NFT: pine tar

the reason people are saying it's ok to use it descreetly is because it won't be caught during the game. If noticed by cameras, it will be after the game and at that point, MLB can't do anything about it. If it's not discreet and cameras spot it during the game like last night, in an attempt to make a story, then the managers have no choice but to say something. Thats what people mean.

In comment 11636008 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

is that every manager basically chalks it up to part of the game, except for yours. Getting punished for cheating isn't what's being argued. Basically, your manager is a hypocrite.

So, coaches cant point out obvious violations of the rules to umpires and refs without being hypocrites? So coughlin cant yell about a holding call because the Giants get away with holding too?

Oh, because its baseball and theres "unwritten rules". Bull. If youre a manager and you see something like that, you are an idiot for not pointing it out to the ump IMO

that no one calls in during games to notify the managers. Seems like that would be so simple nowadays. Unless they do and just ignore it.

is that the Red Sox went out of their way after the last game to say it was no big deal, and they would rather the guy had a grip than not. I thought I remembered even the manager saying it was no big deal. Definitely a dick move on their part after saying those things, but they also know the Yankees are pussies and will never retaliate. From Big Ploppi and his interminable trots, to allowing the red sox to hit A rod without consequence, to not bunting when Schilling was hobbled, the Yanks don;t hold anyone accountable. So to those expecting some kind of payback for this, don't hold your breath.

Accuse every single one of those motherfuckers every single game. You know they'll catch at least one of them.

holding and pinetar are the same thing...

Not going to argue about it. Like I said, I don't really care what happened. Just seems strange that you won a World Series, cheating in the process, but then point fingers. It's just like steroid use and the excuses of Ortiz and whoever else not getting caught. We all know he/they do/did them.

Either let it be legal for everyone to use or ban it completely. This not discreet and discreet stuff is bullshit and stupid

True, but why the big question to why it is wrong even when obvious? It is always wrong, and if used so latently how can anyone complain if enforced?

Also I bet if teams really wanted to they could have someone watching the television feeds just for that purpose and complain more often, it really wouldn't be hard to do at all. But I go back to my original point that it is likely most managers prefer to just look the other way.

I just don't see any real confusion here it simply is what it is, a rule that will be enforced if a player is found to be using it at the time and complained about doing so by the opposing manager.

Surprised they didn't find a sander underneath his cap

.

it is banned for everybody.

Because of all this bullshit, everyone will forget that Jeter can't field his position anymore.

*

who said last week that it's not just not a big deal, but necessary for batters' safety. Something like: "We use PT to get a grip on the ball. So it's either MLB pitchers using PT, or they pitch without grip and batters get hit in the head by out-of-control pitches."

1) It is hypocritical because his pitchers have been blatantly guilty of doing the same thing. Looking back at the first incident, I am now convinced the Sox said nothing because they knew their own pitcher was doing the same thing. Last night, Lackey was probably clean, hence the complaint.

2) I don't think anyone is actually condoning the cheating when they say do it discreetly. It is more along the lines of, if you want to get away with it or have the "unwritten rule" applied, don't have the shit out in the open and certainly don't do it a a second time against the same team in a week's time. That's just dumb.

3) By the rules, Pineda absolutely should have been ejected. I have no problem with the umpires decision.

4) I think the last couple of years have given enough incidents and evidence to re-visit the rule for this. Why can't the umpires examine a player when it is so blatant until the opposing manager complains? Should they just allow the use of pine tar at the umpires' discretion, as they do with going to the mouth?

In comment 11636044 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

that no one calls in during games to notify the managers. Seems like that would be so simple nowadays. Unless they do and just ignore it.

It seems there would be a competitive advantage for a team to have someone on payroll intensely watching every camera for the slightest hint of this, to alert the team in real-time and have the pitcher removed.

No one does that because the practice is so widespread. It would boomerang on anyone who tried.

Which is why Girardi needs to start constantly going to umpires about Sawx pitchers.

it would be an advantage. You'd be scouting for cheating, but why wouldn't that be allowed?

I'm not advocating it, just curious if teams do it, or why they don't do it.

but like with anything, there's a lag to take advantage.

Not just pitchers. They should be checking bats, make sure uniforms are standard, complain about jewelry, etc. They should just nitpick everything. And, for the love of G-d, nail Ortiz square in the back already.

