takes it outside the confines
of the game. It sets a very bad and very dangerous precedent.
There aren't umpires, league officials and other team members
around to keep it sane.
AG
Gnork
>
> who's trying to throw at Mike Piazza?
>
>
> now. And at one time, the same was true for the color line, but that
> doesn't make either of them a good thing. Whether you want to
> acknowledge it or not, a baseball travelling at 90+ mph at
> somebody's head is a potentially deadly weapon.
>
> Talk to Dickie Thon or Tony Conigliaro's widow sometime -- ask
> them if they think beanballs are "just part of the game."
Tony was my favorite player. He was hit after the game had been delayed for
about 15 minutes (first hitter up after the game resumed) because some scum
threw a smoke bomb on the field. I do not believe that Jack Hamilton was
throwing at him. I also don't think he ever married.
P Troy
"Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net> wrote:
> First off, you keep saying threw at his head...beanball..etc. It
> hit him in the back. The first pitch wasn't at his head either. The
> pitch hit him in the back after he turned away and even ducked a
> tad so it wasn't aimed at his head...period. Unless your trying to
> say that Mota had enough control to hit him intentionally but
> not enough control to aim higher..like at his head..then lets stop
> calling it a bean ball since it clearly wasn't.
From what I saw, it hit his shoulder and bounced into his head.
Regardless, the potential for injury anywhere in that area is such that
it scarcely matters. Trying to come close to any part of that area is
playing with fire, and doing it against anyone on a team you're ahead of
by something like nine runs, and after hitting a homer as a pitcher, is
especially reprehensible.
> Secondly..I don't like the hbp trend.
I don't either, and wasn't suggesting you did. I am suggesting that the
current situation is sufficiently different from the old-style great
punitive beanballers that it cannot be justified as "part of the game".
> I dislike it so much I hope
> the Dodgers get rid of Mota. He isn't Nolan Ryan, can't afford
> to be wasting pitches...and I abhor the thug mentality..don't want them
> on my team. But...his actions were all out on the field for everyone
> to see and judge. He may have taken the grudge off the field and
> then back on but he didn't try and settle it off the field...there
> is a difference. And again..he didn't throw at his head..if he had..
> he would have hit him there.
>
> Lastly...there is a right and wrong here. Sadly neither player
> was "right". I am not trying to make Piazza out a villian. I am truly
> concerned with someone, anyone, who takes it outside the confines
> of the game.
And well you should be, but that should include an understanding that as
situations change, rules have to, too (and it has to be acknowledged
that today, rules are selectively enforced), and I hope you have room in
your concern for a pitcher who takes it out of the game, waits a year,
during which presumably the game came to an end, and then brings it back
into the game. A clear double standard is being displayed here on these
combined threads; Piazza "tried to choke" Mota, and "stalked" him, and
took it out of the game, but Mota didn't even throw at him, let alone
try to kill him or intimidate him by proving he was capable of killing
him or seriously injuring him, and above all, he didn't take it out of
the game, even most on this newsgroup seem to agree his running like a
girl (not my phrase; I know many girls who would have stood up to Piazza
better than that and I wouldn't insult them by comparing them to Mota)
was reprehensible. If all he really did was run like a girl, then why
even discuss any kind of sanction against him? Again, I'm referring to
the overall views expressed by some here, not only what you're saying.
> It sets a very bad and very dangerous precedent.
No, it really doesn't; it was set at least a couple of years ago.
Piazza's actions didn't turn a good, or even an acceptable, situation
into a bad one; at most, it escalated a bad one by a very small margin,
and if it wasn't him, it would have been someone else. The only question
is when.
--
Phil Troy
Lance Freezeland
<Bear...@ix.spamoff.netcom.com> gave us this:
>I'll say it one more time: I'm not suggesting further punishment is
>in order. I'm arguing against those who who would criticize the
>current system of policing such events as being overly protective of
>hitters, overly intrusive upon the game, or a product of "politically
>correctness."
This is a poor example to make such a point, but I disagree.
The current system is overly intrusive on the game, not because it
punishes pitchers who intentionally headhunt, but because it assumes
that any pitch up and in is necessarily a tortious act by the pitcher.
I don't have a problem with a system that takes away the beanball. I
do have a big problem with a system that takes away the brushback, and
I think that's what we have now.
--
Lance lb...@altamont.net
"I don't wanna cause no fuss, but can I buy your
magic bus?" -- Pete Townshend
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Agua Girl
> So your position would be that because the pitcher "owns" the inside
> of the plate, he can declare open season on anybody who stands too
> close to it, and to hell with the consequences if somebody gets hit?
> Thanks for a perfect example of precisely the sort of goonery I've
> been talking about.
