PDA

View Full Version : Controversy at the end of last night's Dodgers/Giants game


doublem23
07-21-2010, 12:04 PM
Set the scene... It's the top of the 9th, Dodgers leading San Francisco 5-4. Closer Jonathan Broxton on the mound, having just issued an intentional walk to load the bases. Acting manager Don Mattingly (Torre was ejected earlier in the game) comes out to speak to Broxton and his infield. As he starts to return to the dugout, Dodgers 1B James Loney asks Mattingly a question, so Mattingly turns around to answer, inadvertently stepping off the mound's dirt and coming back on, technically two separate trips to the mound in an inning which, of course, means Broxton has to leave the game. The Dodgers don't have anyone else in the bullpen, so George Sherrill enters the game cold and well, you can guess how it ended.

http://deadspin.com/5592645/dodgers-lose-another-one-this-time-to-the-rulebook

Bizarre.

BleacherBandit
07-21-2010, 12:06 PM
This is also a game in which Joe Torre and several other players were ejected.

thomas35forever
07-21-2010, 12:07 PM
I saw the highlight for that last night. I've never seen anything like it before, but I guess there's a first time for everything in baseball.

doublem23
07-21-2010, 12:10 PM
I saw the highlight for that last night. I've never seen anything like it before, but I guess there's a first time for everything in baseball.

Props to Bruce Bochy who caught that instantly. Even Vin Scully put 2 + 2 together really quickly. I've been watching baseball for years, not only did I not know that was the official rule, but I never would have caught Mattingly. Had he walked 1/2 way to the dugout before coming back, all right, but he was literally 1 step off the mound when he turned back.

thomas35forever
07-21-2010, 12:14 PM
Props to Bruce Bochy who caught that instantly. Even Vin Scully put 2 + 2 together really quickly. I've been watching baseball for years, not only did I not know that was the official rule, but I never would have caught Mattingly. Had he walked 1/2 way to the dugout before coming back, all right, but he was literally 1 step off the mound when he turned back.
Well, when you've been with the Dodgers since they were in Brooklyn, you're bound to know everything about baseball.

WhiteSox5187
07-21-2010, 12:39 PM
I saw the highlight for that last night. I've never seen anything like it before, but I guess there's a first time for everything in baseball.

It happened a couple of years ago in Arizona I think. A manager was bitching with the umpire all night, went to talk to his pitcher, stepped off the mound, yelled at the umpire and then went back to continue his talk with the pitcher and the ump said it was the second visit the mound.

spawn
07-21-2010, 01:10 PM
It happened a couple of years ago in Arizona I think. A manager was bitching with the umpire all night, went to talk to his pitcher, stepped off the mound, yelled at the umpire and then went back to continue his talk with the pitcher and the ump said it was the second visit the mound.

From what they were saying on ESPN radio, this wasn't the first time Bochy has done this. Major props to him.

RedHeadPaleHoser
07-21-2010, 01:36 PM
Just read the story on Yahoo sports.....good job by Bochy in catching that.

Brain snooze on Mattingly's part I'm thinking....

BadBobbyJenks
07-21-2010, 01:40 PM
Nothing controversial about it, just a clear violation by Don.

TDog
07-21-2010, 02:27 PM
Props to Bruce Bochy who caught that instantly. Even Vin Scully put 2 + 2 together really quickly. I've been watching baseball for years, not only did I not know that was the official rule, but I never would have caught Mattingly. Had he walked 1/2 way to the dugout before coming back, all right, but he was literally 1 step off the mound when he turned back.

I was watching the Giants broadcast. Bochy said postgame that this isn't the first time he has called a manager/coach doing this, but I don't remember a previous occasion.

What killed the Dodgers is that they had no one warming up in the bullpen. (You would think Terry Bevington was managing.) The Dodgers attempted to stall to warm up a pitcher, but he had to come in without warming up and gave up a double to surrender the lead to the Giants. At the end of the game, the fans were chanting "Giants suck." The Dodgers had a big lead, threw at Rowand in retaliation and everything went bad.

The Giants and Dodgers have a heated rivalry anyway, surpassing the Red Sox and Yankees, although you wouldn't know it outside of California. The game began with a Giant hit batsman, and Lincecum hit a Dodger as well (although the Giants announcers insisted it was in retaliation for an earlier game where he stole second with a five-run lead). I think Torre was ejected when Rowand was hit, and that could have gotten ugly. Padilla of the Dodgers hit Rowand in the face, sideling him earlier in the season.

I gave up on the Giants when the score was 5-1, but it turned out to be one of the great games in the rivalry.

