|
|
|
Brooklyn Met Fan is proud to present his newest feature, “The Mexism of the Day.”
…my favorite mexism so far is Keith telling the story of his time running out in to a tornado…classic stuff…
Will Sommer of Mets Fans Forever lists three reasons why the Mets have more respect for Jerry Manuel than they had for Willie Randolph.
Speaking of lists, Newsday’s David Lennon lists five ways for the Mets to stay alive this season.
Over at Hot Foot, Gary Grund, posts hilarious video of a cat and mouse situation between Pat Venditte, who is an ambidextrous pitcher for the Staten Island Yankees, and Ralph Henriquez of the Brooklyn Cyclones during last night’s game.
 |
 |
 |
RSS 2.0 Both comments and pings are currently closed.
IF Pat Venditte was on any other club, he’d have to pitch to switch hitters against the grain. The rule states that a switch hitter is allowed to switch sides up until two strikes into the count. A switch pitcher should not be given the advantage against switch hitters because there’s too much advantage towards the pitcher in that situation. Switch hitters never face the same side pitcher, and for them to have to do so because a freak of nature comes is bogus. The batter is ALWAYS, and Has ALWAYS been allowed to decide from which side of the plate he wants to bat against the pitcher….not the other way around. This is an abomination of the game, and needs to be put to an end immediately. Batter choses.
K ~
The umpire got it wrong. Don’t compound the issue, and ever let that sniveling cheater Venditte get away with it ever again.
K ~
Vindittie is a pussy for not beaning him.
The rules have said all along that the Pitcher declares first. It’s not a matter of him being on the Yankees. It’s a matter of what the rules state. Period.
Will Sommer, you need to relax!
I can’t believe this web site, which I love, would give any credibility to such bull dung. Where did Will Sommer pull that crap from.
Willie disciplines Reyes, and he goes in the tank. Willie, bad manager. Manuel disciplines Reyes during game; and Reyes responds by going 3-4 for one game. Manuel, great manager.
Then Sommer says suggest that only Manuel had the deft touch to show confidence in Perez when he was on the verge of implosion which resulted in Perez keeping his cool and finishing the inning. So, Willie never gave Perez that chance? Willie never said how important it was for Perez to get mentally tough when he struggled with his location and on the verge of one of his infamous implosions? More bull crap from Sommer.
Sommer is pitiful, and Mike, you’re pitiful for publishing that crap on this excellent site. Very poor job.
Watched that Cyclones vid…that is pretty funny stuff… recap: Yankees pitcher is a “switch pitcher” while the Mets batter is a switch hitter…the batter went into the box as a righty, so the pitcher was throwing righty…batter switched to the left side, and in response, the pitcher switched to his left arm…this went back and forth for a while, and eventually the pitcher got pissed…frankly, I don’t understand what right he has to get pissed off
The rule definitely is that the “switch-pitcher” has to declare at the beginning of the at bat what side he’s throwing from. They put that in a bunch of years ago when Greg Harris was in the league — he only actually threw 1 inning from his “other” side, but the rule was there anyway.
What I don’t know are the rules about when a switch-hitter can switch sides. But it seems like they’re probably the same as if a manager goes to his pen to “turn a switch hitter around” — the batter’s always allowed to switch then, so I’d think he’d be allowed to turn around once the pitcher declared which arm he’s using. But it’s definitely the case that once the pitcher has declared (or I’m guessing, demonstrated his intention to use) a particular arm, he can’t switch. So I’m pretty sure the umps got it wrong.
If anyone can point to an authoritative source for this, that would be great.
You’re absolutely right. Venditte and the yankays are cheaters. The pitcher has to pick a side he wants to pitch from before the at-bat begins. That’s the compromise. If a switch hitter is a little weaker from one side, the pitcher can opt to pitch to pitch against that weaker side, but to have a switch hitter bat against the same side is ridiculous.