>
What about the kind of "goonery" that has the hitters charging the
mound when a pitch gets away???? sometimes its just a bad
pitch, not a brushback, not even aiming for the inside of the plate,..
it just gets away. How do you know for sure when a pitcher is
sending a message pitch and when he isn't, and what do you do
to hitters that go after pitchers when the pitch was just bad?
AG
Mike De Leon
Barry S. Mandel wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Mar 2003 00:28:42 GMT, Mike De Leon <laz...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Barry S. Mandel wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 20:26:16 GMT, "Agua Girl" <ukn...@nospam.net>
>>>wrote:
>>
>
>>>So what? Why should a pitcher's inability to control the baseball
>>>absolve him from responsibility if he hits someone? AFAIC, you're
>>>making my argument for me -- if anything, a pitcher who throws that
>>>hard should be taking greater care not to injure someone when he
>>>elects to come inside. And despite what you seem to be
>>>suggesting, it _is_ possible for a pitcher to have some regard for the
>>>safety of the batter and still be successful. Walter Johnson, for
>>>instance, was reportedly terrified about the prospect of killing
>>>somebody with his fastball, and he still managed to do all right for
>>>himself on the mound.
>>
>
>>When a batter starts crowding the plate he KNOWS he's going to get
>>brushed back. That's the pitchers JOB.
>
>
> Sure it is. It's not a pitcher's job to hit people, however, and
> I'm merely suggesting that a responsible pitcher knows the
> difference.
>
>
>>If it comes in to far and the better gets hit then he gets hit,
>
>
> Oh, okay. So Ray Chapman crowded the plate on Carl Mays.
> Ray Chapman got hit. Ray Chapman died.
>
> Que sera sera, eh?
>
>
>>next time maybe he'll stay off the
>>plate. I never pitched but I KNEW the pitcher thought the inside of the
>>plate was his and he let me know when I was crowding it. That's part of
>>the game, if you don't want to get pitched inside or brushed back stay
>>off the plate, you wont be a very good hitter but chances are you won't
>>be playing very long anyway. And if your afraid of getting hbp then your
>>out of BB anyway.
>
>
> So your position would be that because the pitcher "owns" the inside
> of the plate, he can declare open season on anybody who stands too
> close to it, and to hell with the consequences if somebody gets hit?
> Thanks for a perfect example of precisely the sort of goonery I've
> been talking about.
Obviously you've never played. Everytime you get into the box you know
there is a chance you'll get hit, you don't dwell on it or think about
it. 99.9% of the time a HBP is a pitch that got away. If your a batter
like Galaraga whose stance was on top of the plate you better know that
your going to get pitched inside and be ready to act accordingly- bail
out if it gets too close. As a better you have to know the difference.
As for the "goonery" you espouse, you'd rather have the pitcher tossed
regardless of whether the pitch got away or not. Changing the whole
game. Why not just do away with pitchers all together and use PM's? If a
batter getting hit every now and then upsets you so much maybe you
should start watching badmitten or some other sport where the slight
chande of a player getting hurt is nil.
Lance Freezeland
<Bear...@ix.spamoff.netcom.com> gave us this:
>On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 23:24:01 -0600, Lance Freezeland
><lb...@altamont.net> wrote:
>>This is a poor example to make such a point, but I disagree.
>>The current system is overly intrusive on the game, not because it
>>punishes pitchers who intentionally headhunt, but because it assumes
>>that any pitch up and in is necessarily a tortious act by the pitcher.
>>I don't have a problem with a system that takes away the beanball. I
>>do have a big problem with a system that takes away the brushback, and
>>I think that's what we have now.
>I disagree. If the current system really were "taking away the
>brushback," as Lance suggests, then Mota would never have
>gotten to throw that second pitch to Piazza in the first place.
There are exceptions to every rule, to be sure, but there seems to be
no sense to the situation in general.
In today's game between the Braves and Cardinals, Albert Pujols was
brushed back, but not hit. He didn't charge the mound or anything,
and grounded out on the next pitch. This was, BTW, the at bat after
he had homered.
In the next half inning, Matt Morris hit an Atlanta batter (DeRosa?)
in the calf with a pitch, and the umpires warned both benches.
Ridiculous.
--
Lance lb...@altamont.net
"I doubt Chuck LaMar could solve a single-color Rubik's Cube."
-- Dan Szymborski, Baseball Primer
Brad Machado
grip man. Thats not funny. What would Mikey have done if he'd caught
Mota? Hit him with his purse?
Brad Machado
Brown or Jordan might have fed him his lunch.