The two-visits rule, of course, is an MLB rule, not part of the official baseball rules, which only defines what a visit is. In the 1970s, the American League required the visits be to different batters, so what happened last night wouldn't have occurred. There was a World Series in the 1970s where they suspended the visitation rule and Dick Williams made so many trips to the mound that they never suspended the rule again.

BadBobbyJenks
07-21-2010, 02:32 PM
Why should anyone have been warming up with Broxton on the hill?

They ended up bringing in Sherill for god's sake.

doublem23
07-21-2010, 02:42 PM
I was watching the Giants broadcast. Bochy said postgame that this isn't the first time he has called a manager/coach doing this, but I don't remember a previous occasion.

What killed the Dodgers is that they had no one warming up in the bullpen. (You would think Terry Bevington was managing.) The Dodgers attempted to stall to warm up a pitcher, but he had to come in without warming up and gave up a double to surrender the lead to the Giants. At the end of the game, the fans were chanting "Giants suck." The Dodgers had a big lead, threw at Rowand in retaliation and everything went bad.

The Giants and Dodgers have a heated rivalry anyway, surpassing the Red Sox and Yankees, although you wouldn't know it outside of California. The game began with a Giant hit batsman, and Lincecum hit a Dodger as well (although the Giants announcers insisted it was in retaliation for an earlier game where he stole second with a five-run lead). I think Torre was ejected when Rowand was hit, and that could have gotten ugly. Padilla of the Dodgers hit Rowand in the face, sideling him earlier in the season.

I gave up on the Giants when the score was 5-1, but it turned out to be one of the great games in the rivalry.

The two-visits rule, of course, is an MLB rule, not part of the official baseball rules, which only defines what a visit is. In the 1970s, the American League required the visits be to different batters, so what happened last night wouldn't have occurred. There was a World Series in the 1970s where they suspended the visitation rule and Dick Williams made so many trips to the mound that they never suspended the rule again.

A) Why would they have someone warming? Broxton is their closer, there was 1 out in the 9th at that time.

B) I wasn't referring to the 2 visits rule, which I assume everyone knows about, more that each time the manager/coach steps on the mound that is considered a "visit."

TDog
07-21-2010, 02:46 PM
Why should anyone have been warming up with Broxton on the hill?

They ended up bringing in Sherill for god's sake.

Why should anyone be warming up when Jenks is on the hill?

The Giants had the bases loaded and one out, the only out being a Rowand sacrifice bunt. The Giants had the top of the order coming up. There was concern over the way he was pitching, hence the visit.

BadBobbyJenks
07-21-2010, 02:55 PM
Why should anyone be warming up when Jenks is on the hill?

The Giants had the bases loaded and one out, the only out being a Rowand sacrifice bunt. The Giants had the top of the order coming up. There was concern over the way he was pitching, hence the visit.

The rest of the Dodgers bullpen is complete crap. Taking out Broxton would be nuts.

doublem23
07-21-2010, 03:01 PM
Why should anyone be warming up when Jenks is on the hill?

The Giants had the bases loaded and one out, the only out being a Rowand sacrifice bunt. The Giants had the top of the order coming up. There was concern over the way he was pitching, hence the visit.

Considering he had the whole team on the mound, it's not 100% certain he came out to talk to Broxton.

That whole rally for SF was set up by a weak lead-off single by Uribe. Jenks simply couldn't find the strike zone Sunday. Big difference.

TDog
07-21-2010, 03:03 PM
A) Why would they have someone warming? Broxton is their closer, there was 1 out in the 9th at that time.

B) I wasn't referring to the 2 visits rule, which I assume everyone knows about, more that each time the manager/coach steps on the mound that is considered a "visit."

The rule book clearly defines that a visit happens anytime a member of the coaching staff steps from outside that circle to inside the circle. Bochy pointed it out to the umpires, and the umpires removed Broxton from the game.

The Dodgers may at least tied the game anyway. Broxton didn't have his great fastball last night and Torres is one of the few Giants who is tough to double up, and he was followed by Sanchez.

But if the Dodgers hadn't thrown at Rowand earlier in the game, Mattingly wouldn't have been there to go back to add one more thing to Broxton before returning to the dugout.

doublem23
07-21-2010, 03:07 PM
The rule book clearly defines that a visit happens anytime a member of the coaching staff steps from outside that circle to inside the circle. Bochy pointed it out to the umpires, and the umpires removed Broxton from the game.

The Dodgers may at least tied the game anyway. Broxton didn't have his great fastball last night and Torres is one of the few Giants who is tough to double up, and he was followed by Sanchez.

But if the Dodgers hadn't thrown at Rowand earlier in the game, Mattingly wouldn't have been there to go back to add one more thing to Broxton before returning to the dugout.

