I don't get that. Granted he obviously is lacking any sort of common sense in this situation, but this rule is frustrating to me.
Pitchers are, in an unspoken agreement, allowed to use pine tar in cold weather. Yet when someone is completely non-discreet they get thrown out with a (basically) 2 game suspension.
Either it's legal or it's not.
The way Jeter played SS yesterday, you'd think he did get hit in the head. Awful.
haha, well played. and this is on Pineda for being stupid enough to get caught when the spotlight was on him from the last time...but 10 games is still silly. 5 games (1 start), fine
The way baseball arbitrarily enforces their 'rules' is a goddamn joke
It's a rule. But you can do it. Just don't be so obvious about it.
Retarded.
How is this unlike doping, speeding (not everyone gets caught), or small business owner tax evasion?
It's the law/rules. If you dont get caught - great, you got to your destination faster. If you get caught, take your ticket, fine, whatever like an adult and move on.
RE: RE: RE: absurd. If Lackey had thrown at Jeter's head
The way Jeter played SS yesterday, you'd think he did get hit in the head. Awful.
haha, well played. and this is on Pineda for being stupid enough to get caught when the spotlight was on him from the last time...but 10 games is still silly. 5 games (1 start), fine
Agree. But apparently if they don't appeal, he'll only miss one start due to the team having a day off. I like the sound of that. Nice, little middle finger to the Red Sox and MLB.
If you are going to break the rules, don't do it so blatantly. That's it.
This is the stupidest attitude about the whole thing. Either enforce the rule or get rid of it, but this whole bullshit nudge-nudge wink-wink "discretion" line is a joke.
I would say a very high percentage of starters use pine tar or
a substance that gives them a better grip on the ball. This rule needs to be changed by baseball immediately. It is a stupid rule. Would they rather have a pitcher have no control over his pitches and start hitting batters because he can't feel the grip of the baseball because of cold weather? This issue should be an easy fix.
Secondly, it is a rule that is violated in almost every game without any fanfare. That doesn't justify it but it should, and does in my view, demonstrate the abject stupidity of the rule. Having a rule that no one follows and that is virtually never reported means you need to revise or get rid of the rule.
None of that changes the fact that Pineda is a world class donkey for making it so obvious. I mean, why not the left side of his neck or under the brim of his cap. Apparently that would have made all the difference to Pope Farrell.
Francesa's analogy was good.. he said something along the lines of "when you stay at a hotel, if you grab a towel and take it with you or some soap, you throw em in your bag it's no big deal.. people do it.. but when you try carrying the tv out of the room, it's a little different"
Just don't be so blatantly obvious about it. I don't even like the rule, I think it shouldn't matter.. but all these guys know that if they're blatantly obvious, they'll get caught on it.. especially Pineda after the last time. Just be a little discreet. Shouldn't be THAT hard.
a substance that gives them a better grip on the ball. This rule needs to be changed by baseball immediately. It is a stupid rule. Would they rather have a pitcher have no control over his pitches and start hitting batters because he can't feel the grip of the baseball because of cold weather? This issue should be an easy fix.
Cone and Leiter have both said exactly this during broadcasts. They both said they used pine tar many times throughout their careers
if all players universally (it seems) have no issue with pitchers using pine tar (many seem to encourage it), then why isn't it legal? Why wouldn't the players go to the union or to the competition committee to change the rule?
pitcher (or many of them anyway) is able to use pinetar without having a big shmear along the side of his neck? I mean, it was almost like a comedy routine. "oh that? on my neck? that's nothing--birthmark--just came on since last inning". He really deserves more than 10 games for stupidity. The rules are a little odd, but everyone else seems to figure it out, how come he can't?
And really? Anti-Yankees prejudice? Come on, now! I don't want to get a big fight started, so I won't, but....c'mon, man!
pitcher (or many of them anyway) is able to use pinetar without having a big shmear along the side of his neck? I mean, it was almost like a comedy routine. "oh that? on my neck? that's nothing--birthmark--just came on since last inning". He really deserves more than 10 games for stupidity. The rules are a little odd, but everyone else seems to figure it out, how come he can't?
And didn't ANYONE in the Yankee dugout see it and mention it to him??? What are they blind?