Barry S. Mandel
From: "Mike De Leon" <laz...@earthlink.net>
Newsgroups: alt.sports.baseball.la-dodgers,alt.sports.baseball.ny-mets
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: another brawl note
> > So your position would be that because the pitcher "owns" the inside
> > of the plate, he can declare open season on anybody who stands too
> > close to it, and to hell with the consequences if somebody gets hit?
> > Thanks for a perfect example of precisely the sort of goonery I've
> > been talking about.
>
> Obviously you've never played.
Typical Neanderthal's response.
Believe it or not, it's possible to have played baseball without
embracing every stupid preconception you seem to have about
the game. And no, I don't share your belief that intentionally
throwing at hitters has any legitimate place in the sport.
> Everytime you get into the box you know
> there is a chance you'll get hit, you don't dwell on it or think about
> it. 99.9% of the time a HBP is a pitch that got away. If your a batter
> like Galaraga whose stance was on top of the plate you better know that
> your going to get pitched inside and be ready to act accordingly- bail
> out if it gets too close. As a better you have to know the difference.
And as a pitcher, you have to know the difference between
protecting the inside part of the plate and reckless disregard
for another human being. You seem unwilling or incapable
of making a distinction between these two concepts. Perhaps
they just don't matter to you.
> As for the "goonery" you espouse,
I'm not the one "espousing" goonery. You are.
> you'd rather have the pitcher tossed
> regardless of whether the pitch got away or not.
If you'd bothered to read the whole thread, you'd know that my
call for automatic ejections applied only to situations where the
batter was actually struck above the neck.
>Changing the whole game.
It changes nothing that shouldn't be changed. Beanballs
are not a legitimate part of the game, nor should they be.
> Why not just do away with pitchers all together and use PM's? If a
> batter getting hit every now and then upsets you so much maybe you
> should start watching badmitten or some other sport where the slight
> chande of a player getting hurt is nil.
No thanks. In the future, however, I will make a more
concerted effort to recognize when I'm arguing with a
blithering idiot, and to take the appropriate steps to deal
with that particular problem.
*plonk*
Agua Girl
"Barry S. Mandel" <Bear...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bK7da.3725$pK4.4...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> No thanks. In the future, however, I will make a more
> concerted effort to recognize when I'm arguing with a
> blithering idiot, and to take the appropriate steps to deal
> with that particular problem.
I disagree with Mike a lot...actually I get disagreed with
a lot <g>...but he isn't any of those things. He would
have hit my filter list long ago if he was :-)
Really, the problem is deciding on when a pitcher is
throwing a "message" pitch and when the are just trying
to use the inside of the plate. Pitchers have to be allowed
to pitch inside .. it's part of their aresenal and the PTB have
already tried to give the advantage to the hitter in favor of
"more action" for the fans. The difference between a
"message pitch that got away" and a pitch inside that sailed
to far inside is mostly unnoticable so trying to hold pitchers
"accountable" for pitching inside is impossible. The bean
ball pitch is different. There are so few of them that it
probably wouldn't impact the game if you tossed every pitcher
that threw one, accidental or intentional...but...it would have to
be a real beanball pitch. Not one where the batter ducked down
to get out of the way and moved into the path, not one that
glances off his upper arm and ricochets into his head and certainly
not one that ricochets off of armor. Then if it was found to be
intentionally thrown..he could face suspension as well as ejection,.
But..if your going to make it goon free as far as pitching goes..that
has to be true for hitters as well. If a hitter charges the mound...
he should be ejected. Or maybe if he charges the mound after being
hit by a pitch, he doesn't get to take his base and the pitch is dead.
If he reaches the pitcher and lands even one punch...he should be
ejected and suspended. That would cut down on
brawls and protect pitchers from serious injury.
Fair????
PiazzaGrrl
>>I loved it when Mota drilled Piazza. Had I known this would mean the return
of Piazzagrrl, not to mention ChrisTM, I would have hoped it never happened.<<
Then my work has not been unrewarded.
Piazzagrrl
The postess with the mostest.
Atlanta delenda est.
PiazzaGrrl
>>Well..that isn't exactly what happened last year when he went hunting
for him..unless by severe chat you mean with his hands around Mota's
neck. :-)<<
Piazza hands *never* went around his neck. For someone who complains about
other people's fidelity to the facts, you're free enough about making up your
own. <insert emoticon of your choice>
PiazzaGrrl
Ima:
>>Piazza left the field, went to the clubhouse, waited a few innings,
and then came looking for Mota after he was leaving the dugout.<<
BZZZZZZZT--WRONG!! Holman field doesn't HAVE dugouts. It has benches. Piazza
sat on the same damn bench for an inning and a half, and when Mota left the
game he had to pass in front of where Piazza was sitting. Piazza followed him
down the line.
