What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

MLB 2011 Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1

Scarlet said:
None of whom post here so comments like that are unnecessary.
Click to expand...

My apologies, Scarlet. I was venting at a couple of pinheads that I'm friends with on Facebook that were making jokes about it. My wife's uncle recently came out and she's been trying to deal with it. (She's accepting of it, but she's worried about what everyone thinks.) My anger wasn't directed at you or any other sane Red Sox fans.
 
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1

Good God, I want the umpire's union on my side of future labor negotiations.

Asshat Joe West now is using replay outside of the rules. I'm sure Selig will keep his head up his *** on this, too.
 
First Time said:
Fan interference on home runs is allowed to be reviewed.
Your issue here is the ball was not and could not be a home run not the fan interference.
Click to expand...

Granted, I didn't/couldn't see the replays/video of it, but from what I read the technicality is that Manuel went out and argued that it should be a home run. At that point, does the play in question become an argued home run and video replay can be used? And if so, can the only realistic outcomes of this play therefore be a home run or a say 'ground rule double' since the out was not made? This seems to be a play that you only see once in about 10 blue moons. (Again, just able to go off the articles I read, not being able to see replay)
 
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1

I like the fact Nyjer plays hard. It's refreshing to see someone giving maximum effort. However, he needs to check himself before Gabby Sanchez clotheslines him again. Puljos did bring up a valid point about how he's been on three teams in four years. Not everything is a personal affront to you, Mr. Morgan.

EDIT: I also thought Milton Bradley going to the M's was a terrible idea. He's a head case as well whose attitude has forced him out of the game and Morgan may do that to himself down the line.
 
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1

MLB and ESPN really blew it tonight.

Mets to wear regular uniform hats for Sept. 11 game

NEW YORK — As they did on Sept. 21, 2001, when they played the first professional baseball game in New York following the Sept. 11 attacks 10 days earlier, the Mets wore caps bearing the logos of Emergency Service Departments for warmups prior to tonight's game against the Chicago Cubs.

Unlike that night 10 years ago, the Mets will not wear the caps in the game.

"MLB has put an edict out: We have to wear our regular hats," Mets manager Terry Collins — wearing an FDNY hat — said in his pregame media briefing.

The Mets issued a statement explaining why they chose not to wear the emergency service caps this time around: "MLB set a leaguewide policy as it related to caps and uniforms for Sept. 11 and we followed the guidelines," the statement read.

Of course, Major League Baseball issued the same edict 10 years ago, but for that Sept. 21 game, the Mets defied the edict and wore the emergency service caps that night anyway.

During batting practice, the team's two union representatives, catcher Josh Thole and reliever Tim Byrdak, discussed the idea. The team appeared in favor of it, consequences be ****ed.

"What are they going to do?'' Thole said. "They're going to fine us?''
Click to expand...

Well, yes. Reportedly, so much that the team had to buckle.

Wearing an FDNY hat for pregame warmups tonight held special meaning to Mets reliever Bobby Parnell.

"It's a big deal, because my father's a firefighter and really felt the impact of 9/11 back home, throughout the fire department community," Parnell said before the Mets and Cubs squared off on a special "Sunday Night Baseball." "To be here now, and to have the opportunity to go out there and represent him is a big honor."

Parnell, whose father, Bob, is the fire chief in Salisbury, N.C., spent Saturday evening visiting the area of Ground Zero, in lower Manhattan, with a friend, Chip Thomas, and Thomas' family. Thomas is a firefighter in Salisbury.

"It was actually a good visit," Parnell said of Saturday night. "There weren't very many people down there — the people that were, were mostly firefighters in their dress blues and their Class A uniforms. Everybody was real quiet, just walking around, seeing the scenery."
Click to expand...


Meanwhile, ESPN didn't want to miss its chance to play Scrooge...

Bobby Valentine, who managed the Mets in 2001, is in town to do the television broadcast for ESPN. The Mets asked ESPN if Valentine could participate in their pregame ceremony to commemorate Sept. 11, but ESPN declined, saying Valentine has "responsibilities" and is unavailable. The Mets plan to recognize Valentine at some point during the game, according to a team spokesman.
Click to expand...

This isn't rocket science, folks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top