Francesa's analogy was good.. he said something along the lines of "when you stay at a hotel, if you grab a towel and take it with you or some soap, you throw em in your bag it's no big deal.. people do it.. but when you try carrying the tv out of the room, it's a little different"
Just don't be so blatantly obvious about it. I don't even like the rule, I think it shouldn't matter.. but all these guys know that if they're blatantly obvious, they'll get caught on it.. especially Pineda after the last time. Just be a little discreet. Shouldn't be THAT hard.
This is a terrible analogy because Francesa is comparing two completely different actions-- taking shampoo and taking a television. Whether Pineda had the pine tar on his neck or in his glove, it doesn't change his action. It doesn't change the fact that it's pine tar that he's touching so as to give him the ability to grib the ball in cold weather.
Failure to cover up the action doesn't make it a more grievous or severe action. It just makes it easier to get caught.
Talk last night about how they used to put stuff on their belts to hide it.
Why didn't the Yankees better advise Pineda on this? How did no one see it on their bench but Farrell and the Red Sox did as soon as the 2nd inning started?
A complete failure by the Yankees on this and an embarrassing side note to this season so far.
Francesa's analogy was good.. he said something along the lines of "when you stay at a hotel, if you grab a towel and take it with you or some soap, you throw em in your bag it's no big deal.. people do it.. but when you try carrying the tv out of the room, it's a little different"
Just don't be so blatantly obvious about it. I don't even like the rule, I think it shouldn't matter.. but all these guys know that if they're blatantly obvious, they'll get caught on it.. especially Pineda after the last time. Just be a little discreet. Shouldn't be THAT hard.
This is a terrible analogy because Francesa is comparing two completely different actions-- taking shampoo and taking a television. Whether Pineda had the pine tar on his neck or in his glove, it doesn't change his action. It doesn't change the fact that it's pine tar that he's touching so as to give him the ability to grib the ball in cold weather.
Failure to cover up the action doesn't make it a more grievous or severe action. It just makes it easier to get caught.
I think you're taking it too literally.
The idea is that a lot of people take something from a hotel room.. it's not a big deal when it's something small, no one gives you grief over it and no one is going to search your bags for it. But if you take something that makes it so obvious that someone HAS to say something, they will.
I mean, you can replace the TV with like all the pillows from the bed or something. It made sense to me. The idea is if you're going to do it, just be at least somewhat discreet. If you're going to make it look like you took a dump in your hand and wiped it all over your neck, someone's going to say something. And Pineda should have been WELL aware of that.
MLB is a joke. There's a rule against, but technically you can do it, just as long as you don't do it 'too much.' Tough to take MLB seriously with things like this.
Put in a situation that he had to do it. He would have been crucified by the media after letting him get away with it 10 days before.
Pineada had a huge microscope on him last night and chose to be an idiot and not try to hide it.
For the hotel analogy its like stealing the towels but announcing that you are doing it in front of the staff and all the guest and not expect them to do anything where if you snuck out you probably get away with it.
Put in a situation that he had to do it. He would have been crucified by the media after letting him get away with it 10 days before.
Pineada had a huge microscope on him last night and chose to be an idiot and not try to hide it.
For the hotel analogy its like stealing the towels but announcing that you are doing it in front of the staff and all the guest and not expect them to do anything where if you snuck out you probably get away with it.
Agree 100%. And yeah, that's a better way of using the analogy. That's basically what Mike was getting at.
In cold weather games the catchers put pine tar all over their shin guards and put it on the ball when they throw it back. Almost all pitchers use it one way or the other.
Pineda is stupid knowing the Redsawx would be looking for it. I love how people are acting like hes some sort of cheater. I can almost guarantee you every pitcher that has a name for himself has used it many times.
Look at Lester last year. Clearly used it at least twice. Bucholtz is known for it.
Pineda's choice for where to put was just mind boggling though. All he had to do was tell McCann to stick a wad under his leg guard and put a little on each ball he throws back like every other team does it.
coming from the Caribbean. People are treating him like some fool because someone probably told him to use pine tar but did not show him how it was done. He gets dogged but someone should have advised the kid on what to do after the first time.
Francesa's analogy was good.. he said something along the lines of "when you stay at a hotel, if you grab a towel and take it with you or some soap, you throw em in your bag it's no big deal.. people do it.. but when you try carrying the tv out of the room, it's a little different"
Just don't be so blatantly obvious about it. I don't even like the rule, I think it shouldn't matter.. but all these guys know that if they're blatantly obvious, they'll get caught on it.. especially Pineda after the last time. Just be a little discreet. Shouldn't be THAT hard.