If you do not know what the hell you are talking about, it would be wise of you
not to supply details constructed of whole cloth.
>>That's radically different than charging him when he was on the field.
That shows a premeditation, and a willingness to go away from the
field of play to get revenge.<<
PFFTT. See above.
PiazzaGrrl
>>Is Piazza the only hitter who has ever been deliberately hit by a 97mph (mota
throws that hard????damn) fastball?
Cuz he is the only one I know of that goes after the opposing pitcher hours
later. <<
10 minutes. *Damn*, are you a pathological liar, or something?
Agua Girl
"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20030317221442...@mb-mt.aol.com...
> AG:
> >>Well..that isn't exactly what happened last year when he went hunting
> for him..unless by severe chat you mean with his hands around Mota's
> neck. :-)<<
>
> Piazza hands *never* went around his neck. For someone who complains
about
> other people's fidelity to the facts, you're free enough about making up
your
> own. <insert emoticon of your choice>
His hands were closer to Mota's neck than Mota's pitch
was to Mikeys head...
As for the dugout./benches..he still followed him off the field.
Look it up...check out exactly how many batters have followed
a pitcher off the field and then confronted him by grabbing the
front of his collar (the press is the one who said choking which
is why I inserted the emoticon). How many have gone into
the opposing pitchers dug out like a lunatic? Come on..these
fact should be easy to look up. I can tell you how many pitchers
have hit batters...and make a good guess at how many were
intentional. Mota is an idiot but he is an normal idiot...Mikey
is abnormally aggressive. No matter how you defend him,
sugar coat his actions or dress up Mota's..it's still Mike setting
precedence with his aggressive behavior. Deal with it.
AG
Agua Girl
"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> ag:
> >>Is Piazza the only hitter who has ever been deliberately hit by a 97mph
(mota
> throws that hard????damn) fastball?
> Cuz he is the only one I know of that goes after the opposing pitcher
hours
> later. <<
No, I just exaggerate..kind of like calling Mota's pitch "at his
head". It was longer than 10 minutes last year. I was guesstimating
since I didn't time it.. So tell me..what should the allowable
waiting time be before you storm the opposing pitchers club house
looking for him (and storm is the word the witnesses use so if you don't
like it talk to them). 15 minutes later is ok but 30 isn't? It's just so
confusing because I had never seen a player go after the pitcher
after they were both out of the game...I am not sure what the
accepted waiting time is? You keep nit picking the details but you
avoid the real issue. Piazza took it outside the context of the game.
That should be a big no-no..and if you were a fan of the game rather
than a fan of the player you would see that.
AG
PiazzaGrrl
head...<<
True, by scant inches.
>>As for the dugout./benches..he still followed him off the field. Look it
up...check out exactly how many batters have followed a pitcher off the field
and then confronted him by grabbing the
front of his collar<<
Look it up where, exactly? MLB doesn't keep stats on confrontations.
>> (the press is the one who said choking which is why I inserted the
emoticon).<<
No, you inserted the emoticon because you thought you were right.
>>How many have gone into the opposing pitchers dug out like a lunatic?<<
He didn't go into the dugout. He went into the clubhouse. Has anyone in the
history of the sport ever done that before? Dunno. But it's likely. Will
check Ball Four for possible references, among others.
>>Come on..these fact should be easy to look up.<<
Then I suggest you give me a source, since it's so easy. Is there a
"Hitbatters.com" I can go to?
>>I can tell you how many pitchers
have hit batters...and make a good guess at how many were intentional.<<
You can make a guess, but it'll be wildly subjective. You have no way of
knowing, particularly without actually actually seeing the pitches.
>>Mota is an idiot but he is an normal idiot...Mikey is abnormally
aggressive.<<
In that single instance, yes, he was far more aggressive than he ever has been.
Which makes me wonder all the more what it was Mota said to him last year that
torched him off. Called him a fag, perhaps?
>> No matter how you defend him,
sugar coat his actions or dress up Mota's..it's still Mike setting
precedence with his aggressive behavior. Deal with it.<<
Sorry, it's your psychosis. You deal with it.
PiazzaGrrl
>>No, I just exaggerate..kind of like calling Mota's pitch "at his head". It
was longer than 10 minutes last year.<<
You did not clarify whether you were talking about this year or last year. It
wasn't "hours" in either case.
>>I was guesstimating since I didn't time it.. So tell me..what should the
allowable
waiting time be before you storm the opposing pitchers club house looking for
him (and storm is the word the witnesses use so if you don't like it talk to
them). 15 minutes later is ok but 30 isn't?<<
To put it in simple terms you can understand, yes. 10 minutes may not be
enough time to cool off; 30 minutes should be.
