jackie hayes

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 08:39 PM) He's a big boy. He can answer for himself. No doubt. So this was just an attempt to start a firefight. Great.

I don't think that's fair, Addy. First of all, Jim's got good questions, and second, this is a topic he has some expertise on. That said, if there's no better way of saying "biogeochemical cycle", then I wish one would be invented.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 07:54 PM) You're quite the cup-is-half-full kind of guy Jackie... Half full of carcinogens, that is! Mmmm.... (The sad thing is that's only half kidding, considering how I've been eating most of my life.)

QUOTE(YASNY @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 06:42 PM) I'm wondering what people's reactions would be if one of these games cost us a playoff series. Just a thought. Eh. If one of these games costs us the playoffs, then one of the games where Ozzie handles the bullpen badly costs us the same thing, and all of the games where we just played like crap costs us the same thing. I really doubt I'll be upset about it then (hell, I don't even know if I'm upset now -- I haven't been able to see these controversial calls). This is so early it'll be forgotten anyway. Like Sammy's game-winning hit the day before the cork was discovered was forgotten by the time the wild card race came down to the wire...

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 07:38 PM) Yeah, fine, but at least they're low-carb, right?

QUOTE(The Critic @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 03:08 PM) I'm more upset when a call isn't made than when it is. The fact that it's not made on other players is irrelevant to me in this instance. In this case, the umpire was correct and that's all that matters to me. But then you have to be upset 99% of the time, on these no-effort, no-call hbp and pitches that are "at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants" and still not called strikes. I think most people, rather than getting upset that often, are satisfied that -- while the de facto rules don't always match book rules -- everyone knows what the standard is, so the playing field is level. Going back to the strike zone example, (almost) noone gets angry at an ump calling the usual strike zone consistently, even though it's not quite right. But if he calls the high strike all of a sudden at a sensitive time in the game, people will get angry -- it's the lack of consistency, rather than the other 15 times he didn't call it, that gets to them. I'm not saying your perspective is wrong, I'm just saying that it's pretty rare.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 01:49 PM) Wouldn't the pitch have hit him anyway??? Does it matter? Even if it's physically impossible to avoid the ball, you have to make an effort by rule. And really, why would we want to give the John Kruks of the world all those free bases?

QUOTE(IndplsSoxFan @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 01:06 PM) DJ (I think it was him) kept saying that the ball was well within the batters box, therefore I Crede "can't" get out of the way, he's at first base. Is this true? You have to make an attempt to get out of the way of the pitch, doesn't matter if it's in the box or not. And that holds for I Crede and I Claudius alike.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 12:32 PM) He leaned into it and it should have been called. Doesn't matter to me if it's never called against Biggio or anyone else. How can it not matter? You can't have rules that only get enforced when the ump feels like it. Suppose the ump is calling the 'usual' strike zone the whole game, then in the last half-inning starts calling the high strikes of the official strike zone. Is that okay because it's in the rule book? Selective enforcement of a rule is no better than not having a rule in the first place.

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 04:11 AM) The reason it rarely ever happens in MLB is very simple. Protest cannot be made on a judgement call. They can only be made based on an incorrect interpretation of a rule. In the Majors you have four umpires on a crew. In a situation where a protest may be filed, the umpires will meet amongst themselves to make sure they agree on the call. It would be very rare that four MLB umpires would interpret a rule incorrectly. Even in the George Brett incident, the call was overturned only because there was no precedent for that particular situation. The umpires made the call based on what the rule said, but whoever reviewed the protest felt a different interpretation was in order. The call was overturned and the rule was rewritten to cover such a situation in the future. Think of it as the Supreme Court overturning a lower court's decision. As for the first part, where have I heard that before.... Not only would it be very rare that 4 MLB umps misinterpret a rule, it would be pretty rare that even one would. These guys are very good, they know those rules backwards and forwards. The Brett snafu was truly a grey area. Different league president and you may have had a different answer. It turned out right in the end.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 02:19 AM) As for the Crede play it's not a question of what Crede did or failed to do but rather the fact that the same pitcher had beaned Rowand earlier in the inning. My experience as a little/pony league umpire leads me to believe that when that happens you give the benefit of the doubt to the hitter because the pitcher has already proved his wildness. Damn. Well, my experience as a player in pinto ball taught me that it's easier when the dad from the other team pitches because he doesn't want to look like he's throwing easier to his kid so let's do that. No, it IS a question of what Crede did, and what the umps always do -- the MAJOR LEAGUE umps. It's not, however, a question of what you did as a little league ump.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 01:07 AM) Jackie, what does playing the game 'under protest' really mean? You hear it a lot, does anything ever become of it? Basically, you're saying that you think the ump is wrong, and while you will complete the game, if the president of the league decides that the ump was wrong (in the way you specified), the game will be restarted from the point of the blown call at some later time. If the protesting team wins, it's all thrown out the window. In little league it can be important, b/c the umps may actually be unclear about the rules. But in the majors it's very rare to see anything happen. The George Brett pine tar incident is the only example I can find.