I didn't mean competitive advantage in a negative way, I meant it positively.

He should be mad at his own player for being so dumb about how he went about it. He uses it so openly and just after having used it the game before against the same team. So much so in that game that they were asked about it but the Boston players chose to just played it down. So for him to come back and then so blatantly do it was practically and insult which begged to be complained about. There is zero chance they complain if he had a small amount tucked away inside his glove. He was a dope and this is the result. I think Girardi will be smart and let it die at that.

The one thing you bring up that is being largely ignored about Girardi and Rothchild os not the retaliation, but the accountability. It is not just Pineda who was stupid. How do the manager and pitching coach let him go out like that last night? did they not see him go back into the clubhouse? Did they not see his neck?

mentioned on MLB radio why didn't the Yankee pitchers or coaches teach him out to use it discretly. They make a good point.

Good point, but realistically it was likely when he was on the mound when they first saw it themselves. What are they to do at that point? I guess they could have went to the mound with a towel and had him wipe it off, but that stuff doesn't come off easy probably need something else like turpentine to help beak it up so that would have just been an embarrassing nightmare of an event to be played on highlights for decades to come. It really falls on the pitcher.

discreetly or having it hidden in a glove is a distinction without a difference. If the belief is that using pine tar for grip is cheating, then it doesn't matter where the pitcher hid the pine tar. It would have the same result.

In fact, I believe it's better when it is out in the open for everyone to see. No one cares about using pine tar for extra grip, and most batters would prefer that the pitchers have the ability to grip the ball and not pitch like Rick Vaughn on Opening Day.

When the substance is hidden, then we become unaware of exactly what the pitcher is using. Maybe he has a file that allows him to scuff the ball, maybe it's something else.

When it's out in the open, we know what the pitcher is using and how he is using it, and we can see that it is purely for some grip.

This is just another example of MLB knowing what the majority of players are doing, that it violates the written rules, but are pleading ignorance and leaving it as a Wild West situation where it becomes only about which players get caught as nothing more than a PR stunt to act as if they are ridding the sport of bad behavior.

What a farce.

couldn't have said it better myself.

that the pinetar was not really noticeable in the dugout where the lighting is not nearly as bright. Pineda is dark and close in complexion to the color of pinetar, and why would a manager have any reason to think to look at his neck. I wouldn't have noticed it in the dugout.

I think it was only when he was out in the open on the field, under the bright lights of Fenway, or on camera that you could see the substance because of the way it reflected the lights.

of my original post. (Sorry for using "discrete" instead of "discreet," though. Hadn't had my coffee yet.)

It seems that Pine Tar is wink-nod cheating to a lot of people. It has this throwback element of gamesmanship as a euphemism for cheating, where wily players are just finding an edge. Statements like "if you're not cheating you're not trying" and "it's not cheating if you don't get caught" sort of romanticize this idea.

As a result, it's seen as a far, far lesser evil than performance enhancing drugs.

have McCann or whoever is catching put it on the ball they rarely check the catchers!! Just ask Yogi!!! he'd cut up the ball for Whitey (Ford that is ;-0).

MLB is not going to have umpires check every inch of every glove, belt, hat etc between each inning of a 162 game schedule.

If you put in on the umps and baseball then you really would have a farce because there is zero chance of it being enforced evenly or fairly towrds every team throughout the entire season.

The onus is where it should be and that is on the opposing manager to make the accusation to the umpire.

Well since it is banned like you say then being discreet about it should not excuse someone from using it. An ump can't do anything about it unless a manager says something about it is just stupid. Get rid of it or allow it.

legal?

Quote:

Major League Baseball Rule 8.00 governs behavior for pitchers. Subsection 8.02 clearly states: “The pitcher shall not apply a foreign substance of any kind to the ball.” That means any substance. Even spit balls are illegal. The penalty for violating this rule is immediate ejection from the game, and a possible suspension.

Saying it's legal if used discretely isn't that like saying steroids and PED's are legal if you don't get caught?

The root of the problem is the MLB. Don't have grey rules. Keep things black and white. If its banned enforce the rule.