>>It's just so confusing because I had never seen a player go after the pitcher
after they were both out of the game...I am not sure what the accepted waiting
time is? You keep nit picking the details but you avoid the real issue.<<
The details are part of the issue. You're conflating a couple of minor
skirmishes with stalking, which is just stupid.
>>Piazza took it outside the context of the game. That should be a big
no-no..and if you were a fan of the game rather than a fan of the player you
would see that.<<
Don't impute arguments to me that I have not made. I do regard it as a no-no.
I'm glad Mota wasn't there when he got there. I'm glad Jordan had enough sense
to get him out of there. I do think Piazza should be fined and suspended for
the act. I do not, however, regard a pitch at the head as a minor infraction,
which is how you are attempting to cast the act that provoked Piazza's display
of rage. You have attempted to say he didn't throw near his head--which he
patently did. You have attempted to say it was understandable that he threw at
him because Piazza "choked" him last year--which he patently did not. What he
did was embarrass Mota, and probably over an excuse-me pitch--regrettable, but
the initial brushback pitch from Mota last week should have ended it. There
was no excuse for coming up and in on him a second time--even if you have
managed to delude yourself that he wasn't trying to hit Piazza, you must admit
that was an exceptionally irresponsible act. *You* are the one making excuses
for aberrant behavior based on the uniforms of the players involved, not I.
Agua Girl
"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
>> Don't impute arguments to me that I have not made. I do regard it as a
no-no.
> I'm glad Mota wasn't there when he got there. I'm glad Jordan had enough
sense
> to get him out of there. I do think Piazza should be fined and suspended
for
> the act. I do not, however, regard a pitch at the head as a minor
infraction,
> which is how you are attempting to cast the act that provoked Piazza's
display
> of rage.
Now your attributing arguments to me that I have not made. I never
said hitting a player was a minor infraction. What I did say was Mota did
what a lot of pitchers before him have done. They hit a batter in
retaliation
to being embarrassed. Mike initiated that embarrassment by an overly
aggressive act last year. Mota shouldn't have even thrown a message
pitch, certainly shouldn't have hit him. I don't however believe he threw
at his head. It may make it easier to justify Mikes actions for you to
believe
it but you don't know it either...and since the first "message" pitch was
much lower it's a further stretch to believe he was throwing at his head
than not. Either way, it wasn't a minor infraction.
>You have attempted to say he didn't throw near his head--which he
> patently did.
No, I said he didn't throw at his head. Hit him in the back...high in
the back but it missed low in the back by a couple of inches same
as it missed his head by a couple of inches. If he had enough control
to first deliver a message pitch at his waist and then to hit him, don't you
think he had enough control to throw at where he wanted to hit him?
Or are your wanting us to believe that he tried to bean him but Mikey
jumped up so it would hit him in the back instead?
>You have attempted to say it was understandable that he threw at
> him because Piazza "choked" him last year--which he patently did not.
No, I have said he probably (not in his head) threw at Mike because
mike collared him (or jerseyed him near the neck if you must) last year.
He came after Mota outside the context of the game, (a no no) for a pitch
that was probably an accident.
>What he did was embarrass Mota, and probably over an
excuse-me pitch--regrettable, but
Ahhh...there is the patented Piazza "but". It was more than
regrettable, it was overly aggressive...and there are no buts.
> the initial brushback pitch from Mota last week should have ended it.
Yes it should have, just like the mound rush should have ended it.
Personally I would have been happy if he had forgone the brushback
pitch.
>There was no excuse for coming up and in on him a second time--even if you
have
> managed to delude yourself that he wasn't trying to hit Piazza, you must
admit
> that was an exceptionally irresponsible act.
Never ever once said that I thought the pitch was unintentional...ever. I
think it was completely intentional. And there is never an excuse
for intentionally hitting the batter....just as there is never an excuse
for grabbing a pitcher by the jersey in or out of the context of the game
nor is there ever an excuse for storming the opposing teams clubhouse.
> *You* are the one making excuses
> for aberrant behavior based on the uniforms of the players involved, not
I.
You are way way off base there. I would feel the same if Mota was a Met
and Mike was a Dodger. Because you are a Piazza fan first and foremost,
you fail to see the problem this presents.
The difference is there is a precedence for a pitcher
throwing at a batter.... It's still within the context of the game, it's
done in front of God and everybody and there is immediate retribution.
Waylaying, or collaring or searching for a player outside of the game
is different. It hasn't been done to my knowledge and the amount of
press given to a spring training incident leads me to believe it probably
hasn't happened in the past 20 years. A line previously uncrossed
was crossed. Why do pitcher throw at hitters? Because it's done.
