You can bear your own faults, and why not a fault in your wife?
Benjamin Franklin
Tweet of the Day
@Pontifex Fr. Rosica "embracing reality as it is" must not confound style with ambiguous doctrine. We are sinners. https://t.co/HDStYcrtqO
— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) October 11, 2015
Image of the Dayvia Lew Rockwell |
Dirty Baseball: Utley's Slide in Mets-Dodger Game
via CBS Sports |
So Saturday I was watching the Mets play the Dodgers. I have no dogs in this fight; as faithful readers know, I'm an American League fan. Now typically what shortstops or second basemen do in trying to turn a double play is drag their foot across the bag to force out the incoming base runner and often will take a step or two from the bag to pivot and throw to first pase. (This will come under scrutiny later.) In fact, Utley has already been called out as Tejada pivots. This is not a case where Tejada is perched on second waiting for the ball and Utley is making a hard slide to take possession of second base and beat the throw. Utley's only legitimate target is second base; but if you look at any angle, Tejada is a step or two right of the base, and Utley unambiguously is veering away from the base and directly at Tejada. He's de facto already out and deliberately focused on preventing the throw to first. Now let me provide this entry for interference from Wikipedia:
In baseball, interference occurs in situations in which a person illegally changes the course of play from what is expected. Interference might be committed by players on the offense, players not currently in the game, catchers, umpires, or spectators. The most common incidence of interference occurs when a member of the offensive team physically hinders the defensive team, decreasing its chances to make an out or increasing the chance that a baserunner will advance. Whenever this offensive interference occurs, the ball becomes dead. If the interference was committed by a batter or a baserunner, that player is called out and all other runners must return to the bases they occupied at the time of the interference. If interference is committed by a runner with the obvious intent of preventing a double play, the batter-runner will be called out in addition to the runner who committed the interference.What I clearly saw was an absurdly timed "slide" that was a de facto chop block, taking out Tejada. (In fact, Tejada's leg is broken, and his season has ended.) I cannot explain what happened next, because there's not any doubt in my mind that interference occurred--Utley's slide is not even close to second base; it's directed at Tejada who was away from the base. He had been called out in advance of the slide, he had changed his path illegally--and even if he hadn't been forced out, by the rules, he should have been called out for his interference. I don't think the clip shows the aftermath of the collision. He ended up leaving the field acknowledging his forceout. He did not occupy second base, insisting Tejada hadn't forced him out. He left the field to the dugout:
Rule 8-4-2-p: A runner, after reaching first base, who leaves the baseline heading for the dugout or his defensive position believing there is no further play, shall be declared out if the umpire judges the act of the runner to be considered abandoning his efforts to run the bases.So what do these genius umpires do given the opportunity to review the tapes? Not only did they dismiss evidence of interference, but they decided that Tejada's foot didn't quite touch second base, so Utley was allowed to return to second base (and, of course, the first base runner was still safe) and eventually scored a leading, deciding run for the Dodgers. Talk about adding insult to injury!
Literally while I was starting to write this segment, major league baseball announced a 2-game suspension of Utley; I've not seen a response of whether he'll attempt to appeal the sanction; he better not: this was not sportsmanlike behavior, and I think players like him don't belong in baseball.
Facebook Corner
(Pro-Life Libertarians). See Image of the Day.
Ah, the economic idiocy and false choices of genocidal Statists. Yes, unless you support policies promoting morally corrupt State dependency funded by redistributive pillage, i.e., so-called positive rights, things that the State must do on your behalf, you don't support natural/negative rights, things that the State or others cannot unduly constrain of the individual. Positive rights don't amount to anything if one doesn't not respect the unalienable right to live. Of course, the free maket, unlike the corrupt monopolistic State, provides competition and variety for consumers, and voluntary charities work out of moral duty, not from an obligation to the State.
Choose Life: Babies Are a Gift From God
Political Cartoon
Courtesy of Ken Catalino via Townhall |
Roberta Flack (with Peabo Bryson), "Tonight I Celebrate My Love For You"
Who's Bombing Who?
There is too much risk for this thing for this situation to deteriorate quickly into a regional or even global conflict. I would like to see us exit the region ASAP.
Who’s fighting whom in Syria?
We explain this complex issue in 90 seconds
Posted by BBC News on Wednesday, October 7, 2015
5-Year-Old Sweetheart