Hamari too quick?

[Stk004]

2 hours ago, TheRockawayKid said:

 

 

I don't know if I'd say it was a de facto suspension as much as he wasn't really needed at all, but that's a different story. 

 

My argument, and I may be outside my train here, is a bit like what lawump mentioned about his story. Perhaps Hamari knew something was coming (we all did -- but we didn't know what "it" was), and tossed when it happened because he was keyed for it. As far as rule 8.02 -- that rule is a bit vague. I don't know what rules interpretations say constitutes "at" a batter, but we know intent is a judgement call (and people can make errors in judgement).  If "at" a batter means "in the direction of with the intent of injuring and/or intimidating," then I think we have an answer.

But if we're talking about trying to drill the batter, I don't believe that was what he was trying to do (remember the first pitch of the 2015 WS Game 3 that came in high -- and the Royals thought it was a headshot). 

I mean even this year, there have been plenty of umpires who gave more rope than Hamari did (think the Donaldson ejection after an AB against Phil Hughes). 

Sorry, but I don't think that the ejection was warranted -- as long as that was the end of it, which I think it would have been. 

This last part stood out to me. What happens when this isn't the end of it? Now I'm not saying NS would do this, but what if he goes headhunting with the next pitch and gives Utley a serious injury (yes I know he broke tejadas leg but)? Now we've unleashed a whole new $#!% storm. I think this warranted an EJ. 

[Dbellyflop]

3 hours ago, basejester said:

B) How can we know he didn't just miss his target?  Maybe he didn't put in enough hours at hit-the-batter practice.  

Because he's a major league pitcher that throws 90+ on the corners all night long. in his 34 starts 245 strike outs and 40 walks. if he wanted to drill him he would have.

i guess all i'm saying is that the rule says "The pitcher shall not intentionally pitch at the batter."  ????

[ricka56]

5 hours ago, Dbellyflop said:

Because he's a major league pitcher that throws 90+ on the corners all night long. in his 34 starts 245 strike outs and 40 walks. if he wanted to drill him he would have.

i guess all i'm saying is that the rule says "The pitcher shall not intentionally pitch at the batter."  ????

A MLB pitcher never thinks about injuring a batter because he has such command of his pitching. And he is trained to throw the ball for strikes. Deciding to intentionally throw at a batter is not something he practices much ( I would hope). Either the lack of practice or his conscience getting the better of him could cause him to miss hitting the batter. 

But if he intentionally missed, so what if he fooled PU into EJ'g him. Pulling a stunt like that and fooling the PU is on F1, not PU. 

And if a more seasoned umpire might have handled it differently, again, so what. F1 picked a bad time (with AH on the dish) to pull that stunt. Again it's on F1, not PU.  

[lawump]

There's a great YouTube video of Tom Glavine trying to hit Dale Murphy (of the Phillies).  He tries to hit him four times but he couldn't do it...he was just too good a pitcher to intentionally throw that bad a pitch, I guess.  He finally gets tossed after ball four.  Go to YouTube and search "Tom Glavine ejected".

[maven]

Glavine had 12 strikeouts to that point in that game. Yeah, he had no control over ALL FOUR of those pitches. Ha.

 

[ricka56]

I love that a pitcher can't argue this kind of ejection because that would defeat the purpose of his true intent.