Ozzie Guillen is a funny dude:

"He said I cursed him, and I said I cursed him 1,000 times," said Guillen, recounting his explanation to Watson during a 30-minute phone conversation Tuesday. "Yes, I did. I wish I had more time to curse him a little bit more ... I hope he does hold a grudge, because I will hold a grudge," Guillen said. "If we have trouble every time I see him, good, I'll take the chance."

Also funny:
"He's a piece of (expletive)," Guillen said in a tirade to Chicago reporters after learning Ordonez referred to Guillen as the "enemy" during their series against the Detroit Tigers this week.

"He's an (expletive). That's what he is. He's another Venezuelan (expletive). (Forget) him. He has an enemy. Now he has a big one. He knows I can (hinder) him a lot of different ways. He better shut the (heck) up and play for the Detroit Tigers."

"I think Magglio is playing with fire," he said. "I'm not afraid of him. I have nothing to apologize (for). I have nothing to do with Magglio wearing the Detroit Tigers uniform.
"I don't give a (heck) what he does for the rest of his life. He (messed) with the wrong guy."

I guess things have come full circle since the Jerry Manuel regime.

The Kid wrote:I guess things have come full circle since the Jerry Manuel regime.

Or maybe I meant to say half-circle...or something.
Things are different on the south side, was my point.
I'll leave Sox fans to decide whether things are better.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:Please. How is trading a 100% chance of getting on base for about a 20% chance of getting on base "pathetic"? That's not "self-confidence". That's "stats".

Crede's pop up does nothing to diminish the absurdity of that call. What a joke.

You know what, Brad? Let's give Crede his base. Then there's bases loaded, two outs. I still like the Athletics' chances in that inning.

Angus Jung wrote:Apparently the pizzas provided for the White Sox in the visitor's dugout didn't have much pepperoni either. It's an outrage.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:I admire your efforts at irony and obfuscation, but it's still dirty fucking pool -- or at least incredibly amateurish.

Those same lights could've helped Aaron Rowand catch Durazo's ball to start the ninth. But alas.

The lights were on for Dye the night before, right?

My advice for the White Sox: More fly ball practice, less bitching and conspiracy-mongering.

And if you don't want to get hit with pitches, quit standing on the fucking plate. That goes double for you, Carl "Triceratops" Everett.

Angus Jung wrote:
And if you don't want to get hit with pitches, quit standing on the fucking plate. That goes double for you, Carl "Triceratops" Everett.

I don't think the sox players were adverse to getting hit by pitches. I didn't see one of them "rush" the mound. Carl was hit twice and both pitches were well in the batter's box. This isn't dirty pool, it's getting on base. You accept the possibility of getting hit by 90 mph projectile for the gain of the chance of changing the pitcher's routine. When someone is tight on the plate it changes the way you think about pitching (at least for some pitchers). Many pitchers don't like pitching inside and this changes their delivery. Also, If you are quick on the inside pitch then you have effectively made the strike zone more hitable for yourself by getting up on the plate.

The point is that you should be awarded a base if you are hit. Crede wasn't upset about being hit. Neither were the other four Sox batters. Proof: Sox players did nothing from the batter side or pitcher side to retaliate. All that was expected was to have the base awarded for a pitch that was in the right hand batters box. I'm going to look for the rule, because I thought that you couldn't lean into a pitch that wasn't in the batters box, making Crede's effort fair. I'm not sure about the rule.

The lights being turned on for the bottom half was a blatant violation of the rules, regardless of whether it helped anybody or not.

I still think the Sox lost that one on bad execution. The A's almost lost it for the same reasons! Angus is right about liking the A's chances even if Crede's awarded 1st. I just don't think the win or loss is the point. I loathe umpires that become an active participant in the game. Another case: A's pitcher Huston Street was allowed to get drying compound raked into the mound in the middle of an at bat. I've seen this before when a pitcher slips, but never just because and in the middle of a 3-2 count. The umpire asked him before he started pitching if he would like the quick dry, he said no. The umpire should have waited until the end of that at-bat. I'm not sure if there is a rule on that one, but I think it's another example of the umpire enjoying being a part of the game beyond the calls.

Allen

Oh yeah, just to stay on topic, Dye is CRAP!!!!

I love the arm.

I hate when it is used to launch one over the cut-off man.

I can think of three (maybe two) times when he missed the guy at third and 1st and 2nd turns into 2nd and 3rd.

Perhaps Ozuna in Right.

Angus Jung wrote:You know what, Brad? Let's give Crede his base. Then there's bases loaded, two outs. I still like the Athletics' chances in that inning.

You can "like your chances" as much as possible, but we'll never know because of a bullshit call.