It's not ok, it's not good, but it is like a "known" retaliation. It's not
unheard of. In the past, the hitters response was "charge the mound".
That isn't good either, but it's the standard response when you think
you have been intentionally hit and your angry. This is a part of the
game I dislike but since it is a part of the game I sort of accept it.
What Mike has done twice now is to set a new precedence for
retaliation. Why charge the mound and get tossed, just wait til
after the game. Then some super agro somewhere is going to think,
"just wait til that bozo goes out to his car"..then it will be " I know
where you live". I may be exaggerating..may not. Either way,
taking it out of the game and down the sidelines or into the clubhouse
is just a step away from taking it into the parking lot and beyond.
Mota and Piazza were both wrong..but Mikes actions bother me
more not because he is a Met or because I dislike him...(but you
go on believing that if it helps)...it's because he is setting a new
and disturbing precedent.
AG
Harry
commercial did not recognize him!
Sam Monk wrote:
> A quick note; Piazza didn't just go back to the ballpark
> after he left, but literally went into the Dodger clubhouse
> looking for Mota.
>
> MSG cameras caught him on video walking out of the clubhouse
> to his car.
>
> This is even more bizarre than the "First baseline Fiasco"
> last year.
>
> So, during the brawl, the three guys behind Piazza in the
> order, burnitz, mcewing (sp?), and wigginston (sp?) all
> made kamakazii-like attacks at Mota. Mota back pedalled
> and was herded into the dogout by the coaches. Burnitz
> made it all the way to the dugout before being restrained
> by three or four dodgers. Mcewing and wiginston wound up
> on their backs under several dodgers each. The other 40
> mets were no-shows.
>
> Piazza looked like the energizer bunny with a 12 volt
> automobile battery attached, but he did make the
> universal "you're a p*ssy" sign at Mota after he had made
> it into the dugout. Gotta admit, that made me laugh.
>
> __________________________________________
> Dodgers fan stuck in sevarB country
Harry
Agua Girl wrote:
> "MO" <mopins...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ffe9f90a.03031...@posting.google.com...
> > really .. are you a lawyer? Your Dodgers have a history of brawls:
> >
> > ยป August 22, 1965: San Francisco's Juan Marichal, batting against LA's
> > Sandy Koufax, complains that C John Roseboro's return throws are too
> > close. He then turns and attacks Roseboro with his bat. A 14-minute
> > brawl ensues before Koufax, Willie Mays, and other peacemakers can
> > restore order. Roseboro suffers a considerable cut on the head.
> > Marichal is suspended eight playing days and levied a National
> > League-record $1,750 fine.
>
> 1965???? LOL..is that the best you can do. Come one..there has
> to be something more recent than that..
>
> I was referring to Mikes penchant for taking it off the field. Mike
> had good cause to charge the mound. Leaving the game, and then
> waiting for Mota to exit the park, or going after him in the club house..
> that's a little outside the norm donchathink? Mota was wrong..and
> stupid. Mikey on the other hand is unbalanced. He shouldn't still
> be enraged 30 minutes later. You don't go searching for the guy
> off the field. What's next? staking out his car? his house? You don't
> have to be a lawyer to know there are laws about that kind of stuff.
>
> AG
....imagine this guy, the best cather in baseball, keying Mota's car!
Harry
The Baba wrote:
> Ima says:
> >>Two against Mota.>>
>
> Last year he grabbed him while they were still on the field...Not out in the parking
> lot, like he was hoping to do last night...Granted, I don't think he should have gone
> looking for him after the game, but some people in here are labeling him psycho,
> unbalanced, and in need of help...I'm sure a 97 MPH fastball up and in will give
> anyone flashbacks to being knocked out, and make one fly off the handle a little, and
> it probably didn't help that the big pussy ran like a little girl into the
> dugout...It's not like Piazza went looking for him with a gun, or a bat in his
> hand...He was pissed, he dwelled on it too much, he did something stupid, and
> hopefully it's out of his system (at least until they get back on the filed again
> that is ;-))...If it was anyone other than Piazza, it wouldn't even be a blip on the
> asbla-d NG map...
>
> --
> *'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*
> Following the rules will not get the job done.
PiazzaGrrl
>>I never said hitting a player was a minor infraction. What I did say was
Mota did
what a lot of pitchers before him have done.<<
And Piazza did what a lot of other players have done in reaction to being hit.
Please don't tell me you've never seen anyone charge the mound.
>>They hit a batter in retaliation to being embarrassed. Mike initiated that
embarrassment by an overly
aggressive act last year.<<
I concede this point.