This is a terrible analogy because Francesa is comparing two completely different actions-- taking shampoo and taking a television. Whether Pineda had the pine tar on his neck or in his glove, it doesn't change his action. It doesn't change the fact that it's pine tar that he's touching so as to give him the ability to grib the ball in cold weather.
Failure to cover up the action doesn't make it a more grievous or severe action. It just makes it easier to get caught.
I think you're taking it too literally.
The idea is that a lot of people take something from a hotel room.. it's not a big deal when it's something small, no one gives you grief over it and no one is going to search your bags for it. But if you take something that makes it so obvious that someone HAS to say something, they will.
I mean, you can replace the TV with like all the pillows from the bed or something. It made sense to me. The idea is if you're going to do it, just be at least somewhat discreet. If you're going to make it look like you took a dump in your hand and wiped it all over your neck, someone's going to say something. And Pineda should have been WELL aware of that.
Again, the problem is that in Francesa's and now your analogy the item being taken in front of the hotel people's faces is a lot bigger, more valuable, and thus a more egregious "theft."
This analogy only works if Pineda were caught with sandpaper in an obvious place and people justified that with a reference to pine tar in a glove. Then you can say it's like taking shampoo discreetly vs. a TV in plain sight.
Again, you're taking it too literally. You can replace the TV with a stack of towels or the pillows from the room stuffed under your arms.. something obvious enough where they'd probably have to say something to you at the door because you're being too blatant.
If the guy has it under his belt or McCann is putting some on there before he tosses it out.. whatever it is.. if it's less obvious than being smudged all over his neck, Farrell wasn't going to make a big deal about it. But it was right out in the open for everyone in the world to see. It's very easy to be more discreet than that. Pineda for whatever reason couldn't figure that out.
And as I've already said, i think the rule is dumb. A lot of these guys use it, it doesn't change the way the ball moves.. just make it legal. But as it stands right now, the rules are what they are.
the problem with Francesa's analogy and with the point many fans are making is that they are conflating the obviousness of the "cheating" with the severity or evilness of the "cheating"
the problem with Francesa's analogy and with the point many fans are making is that they are conflating the obviousness of the "cheating" with the severity or evilness of the "cheating"
Agree with this.
First, the hotel truly does not care about the soap or the shampoo, but they do care about the towels, and taking them is just stealing. Same as the TV.
Second, what's baffling about the pine tar thing is that no one thinks there is anything wrong with using it (unlike stealing towels or a TV, which is wrong), just with being obvious about it. So in that sense Pineda did not steal towels, he just did something that no one considers wrong. He just did it in an obvious way, which should not be wrong if the action itself is not wrong.
So people really are conflating right/wrong with obvious/not so obvious. I don't blame anyone though. The problem is that MLB is totally f'd up on this issue. The link from Deadspin or wherever that Greg posted earlier today sums up the absurdity.
the problem with Francesa's analogy and with the point many fans are making is that they are conflating the obviousness of the "cheating" with the severity or evilness of the "cheating"
The point fans are making is that it is quite easy to not be that obvious. All Pineda needed to use here was a modicum of common sense.
You can think the rule is stupid and that Pineda also used poor judgement. The two are not mutually exclusive. There was attention brought to it the very last time he pitched. Why would you go out there against the SAME team with it smudged all over your neck for everyone in the world to see?
If you're going to be blatant about it and basically dare someone to call you out, don't be surprised when they do.
The master of foreign substances said you can get the same effect by spitting on your hand and grabbing the resin bag because it is dried pine tar. If anyone should know he should. ;).
If Pineda accepts suspension, due to off-day Monday, #Yankees would need an extra starter (probably Phelps) just once
Pitchers are, in an unspoken agreement, allowed to use pine tar in cold weather. Yet when someone is completely non-discreet they get thrown out with a (basically) 2 game suspension.
Either it's legal or it's not.
Retarded.
The way Jeter played SS yesterday, you'd think he did get hit in the head. Awful.
Except it wasn't his second offense. No one except the media brought up the pine tar the first time.
Quote:
he wouldn't have even gotten suspended
The way Jeter played SS yesterday, you'd think he did get hit in the head. Awful.
haha, well played. and this is on Pineda for being stupid enough to get caught when the spotlight was on him from the last time...but 10 games is still silly. 5 games (1 start), fine
Retarded.