Shall we start disallowing "neighborhood" outs on double plays as well?

Or perhaps we can call batters out for stepping beyond the backline of the batter's box.

Angus Jung wrote:Those same lights could've helped Aaron Rowand catch Durazo's ball to start the ninth. But alas.

The lights were on for Dye the night before, right?

My advice for the White Sox: More fly ball practice, less bitching and conspiracy-mongering.

The point is that if you want to praise "good calls", then you should also acknowledge when nonsense takes place.

Hey, guys make mistakes. As much as it drives me crazy, I'm not going to beat up Dye for missing an easy fly ball (something that Torii Hunter did a few days before on a similar play). I can live with that.

But I hate nonsense. And I saw some nonsense yesterday.

Angus Jung wrote:And if you don't want to get hit with pitches, quit standing on the fucking plate. That goes double for you, Carl "Triceratops" Everett.

Are you serious? Do you really contend that this "standing on the plate" nonsense accounts for a combined TWENTY bases on balls and HBPs from the Oakland staff in a three game series?

This number does not include the Crede HBP or the ball that Harden threw behind Everett.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:You can "like your chances" as much as possible, but we'll never know because of a bullshit call.

The call was correct, Brad. According to the rules of baseball:
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/offic ... r_6.jsphen

when the batter makes no attempt to get out of the way, he doesn't get first base.

This is never called, but when the batter takes it even further than that, to the extent Crede did, to purposefully stick his fucking arm out (on an offspeed pitch he knew wouldn't hurt him), he forces the umpire's hand. Crede's chickenshit antics should not be, and were not, rewarded.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:The point is that if you want to praise "good calls", then you should also acknowledge when nonsense takes place.

See, I think the point is that your team has a great chance to sweep a series if they just catch a couple of fly balls, and they don't, yet you're talking about true "nonsense" like turning lights on.

Rule 6.08:
"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… (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."

Bradley, this was a good call by the umpire. Not only did Crede make no attempt to avoid being hit, he CLEARLY stuck his arm in the hope that he would be hit. Furthermore, it looked like the pitch would've been a strike, in which case he should've had a strike called against him on top of it all.

This umpire saw what everyone else on the field, in the dugouts and in the stands saw: A player deliberately and purposefully sticking his arm out, not a player turning away.
There's a difference between "turning into a pitch" (a la' Craig Biggio) and taking one on the shoulder or side, and blatantly sticking your arm out on a slow curveball.
The "neighborhood" equivelant that you're talking about is what Biggio does every other game. No umpire would dare call him back to the plate when he's hit on the shoulder or mid-section after turning in towards the plate and back at the catcher/ump.
Is he trying to get hit? Of course.
Is he making it blatantly obvious that he his? Not really.

Turning into a pitch will make a pitcher's eyes roll and prompt a few chirps from the manager, but they all know it will never be called.

What Crede did though, was as obvious as it gets. No self-respecting umpire would ever let Crede take his base on that play.

Angus Jung wrote:The call was correct, Brad.

I'm glad that you are comfortable with this rule, particularly the strict interpretation of it that you advocate (at least in this specific instance).

Now name one time that you can remember this rule being invoked. I bet you one Don Baylor that you cannot. I will raise you one Fernando Vina if you do.

And I might even be tempted to throw in a Brian Downing.

You make it sound like Crede used his arm as a bat. Wtf. Duchscherer threw a slow breaking ball well inside. If Crede leaned into it, then I have no problem with that. What kind of fool wouldn't want to get hit by that pitch with two strikes -- thereby moving the go ahead run to third? And who's going to think that this cobweb-covered rule would get dusted off for a slow breaking ball that hung inside? Chickenshit, my ass. That's a smart, quick-thinking play.

Tell Duchscherer or any other member of the Oakland staff (namely Zito, Harden and Yabu) to find the plate and I'll become much more sympathetic to your argument. And if that call comes from anyone else other than Hunter Wendelstedt, I would not have even raised the issue.

Angus Jung, except for the fact that you are an A's fan, I am very surprised that you are arguing this point. I'm actually a little bit disappointed.

But I'll get over it!

Now you'll please excuse me. I'm off to measure the pine tar on the bat that Erubiel Durazo used to hit his home run yesterday.

I mean, rules are rules.

6-4-3 wrote:[I]t looked like the pitch would've been a strike, in which case he should've had a strike called against him on top of it all.

Please have your eyes checked.

Salut, friends! Baseball, she is so great to talk about in Idaho and California and Illinois!

Yes, the Sox radio announcers said exactly that...saying that they hadn't seen this rule invoked in thirty years.