>>Mota shouldn't have even thrown a message pitch,<<
This is where we differ. I think the first pitch was fine and should have
resolved the issue.
>>certainly shouldn't have hit him. I don't however believe he threw at his
head. It may make it easier to justify Mikes actions for you to believe it but
you don't know it either...and since the first "message" pitch was much lower
it's a further stretch to believe he was throwing at his head
than not.<<
No, no; he wasn't throwing specifically *at his head*, he was throwing *near*
his head, with intent to hit him. Not hit him in the head, just remind him
that he *could* hit him in the head if he wanted to.
>>Either way, it wasn't a minor infraction.<<
No.
>You have attempted to say he didn't throw near his head--which he patently
did.
>>No, I said he didn't throw at his head. Hit him in the back...high in the
back but it missed low in the back by a couple of inches same as it missed his
head by a couple of inches.<<
What? Again, you're going to have to explain your concept of anatomy if you
think the top of the shoulder is near the waist. Or the small of the back.
Just where did you think the ball made contact, specifically?
>> If he had enough control to first deliver a message pitch at his waist and
then to hit him, don't you think he had enough control to throw at where he
wanted to hit him?<<
Yes. He wanted to hit him near the head.
>>Or are your wanting us to believe that he tried to bean him but Mikey jumped
up so it would hit him in the back instead?<<
Uh, no.
>You have attempted to say it was understandable that he threw at
> him because Piazza "choked" him last year--which he patently did not.
>>No, I have said he probably (not in his head) threw at Mike because mike
collared him (or jerseyed him near the neck if you must) last year. He came
after Mota outside the context of the game, (a no no) for a pitch that was
probably an accident.<<
Have conceded this point.
>What he did was embarrass Mota, and probably over an excuse-me
pitch--regrettable, but<
>>Ahhh...there is the patented Piazza "but". It was more than regrettable, it
was overly aggressive...and there are no buts.<<
There are always buts. A single aggro incident does not excuse a pitch near
his head.
> the initial brushback pitch from Mota last week should have ended it.<
>>Yes it should have, just like the mound rush should have ended it.<<
I'm sure it would have, if he'd actually gotten a punch in.
>>Personally I would have been happy if he had forgone the brushback pitch.<<
That would also have been fine. But I'm ok with the brushback.
>There was no excuse for coming up and in on him a second time--even if you
have
> managed to delude yourself that he wasn't trying to hit Piazza, you must
admit
> that was an exceptionally irresponsible act.
>>Never ever once said that I thought the pitch was unintentional...ever. I
think it was completely intentional. And there is never an excuse for
intentionally hitting the batter...<<
I demur on that point. If the batter is crowding the plate, you have an
obligation to dust him. Just not near the head.
>>just as there is never an excuse for grabbing a pitcher by the jersey in or
out of the context of the game nor is there ever an excuse for storming the
opposing teams clubhouse.<<
Ever? That's awfully exclusive.
> *You* are the one making excuses
> for aberrant behavior based on the uniforms of the players involved, not I.
>>You are way way off base there. I would feel the same if Mota was a Met and
Mike was a Dodger. Because you are a Piazza fan first and foremost, you fail
to see the problem this presents.
The difference is there is a precedence for a pitcher throwing at a batter....
It's still within the context of the game, it's
done in front of God and everybody and there is immediate retribution.<<
No, actually, there isn't. That's precisely the problem. Mota should have
been warned by the umpires after the brushback and the game could have
proceeded as normal. There was a failure to act on the part of the
umpire--just as there was in each of the Clemens incidents--and that leaves
Piazza standing exposed at the plate with no other recourse than a charge at
the responsible party.
>>Waylaying, or collaring or searching for a player outside of the game is
different. It hasn't been done to my knowledge and the amount of press given
to a spring training incident leads me to believe it probably
hasn't happened in the past 20 years. A line previously uncrossed was
crossed.<<
This is a bit melodramatic.
>>Why do pitcher throw at hitters? Because it's done. It's not ok, it's not
good, but it is like a "known" retaliation. It's not
unheard of. In the past, the hitters response was "charge the mound".
That isn't good either, but it's the standard response when you think you have
been intentionally hit and your angry. This is a part of the game I dislike
but since it is a part of the game I sort of accept it.
What Mike has done twice now is to set a new precedence for retaliation. Why
charge the mound and get tossed, just wait til after the game. Then some super
agro somewhere is going to think, "just wait til that bozo goes out to his
car"..then it will be " I know where you live". I may be exaggerating..may
not. Either way,
taking it out of the game and down the sidelines or into the clubhouse is just
a step away from taking it into the parking lot and beyond.