How is this unlike doping, speeding (not everyone gets caught), or small business owner tax evasion?
It's the law/rules. If you dont get caught - great, you got to your destination faster. If you get caught, take your ticket, fine, whatever like an adult and move on.
Quote:
In comment 11636815 mfsd said:
Quote:
he wouldn't have even gotten suspended
The way Jeter played SS yesterday, you'd think he did get hit in the head. Awful.
haha, well played. and this is on Pineda for being stupid enough to get caught when the spotlight was on him from the last time...but 10 games is still silly. 5 games (1 start), fine
Agree. But apparently if they don't appeal, he'll only miss one start due to the team having a day off. I like the sound of that. Nice, little middle finger to the Red Sox and MLB.
This is the stupidest attitude about the whole thing. Either enforce the rule or get rid of it, but this whole bullshit nudge-nudge wink-wink "discretion" line is a joke.
Secondly, it is a rule that is violated in almost every game without any fanfare. That doesn't justify it but it should, and does in my view, demonstrate the abject stupidity of the rule. Having a rule that no one follows and that is virtually never reported means you need to revise or get rid of the rule.
None of that changes the fact that Pineda is a world class donkey for making it so obvious. I mean, why not the left side of his neck or under the brim of his cap. Apparently that would have made all the difference to Pope Farrell.
Just don't be so blatantly obvious about it. I don't even like the rule, I think it shouldn't matter.. but all these guys know that if they're blatantly obvious, they'll get caught on it.. especially Pineda after the last time. Just be a little discreet. Shouldn't be THAT hard.
Cone and Leiter have both said exactly this during broadcasts. They both said they used pine tar many times throughout their careers
And really? Anti-Yankees prejudice? Come on, now! I don't want to get a big fight started, so I won't, but....c'mon, man!
And didn't ANYONE in the Yankee dugout see it and mention it to him??? What are they blind?
Just don't be so blatantly obvious about it. I don't even like the rule, I think it shouldn't matter.. but all these guys know that if they're blatantly obvious, they'll get caught on it.. especially Pineda after the last time. Just be a little discreet. Shouldn't be THAT hard.
This is a terrible analogy because Francesa is comparing two completely different actions-- taking shampoo and taking a television. Whether Pineda had the pine tar on his neck or in his glove, it doesn't change his action. It doesn't change the fact that it's pine tar that he's touching so as to give him the ability to grib the ball in cold weather.
Failure to cover up the action doesn't make it a more grievous or severe action. It just makes it easier to get caught.
Why didn't the Yankees better advise Pineda on this? How did no one see it on their bench but Farrell and the Red Sox did as soon as the 2nd inning started?
A complete failure by the Yankees on this and an embarrassing side note to this season so far.
Quote:
Francesa's analogy was good.. he said something along the lines of "when you stay at a hotel, if you grab a towel and take it with you or some soap, you throw em in your bag it's no big deal.. people do it.. but when you try carrying the tv out of the room, it's a little different"
Just don't be so blatantly obvious about it. I don't even like the rule, I think it shouldn't matter.. but all these guys know that if they're blatantly obvious, they'll get caught on it.. especially Pineda after the last time. Just be a little discreet. Shouldn't be THAT hard.
This is a terrible analogy because Francesa is comparing two completely different actions-- taking shampoo and taking a television. Whether Pineda had the pine tar on his neck or in his glove, it doesn't change his action. It doesn't change the fact that it's pine tar that he's touching so as to give him the ability to grib the ball in cold weather.
Failure to cover up the action doesn't make it a more grievous or severe action. It just makes it easier to get caught.
I think you're taking it too literally.
The idea is that a lot of people take something from a hotel room.. it's not a big deal when it's something small, no one gives you grief over it and no one is going to search your bags for it. But if you take something that makes it so obvious that someone HAS to say something, they will.
I mean, you can replace the TV with like all the pillows from the bed or something. It made sense to me. The idea is if you're going to do it, just be at least somewhat discreet. If you're going to make it look like you took a dump in your hand and wiped it all over your neck, someone's going to say something. And Pineda should have been WELL aware of that.
MLB is a joke. There's a rule against, but technically you can do it, just as long as you don't do it 'too much.' Tough to take MLB seriously with things like this.
