quickman Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 On Mike and Mike, they were talking about the Crede call, although they believe Crede purposely wanted to get hit, they said its never called. Tim Kurjchin chimed in and said he sees Craig Biggio do this all the time and its never called. He also cited Harry Wendelstedt doing the the same thing many years ago in a tight ballgame. Mike Greenberg said that was probably the last time it was called. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I can remember watching Sox games back to the southside hitmen, and I don't remember that ever being called. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 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. It was blatant and obvious. Crede's inability to get over it was what bothered me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quickman Posted April 28, 2005 Author Share Posted April 28, 2005 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. It was blatant and obvious. Crede's inability to get over it was what bothered me. Well I agree, he leaned into it, now all the umps will be watching him. I did find it interesting that people are now talking about how its never called. If anything all the umps will be watching more closely on these plays. It just magnifies the issue. upper hand shifts to pitchers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 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. It was blatant and obvious. Crede's inability to get over it was what bothered me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Just as long as Wendelstedt Jr. has called it consistently in the past and will make the exact same call every time it happens in the future. We'll never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 Well I agree, he leaned into it, now all the umps will be watching him. I did find it interesting that people are now talking about how its never called. If anything all the umps will be watching more closely on these plays. It just magnifies the issue. upper hand shifts to pitchers. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's great the Chicago White Sox volunteered to be the guinea pig. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 QUOTE(The Critic @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 06:32 AM) 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. It was blatant and obvious. Crede's inability to get over it was what bothered me. That's all well and good, but I'll only be happy when they start calling it on a big name player like Barry Bonds, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndplsSoxFan Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 QUOTE(The Critic @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 06:32 AM) 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. It was blatant and obvious. Crede's inability to get over it was what bothered me. 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 (edited) Its a rule that's rarely enforced, but it is a rule. Its like the balk rule in which pitchers must come to a complete stop in the stretch. It was never called until baseball decided to emphasize it, and was called 4 or 5 times a game. It appears to have been de-emphasised, because it is rarely called anymore, and a lot of pitchers don't come to a stop. MLB probably came to the realization that adding 4 or 5 balks to the game really did nothing but make the game longer. The Crede call has been called before. I saw it called twice in the same game with the Sox against I believe KC 4 or 5 years ago. As I have said previously, this all comes down to Wendelstedt's history. Players leaning into pitches happens quite often. If he consistently has called it, the White Sox have absolutely no argument. If he never calls it, or just uses it against players and managers he's had confrontations with, the league needs to discipline him. Discipline him not for calling it on Crede, but discipline him for not calling it the other times. I don't think it would be too hard for MLB to investigate it. Edited April 28, 2005 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 Wouldn't the pitch have hit him anyway??? Does it matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawnhillegas Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 did anyone watch the dodgers game and see craig counsell get hit. he leaned into the pitch much more than crede did and there wasnt even an argument. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upnorthsox Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 01:53 PM) 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. So AJ shouldn't have gotten the base when he got hit in the toe or Carl shouldn't when he got hit in the ass since neither made an attempt to get out of the way. Come to think of it, Piazza didn't try to get out of the way on that famous beaning he got from Clemens either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 QUOTE(upnorthsox @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 08:14 AM) So AJ shouldn't have gotten the base when he got hit in the toe or Carl shouldn't when he got hit in the ass since neither made an attempt to get out of the way. Come to think of it, Piazza didn't try to get out of the way on that famous beaning he got from Clemens either If Everett didn't make an attempt to get out of the way, how come that pitch hit him in the back? Turning which is a natural reaction counts towards trying to get out of the way. If he didn't move it would have hit his hip or ribs. Crede dipped his elbow into the pitch with the intent of letting it hit him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 09:20 AM) If Everett didn't make an attempt to get out of the way, how come that pitch hit him in the back? Turning which is a natural reaction counts towards trying to get out of the way. If he didn't move it would have hit his hip or ribs. Crede dipped his elbow into the pitch with the intent of letting it hit him. He didn't really try to get "out of the way", IMO. He just moved a different part of the body in front of the pitch. He didn't duck, or move backwards, he just turned his butt into the pitch instead of his side. Everett had every intention of letting the pitch hit him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxrd5 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 08:20 AM) If Everett didn't make an attempt to get out of the way, how come that pitch hit him in the back? Turning which is a natural reaction counts towards trying to get out of the way. If he didn't move it would have hit his hip or ribs. Crede dipped his elbow into the pitch with the intent of letting it hit him. Details, details.... :rolly As for the Piazza didnt get out of the way...A 94 MPH fastball riding up and in directly at your head is not the same as a spinning curve ball that was thrown at Crede, not even close, fwiw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ISF Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 You're too quick to say that Crede let it hit him. I mean, we're talking about Crede here. I'm pretty sure he's simply too slow to get out of the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 08:24 AM) He didn't really try to get "out of the way", IMO. He just moved a different part of the body in front of the pitch. He didn't duck, or move backwards, he just turned his butt into the pitch instead of his side. Everett had every intention of letting the pitch hit him. If you've been in the box with a guy throwing 95, you'll realize there is very little you can do to get out of the way. Crede was up against a slow curveball. Not only did he make no effort to get out of the way, he made an effort to get in the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSteve Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I remember seeing the same thing happen in a Braves game a few years ago. It was called interference...I can't believe they called it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 09:33 AM) If you've been in the box with a guy throwing 95, you'll realize there is very little you can do to get out of the way. Crede was up against a slow curveball. Not only did he make no effort to get out of the way, he made an effort to get in the way. If we are being technical, the rule saids nothing about pitch speed. The only thing specified is that they try to get out of the way. Technically substituting one body part for another isn't getting out of the way. Also the rule doesn't make any distinctions between trying to get hit, and just not trying to get out of the way. The only thing that is specified is this. The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when He is touched by a pitched ball which he is not attempting to hit unless (1) The ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or (2) The batter makes no attempt to avoid being touched by the ball; If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, it shall be called a strike, whether or not the batter tries to avoid the ball. If the ball is outside the strike zone when it touches the batter, it shall be called a ball if he makes no attempt to avoid being touched. There is nothing in there about trying to get hit. Technically, it shouldn't make a differece in the umps mind. Technically Crede did not get out of the way of the pitch, so technically he didn't deserve the base. But Everett didn't make any effort to get out of the way either, he only tried to get hit in a different place. And that in a nutshell is why the rule that was enforced against Crede was ignorant. If you want to make that call, and use the rule to justify it, I would be willing to bet that call should be made on at least 50% of all HBPs, if the umps followed this rule to the letter of the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 28, 2005 -> 06:46 AM) 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. 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. Crede's selfish reaction after the popup is far more troubling to me, because it shows that he let the ump get in his head when he was in the wrong. Still, that play didn't cost them this game. The offense was pathetic yesterday, and the defense was too. Edited April 28, 2005 by The Critic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 (edited) I think Pete Rose was king of 'taking one for the squad', never saw it called on him, BS call. Edited April 28, 2005 by LosMediasBlancas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitesoxfan56 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 On SportsCenter the D-backs dodgers game, craig concuel(SP) put his arm into a pitch with the bases loaded and the ump GAVE HIM HIS BASE this was worse then the crede thing this is f***en bulls*** :fyou :fyou :fyou :fyou :fyou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.