K ~
That is hilarious. I’ve gotta side with the pitcher here, though. Ultimately, the batter should have to pick a side.
My thoughts go back to Jim Abbott, a lefty who didn’t have a right hand. He used to balance his glove on the end of his right arm, and on his follow through, put the glove on his left hand. So clearly, the pitcher does not need to be wearing a glove when the at bat begins. Why wouldn’t these rules apply here? Couldn’t Venditte just balance the glove on both hands while holding the ball with both hands in the set position on the rubber? The batter has to pick a box to stand in and things would go from there. It gets a little more complicated when there’s a guy on base. Maybe that could be the compromise: if the pitcher wants to throw from the stretch, he has to pick first, otherwise, it’s on the batter.
This is an amazingly ridiculous situation, by the way. And that video really is one of the funniest baseball moments I can remember.
The fact is that there are specific rules in the book for ambidextrous pitchers, so they supersede anything that jim abbott ever did.
In terms of your suggestion of “letting it go from there” — do you honestly think that a batter would have any hope of hitting a ball thrown over 85 MPH from 60 feet 6 inches away if he didn’t know where it was coming from? Not to mention that it would be dangerous from the hitter’s perspective.
Well, if a batter didn’t know where it was coming from, I agree that an 85 MPH ball thrown from 60 feet 6 inches would be difficult to hit (to some hitters, an 85 MPH ball thrown from 60 feet 6 inches is difficult to hit anyway). However, at some point in the very beginning of his windup, it would be obvious to everyone (batter included) which hand the pitcher would be using to throw the ball. So no, I don’t think it would be any more dangerous than an 85 MPH fastball from 60 feet 6 inches would ordinarily be.
Obviously, if there are specific rules in the book regarding ambidextrous pitchers then that’s the end of the discussion and there’s no need for debate and the entire question is moot. I was posting under the assumption that no such rules had been recorded (since no one has referenced them yet), which is why I mentioned Jim Abbott. Had there not been any rules in the book, I believe Abbott’s case makes a compelling argument in favor of the pitcher when there are no runners on, which is, again, why I mentioned it.
Can anyone find the rules regarding ambidextrous pitchers?
Why should the batter be forced to hit from a side that he would never face against another pitcher? You are obviously wrong, there is a rule in place, and it sides with the batter. Pitcher cannot switch until the at bat is over.
I’m obviously wrong, huh? Well, if there is a rule that stipulates that the hitter gets to dictate which arm the pitcher throws with, or that the hitter gets to change sides after the pitcher is locked in, then I most certainly am wrong. However, since I’ve yet to see the rule, and the umps, coaches, and players seemed to be oblivious to this rule last night, I don’t see how it’s so obvious. I have no doubt that you know more about obscure baseball rules than they do, but apparently it isn’t so obvious.
Or is it just obvious because the pitcher was a Yankee and the batter was a Met?
Look, I’m perfectly willing to accept the rule if it’s in the rulebook. I don’t believe I’ve been claiming to know whether last night’s ruling was the correct one or not. But people simply saying “it’s in the rulebook”, “the pitcher’s cheating”, and “you’re obviously wrong” just isn’t that convincing. I’d honestly just like to know the rule.
From a post to Toby Hyde’s “Mets Minor League Blog”:
“According to Tim Bontemps in the New York Post:
The rule governing both switch hitters and pitchers is once the player commits to hitting or pitching from one side, they are allowed to switch one time during the at-bat. The rule, however, doesn’t specify whether the hitter or the pitcher is forced to declare first.”
Again, I’d love for someone to demonstrate what is the overwhelming conclusion that it’s batter’s choice. I’m not saying either side is right, nor am I saying the New York Post is the definitive authority on baseball rules, all I’m saying is that it seems rather ambiguous and not as “obvious” as people here are making it out to be.
Funny, the NY times has something different.