Pineada had a huge microscope on him last night and chose to be an idiot and not try to hide it.
For the hotel analogy its like stealing the towels but announcing that you are doing it in front of the staff and all the guest and not expect them to do anything where if you snuck out you probably get away with it.
Pineada had a huge microscope on him last night and chose to be an idiot and not try to hide it.
For the hotel analogy its like stealing the towels but announcing that you are doing it in front of the staff and all the guest and not expect them to do anything where if you snuck out you probably get away with it.
Agree 100%. And yeah, that's a better way of using the analogy. That's basically what Mike was getting at.
Pineda is stupid knowing the Redsawx would be looking for it. I love how people are acting like hes some sort of cheater. I can almost guarantee you every pitcher that has a name for himself has used it many times.
Look at Lester last year. Clearly used it at least twice. Bucholtz is known for it.
Pineda's choice for where to put was just mind boggling though. All he had to do was tell McCann to stick a wad under his leg guard and put a little on each ball he throws back like every other team does it.
I agree 100%. Actually, I'm not sure he will, but I definitely think he should.
Quote:
In comment 11636904 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Francesa's analogy was good.. he said something along the lines of "when you stay at a hotel, if you grab a towel and take it with you or some soap, you throw em in your bag it's no big deal.. people do it.. but when you try carrying the tv out of the room, it's a little different"
Just don't be so blatantly obvious about it. I don't even like the rule, I think it shouldn't matter.. but all these guys know that if they're blatantly obvious, they'll get caught on it.. especially Pineda after the last time. Just be a little discreet. Shouldn't be THAT hard.
This is a terrible analogy because Francesa is comparing two completely different actions-- taking shampoo and taking a television. Whether Pineda had the pine tar on his neck or in his glove, it doesn't change his action. It doesn't change the fact that it's pine tar that he's touching so as to give him the ability to grib the ball in cold weather.
Failure to cover up the action doesn't make it a more grievous or severe action. It just makes it easier to get caught.
I think you're taking it too literally.
The idea is that a lot of people take something from a hotel room.. it's not a big deal when it's something small, no one gives you grief over it and no one is going to search your bags for it. But if you take something that makes it so obvious that someone HAS to say something, they will.
I mean, you can replace the TV with like all the pillows from the bed or something. It made sense to me. The idea is if you're going to do it, just be at least somewhat discreet. If you're going to make it look like you took a dump in your hand and wiped it all over your neck, someone's going to say something. And Pineda should have been WELL aware of that.
Again, the problem is that in Francesa's and now your analogy the item being taken in front of the hotel people's faces is a lot bigger, more valuable, and thus a more egregious "theft."
This analogy only works if Pineda were caught with sandpaper in an obvious place and people justified that with a reference to pine tar in a glove. Then you can say it's like taking shampoo discreetly vs. a TV in plain sight.
If the guy has it under his belt or McCann is putting some on there before he tosses it out.. whatever it is.. if it's less obvious than being smudged all over his neck, Farrell wasn't going to make a big deal about it. But it was right out in the open for everyone in the world to see. It's very easy to be more discreet than that. Pineda for whatever reason couldn't figure that out.
And as I've already said, i think the rule is dumb. A lot of these guys use it, it doesn't change the way the ball moves.. just make it legal. But as it stands right now, the rules are what they are.
Agree with this.
First, the hotel truly does not care about the soap or the shampoo, but they do care about the towels, and taking them is just stealing. Same as the TV.
Second, what's baffling about the pine tar thing is that no one thinks there is anything wrong with using it (unlike stealing towels or a TV, which is wrong), just with being obvious about it. So in that sense Pineda did not steal towels, he just did something that no one considers wrong. He just did it in an obvious way, which should not be wrong if the action itself is not wrong.
So people really are conflating right/wrong with obvious/not so obvious. I don't blame anyone though. The problem is that MLB is totally f'd up on this issue. The link from Deadspin or wherever that Greg posted earlier today sums up the absurdity.
The point fans are making is that it is quite easy to not be that obvious. All Pineda needed to use here was a modicum of common sense.
You can think the rule is stupid and that Pineda also used poor judgement. The two are not mutually exclusive. There was attention brought to it the very last time he pitched. Why would you go out there against the SAME team with it smudged all over your neck for everyone in the world to see?
If you're going to be blatant about it and basically dare someone to call you out, don't be surprised when they do.