Mota and Piazza were both wrong..but Mikes actions bother me more not because
he is a Met or because I dislike him...(but you go on believing that if it
helps)...it's because he is setting a new and disturbing precedent.<<
I don't like him trying to track Mota down outside the game either, but I do
understand the impulse when the safeguards built into the game to make sure
this kind of confrontation doesn't happen are not enforced. If you expect
Piazza to stand in and allow himself to be targeted without recourse to
self-defense, you hold him to a superhuman standard. **If Mota had been
warned**, I'm convinced there would have been no second pitch, no mound charge,
no suspensions, and no drama. Just a blurb on ESPN about the brushback being
in retaliation for last year and it's all over. Better umpiring would have
defused the whole thing instead of letting it boil over into the present mess.
Gnork
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 18:19:08 -0800, "Gnork" <gn...@aaahawk.com> wrote:
>
> >> Talk to Dickie Thon or Tony Conigliaro's widow sometime -- ask
> >> them if they think beanballs are "just part of the game."
> >
> >Tony was my favorite player. He was hit after the game had been delayed for
> >about 15 minutes (first hitter up after the game resumed) because some scum
> >threw a smoke bomb on the field. I do not believe that Jack Hamilton was
> >throwing at him. I also don't think he ever married.
>
> I'm assuming too much.
I honestly do not know. I wasn't aware of one. I'm not saying you are wrong on
either count only that I think you may be wrong.
Gnork
"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
You are all missing a key point. I confess when I pitched there were rare
occasions when I threw at a hitter. Yes, I intentionally threw the ball at the
hitter's body. But I can honestly say I never tried to or intended to hit a
batter. In retrospect I don't recall ever hitting a guy I threw at. My hit
batters were pure accidents. I threw AT them with the intention of making them
move. This always succeeded. They moved. Usually to the ground on their butts.
I enjoyed seeing this happen even though I probably averaged less than one
intentional knock down per season. (I should have done it more often). When
the hitter got up he tended to back off the plate a bit. I was always able to
suppress the smile I felt at the time so nothing ever came of any of those
incidents. I put forth the point that throwing at the hitter should be an
accepted part of the game. If you want to hit somebody you would throw the
ball a few inches behind the hitter since the natural instinct is to back up.
My goal was always to throw the ball where the hitter "just was". Of course if
he "just wasn't" fast enough evacuating that spot he would get hit. That's
baseball. On the other hand I find charging the mound completely unacceptable.
PiazzaGrrl
>>You are all missing a key point. I confess when I pitched there were rare
occasions when I threw at a hitter. Yes, I intentionally threw the ball at the
hitter's body. But I can honestly say I never tried to or intended to hit a
batter. In retrospect I don't recall ever hitting a guy I threw at. My hit
batters were pure accidents. I threw AT them with the intention of making them
move. This always succeeded. They moved. Usually to the ground on their butts.
I enjoyed seeing this happen even though I probably averaged less than one
intentional knock down per season. (I should have done it more often). When the
hitter got up he tended to back off the plate a bit. I was always able to
suppress the smile I felt at the time so nothing ever came of any of those
incidents. I put forth the point that throwing at the hitter should be an
accepted part of the game. If you want to hit somebody you would throw the
ball a few inches behind the hitter since the natural instinct is to back up.
My goal was always to throw the ball where the hitter "just was". Of course if
he "just wasn't" fast enough evacuating that spot he would get hit. That's
baseball. On the other hand I find charging the mound completely
unacceptable.<<
Of course you do. Being on the receiving end of an asskicking for your
recklessness isn't much fun. I still don't think you pointed out anything we
haven't covered, though.
The Baba
>>Tony was my favorite player. >>
I'm kinda late on this topic, but he was my favorite player too...I grew up right
around the corner from Fenway, and Tony always made time for his fans in the players
parking lot after the games...I'll never forget having him toss me a ball after he
caught it for an out one night...
He was better than a young Griffey in his day...And most people don't know, that's
why the center field seats are covered nowadays...Remember Conigs Corner in center at
Fenway? A good book on Tony is 'Tony C: The Triumph and Tragedy of Tony Conigliaro'
by David Cataneo...
--
*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*
Don't play stupid with me! I'm better at it.
Gnork
"PiazzaGrrl" <piazz...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
LOL. I understand your thought. But why would you assume I would have received
an asskicking had some foolish batter charged the mound? In those days I
weighed about 215. I am just under 6'4" and I am a combat vet. The ass kicking
may have been received by the other guy. Also, since I had no desire to or
intention of hurting anybody there was no malice from my side. This often is
perceived and accepted as part of the game.
>
> Atlanta delenda est.