But currently its a grey area where if you are discreet about it nobody cares. SO just be discreet about it. Pineda crossed a line of discreetness last night. He basically forced the managers hand to say something because it was blatantly obvious. Very different from Lester and Bucholtz

I really can't understand the outrage. The enforcement of the rule is dumb but Pineda is a fucking idiot.

if another manager points it out to the ump. Much like they did last night when they had to enforce the rules.

that's my problem with it. I really don't care if my team's pitcher uses pine tar because everyone does it.

But placing it on your neck so the whole world can see is about as dumb as it gets. It was just so obvious that it felt almost like Pineda or the Yanks were making an intentional statement. Just weird and I think Pineda should and will get a 5 or 6 game suspension and miss a start.

"Major League Baseball Rule 8.00 governs behavior for pitchers. Subsection 8.02 clearly states: 'The pitcher shall not apply a foreign substance of any kind to the ball.'”

Pine tar is not a "foreign substance." It's from North Carolina.

(statement attributed to Jim Kaat)

I just addressed why it is not realistic or practical to put it on MLB and the umpires in my last post. Do so would be a nightmare wrought with fans and teams feeling they are either being targeted or allowed to be victimized. The onus is correctly on the managers to complain.

In comment 11636208 Giants Fan in Steelers Land said:

Quote:

The root of the problem is the MLB. Don't have grey rules. Keep things black and white. If its banned enforce the rule.

There is nothing grey about the rule, but saying "just enforce it" is a little unrealistic. Should the umps check the pitcher and his equipment every inning as he walks to the mound? Examine the ball after every pitch to look for any residue? There's no practical way to enforce a rule about doctoring the ball if pitchers are effective at concealing it. Gaylord Perry made a good living off of that impracticality.

In comment 11636212 kmed said:

Quote:

if another manager points it out to the ump. Much like they did last night when they had to enforce the rules.

False. LaRussa told the umps about Kenny Rogers in the 2006 Series, and all he had to do was wipe off his hand.

was Billy Martin in the right or not? Was he a hypocrite? Should Brett's Home run be chalked up as "part of the game".

I look at it as sort of like the "in the neighborhood rule" for double plays. It should be overlooked if it's within reason and not if it's excessive. Obviously, what's within reason and excessive is subjective. I have no clue as whether it was wrong for Farrell to go out or not. It's worth noting that Girardi, Cashman, and Pineda had more of an issue with Pineda than with Farrell

IMO is greatly different because that is done largely because of player safety. This is likely mostly "tolerated" by majority of manager for their own long term self interest.

The rules should be enforced equally however there is always going to be some subjectivity. In the case of Rogers didn't the umps conclude that it was likely just some dirt mixed in with rosin (which is allowed) that had kind of clumped up? Pure pine tar would be hard to just simply wife off easily with a towel.

In comment 11636259 Bill L said:

Quote:

was Billy Martin in the right or not? Was he a hypocrite? Should Brett's Home run be chalked up as "part of the game". I look at it as sort of like the "in the neighborhood rule" for double plays. It should be overlooked if it's within reason and not if it's excessive. Obviously, what's within reason and excessive is subjective. I have no clue as whether it was wrong for Farrell to go out or not. It's worth noting that Girardi, Cashman, and Pineda had more of an issue with Pineda than with Farrell

I'm talking about 2014. Not going to sit here and defend Billy Martin and what he did 30/40 years ago. Different time, different game. I wasn't alive then, so it's irrelevant to what i'm talking about.

In comment 11636319 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

In comment 11636259 Bill L said: Quote: was Billy Martin in the right or not? Was he a hypocrite? Should Brett's Home run be chalked up as "part of the game". I look at it as sort of like the "in the neighborhood rule" for double plays. It should be overlooked if it's within reason and not if it's excessive. Obviously, what's within reason and excessive is subjective. I have no clue as whether it was wrong for Farrell to go out or not. It's worth noting that Girardi, Cashman, and Pineda had more of an issue with Pineda than with Farrell I'm talking about 2014. Not going to sit here and defend Billy Martin and what he did 30/40 years ago. Different time, different game. I wasn't alive then, so it's irrelevant to what i'm talking about.

In other words, the Yankees did it so it doesn't count.

glad someone was able to dig up a super relevant example to help there argument...

I'll answer the question though just for fun. Martin WAS a hypocrite!!!!!!

Does that make things better?

sometime this decade, then you'd have a point.

The actions of a guy who died 25 years ago have a direct bearing on this discussion, UConn.