As long as the pitching holds up, I won't get upset at all. Stuff happens -- but our G brothers were fantastic, and the biggest weak spot was Buehrle. He'll recover, and the hitting will pick up too (including Dye). Honestly, I think everyone's just upset about the umps, in a close game, you know. I don't feel any different than I did 2 days ago.

QUOTE(Whitesoxfan56 @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 12:32 AM) Question???? Could the sox have protested that game if they wanted to....my little brother was asking me and I dont think you can, but maybe i was wrong? anybody no for sure? No, whether or not the batter tried to avoid the pitch is a so-called judgement call. You can only protest the game if you disagree with the interpretation of the rules, not a judgement call. It would be like protesting over the strike zone, it's not allowed. (With good reason.) Doesn't mean you can't b****, though. (I'm not saying the Sox should or should not -- I haven't seen the play.)

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Apr 27, 2005 -> 02:09 AM) Mmmmmm... Italian beef. Somebody send me an Al's quick! (And while you're on Taylor get me a big Italian lemonade from Mario's too.) I miss my Chicago food. Lou's, and good f'n Mexican places everywhere, and the dogs. And geez, Italian beef. Hot or sweet, I miss that stuff so bad.

I am not jealous of the Cubs, why would you be? Someone I know from college, who has never cared about baseball (knows Ted Williams as the frozen guy rather than the .400 guy, Mickey who?, has no idea Kerry Wood ever struck out 20 batters in a game, or even why that would be important) is obsessed about getting Cubs tickets every year. Would you rather be with people like that, or people like these?

Tigers team physician: It is our expert medical opinion that the intestine in fact had protuded through a hole in the knee, thereby rendering the contract void. Did I say it w/o smirking that time, Mike?

Baltimore had a great draft. Clayton obviously is one of the better receivers, and Cody was a steal in the 2nd round. Terry and Brown were both highly ranked lineman, a big area of need for Baltimore (youth and depth on the o-line). Derek Anderson fell pretty far, he's a good developmental qb. I don't know about the 5th and 7th rounders, but still, that's a very nice class. It's not just Kiper -- the Ravens have a reputation for drafting well. Look at their 1st round picks. All are still in the league, about half are stars, and there's only one bust (Travis Taylor -- which gives you some pause considering that they took a receiver this year, but we'll see).

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Apr 26, 2005 -> 12:41 AM) Good job Frank Gore............ahem, Addy. Nice touch, fitting tribute. Good job w/ the forum, Addy. I give it a B, most of my draft questions were answered, but we'll have to wait a few years to see if any impact threads come out of it.

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Apr 26, 2005 -> 12:06 AM) I never said: "Don't post anything negative" I said: Don't think so negative all the time or you'll miss out enjoying this wonderful start! And that's fine. But calling someone a ""fan"" because they're negative bothers me. Since this is a Sox fan site, it's a short step from that to the 'why don't you just leave then' posts, and it would be very sad if that sort of thing happened here. That's all I'm saying.

QUOTE(Fotop @ Apr 25, 2005 -> 11:57 PM) Talk about kickers, I think the Bears have the rights to Nick Setta, former ND kicker. This guy is solid, and I hope he gets his shot w/the Bears because he's a class guy and a Illinois native. (I think he kicked for NFL Europe last year) Yeah, I think I read that he missed 2 kicks out of 6 -- each one being 20-some yard kicks. So just keep taking delay of game penalties until you've got a kick of 30 yards+, and he should be fine.

It's entirely possible to be too negative, I agree. But I'm worried that if I post something like, 'Our pitching can't be this good all year, we have get on base more/pick sb opportunities better/whatever', someone's gonna jump all over it with an 'we don't care what so-called "fans" like you think, we rock, just enjoy it jerk'. I AM enjoying it. Does that mean I have to think it'll last all season?

Willie, what's the source of the Jackson profile? Thanks in advance.

As much as I hate it when someone says 'The Sox suck because KW didn't sign the guy I wanted, the immortal [insert AAA/$25 mil talent here]'... I hate it just as much when someone says, 'We're winning, so I don't want to hear anything negative out of any of yous'. No thought police is why this is a good site.

QUOTE(Fotop @ Apr 24, 2005 -> 08:37 PM) Am I going crazy or has Brandon Browner of Oregon State not been drafted yet? This guy is like 6'4" and he's a corner...I guess the knock on his speed really hurt him. Or maybe I just couldn't find him in the draft logs. Nope, still undrafted. Kind of strange that he and Shazor may both slip out of the draft completely.