“A switch-pitcher facing a switch-hitter could make a fine Abbott and Costello routine. Against Nebraska last year, a switch-hitter came to the plate right-handed, prompting Venditte to switch to his right arm, which caused the batter to move to the left-hand batter’s box, with Venditte switching his arm again. Umpires ultimately restored order, applying the rule (the same as that in the majors) that a pitcher must declare which arm he will use before throwing his first pitch and cannot change before the at-bat ends.”
This was from an article about said pitcher last year.
Finally, someone posts a reference. Hallelujah! Thanks!
Google finds even the most obscure MLB stats and rules, it is a very valuable research tool.
Ah yes, good point. Because Google is a very valuable research tool, the pitcher must choose first. Citing the fact that the information can likely be found somewhere on the internet isn’t the best way to back up your point. But I’ll accept statnut’s NY Times article as enough evidence to back the position. Shame no one on the Cyclones staff and none of the umpires was aware of the obvious rule, though. Who knows what could have happened…
Okay, it’s been a long week. Reading over these posts I’ve made, I see that I come off as bitter, defensive, immature, overly sarcastic, and generally kind of an a-hole, so dsb, fats, and statnut I apologize for that. The rules say the pitcher has to choose first, they screwed things up last night, it’s late and the Mets won. Movin’ on…
If you think about it, it should be the other way around.
Example: Team A brings in lefty to face a lefty hitter. Team B then brings in a righty to face lefty pitcher. Team A is stuck with the lefty pitcher.
Obviously its a little different, but there are similarities.
Your other post (NY Times) makes your point. There appears to be a rule that sides with the hitter. This example could just as easily be…
Example: Team A sends up a righty to face a lefty pitcher. Team B then brings in a righty to face that righty hitter. Team A is stuck with a righty hitter.
i caught it quickly on sportscenter this morning but didn’t realize it was Mets v Yanks. classic. damn yankees, quit complaining and pitch. surprised he didn’t plunk him.
I saw this, this morning on NBC news only they sped it up. So all you saw for like 15 seconds was the pitcher switching his glove to the other hand, then the batter walking around to the other side of the box, going back and forth. Hilarious….
I’m thinking there has to be a rule somewhere on this. If not, they’ll want to be coming up with one before this pitcher makes it to the majors.
That’s hilarious.
man, that’s an impressive talent for that kid to have….if he’s any good, the Yankees have a gem. Even Torre and Randolph couldn’t mess up the lefty-righty situational relief pitching with that.
I agree with everyone above that the pitcher should have to declare which side he’s gonna pitch from and stick with it in that situation, but even so, that kind of pitcher still has a tremendous advantage normally, considering switch hitters only make up a small percentage of the total players in the league, and most switch hitters have a side they are weaker from.
“Even Torre and Randolph couldn’t mess up the lefty-righty situational relief pitching with that. ”
Yes they could. They’d have the kid throwing with his…
off topic, but I was just reading about Schilling having season ending surgery in the near future. anyway, I thought it was funny that before the season Schill wanted to have the surgery but the Sox thought he could just rehab and get better, they disputed and got a third opinion from guess who…one of the Mets trainers. Needless to say with all the injuries we’ve had and the way the training staff handled Church and no one has seen Pagan since his injury, our trainer in a sense got it wrong with Schilling too (schill did say rehab made him stronger but just couldn’t turn the corner completely). i’m still for getting a new training staff eventhough I understand it’s hard to get late 30 early 40 yr olds healthy.
LETS GO METS! lets get Maine another Win tonight.
Not sure why Pat Venditte was so surprised. This had obviously come up before in his college years. The New York Times even wrote about him last year:
Slow news day…
on the Fan Eddie C just said that Easly will be at 2nd as a reward for for the last game and that Castillo is fine.
Good.
Play good?
Play.
Pretty simple logic.
How many catchers are there on the roster?
Colorado is supposed to have heavy thunder storms tonight, hope they can get the game in. I would hate for this team to have another double header.