No ****ing ****, I know that now. I've never sat down and read the baseball rule book cover to cover because that sounds agonizing. I'm just saying, in watching the game for the majority of my 26 years, I had never known that was the rule, and I know a lot of obscure, little rules just from watching the game.

Iwritecode
07-21-2010, 03:44 PM
The rule book clearly defines that a visit happens anytime a member of the coaching staff steps from outside that circle to inside the circle. Bochy pointed it out to the umpires, and the umpires removed Broxton from the game.

The Dodgers may at least tied the game anyway. Broxton didn't have his great fastball last night and Torres is one of the few Giants who is tough to double up, and he was followed by Sanchez.

But if the Dodgers hadn't thrown at Rowand earlier in the game, Mattingly wouldn't have been there to go back to add one more thing to Broxton before returning to the dugout.

So, in theory, could a manager go out to talk to his pitcher as many times as he wanted if the pitcher met him outside the circle? :thinking:

downstairs
07-21-2010, 03:53 PM
So, in theory, could a manager go out to talk to his pitcher as many times as he wanted if the pitcher met him outside the circle? :thinking:

Well the way I'd look at is this: if he doesn't enter the circle, he's delaying the game. No different than if he walked to the outfield and talked with players. There'd be some trouble for that.

So its more like the rule is he can only visit once, and he MUST enter the circle.

TDog
07-21-2010, 05:04 PM
So, in theory, could a manager go out to talk to his pitcher as many times as he wanted if the pitcher met him outside the circle? :thinking:

Because this is theoretically possible, baseball has a rule that closes the loophole.

Rule 8.06(d) states that if a manager attempts to circumvent the visitation rule by going to a catcher or an infielder outside the circle to relay something to the pitcher, that will count as a mound visit. I imagine that if a pitcher left the circle to talk to a manager, the umpires consider that a mound visit, if only because outside of the circle the pitcher becomes an infielder.

Similarly, when I was a kid, I used to wonder why pitchers went to the trouble of throwing pitchouts to intentionally walk a hitter instead of going to their mouths four times to get four automatic balls called against them. Then while reading my baseball rule book in the back seat during a long family trip, I learned that the first time a pitcher goes to his mouth, it's a ball (unless it's a cold night and there is an agreement to the contrary, of course). The second time, the pitcher is supposed to be ejected.

korhead
07-21-2010, 07:41 PM
My first reaction when I saw the highlights was "why doesn't Mattingly put his closer in left field and bring in an un-warmed up pitcher out of the pen to throw a single pitch?" At that point, put the closer back in for the rest of the at bat. However, rule 3.05(b) would seem to eliminate that possibility in that the substitute pitcher would need to pitch to the current batter until that batter is put out or reaches base.

Upon further study of the rules, I found this rule, which reallyreally confuses the issue for me: part of Rule 8.06 says:

"In a case where a manager has made his first trip to the mound and then returns the second time to the mound in the same inning with the same pitcher in the game and the same batter at bat, after being warned by the umpire that he cannot return to the mound, the manager shall be removed from the game and the pitcher required to pitch to the batter until he is retired or gets on base. After the batter is retired, or becomes a base runner, then this pitcher must be removed from the game. The manager should be notified that his pitcher will be removed from the game after he pitches to one hitter, so he can have a substitute pitcher warmed up."

As I read this, Mattingly should have been removed and the closer should have been allowed to pitch to one more batter before another relief pitcher was brought/forced in.

My head hurts!

SBSoxFan
07-22-2010, 01:04 AM
My first reaction when I saw the highlights was "why doesn't Mattingly put his closer in left field and bring in an un-warmed up pitcher out of the pen to throw a single pitch?" At that point, put the closer back in for the rest of the at bat. However, rule 3.05(b) would seem to eliminate that possibility in that the substitute pitcher would need to pitch to the current batter until that batter is put out or reaches base.

Upon further study of the rules, I found this rule, which reallyreally confuses the issue for me: part of Rule 8.06 says:

"In a case where a manager has made his first trip to the mound and then returns the second time to the mound in the same inning with the same pitcher in the game and the same batter at bat, after being warned by the umpire that he cannot return to the mound, the manager shall be removed from the game and the pitcher required to pitch to the batter until he is retired or gets on base. After the batter is retired, or becomes a base runner, then this pitcher must be removed from the game. The manager should be notified that his pitcher will be removed from the game after he pitches to one hitter, so he can have a substitute pitcher warmed up."

As I read this, Mattingly should have been removed and the closer should have been allowed to pitch to one more batter before another relief pitcher was brought/forced in.

My head hurts!


They just discussed this on some show on Comcast Sportsnet after the Sox game and after Sports night. Said MLB is investigating because it should have gone down as you stated instead of Broxton being pulled.

Nellie_Fox
07-22-2010, 01:19 AM
As I read this, Mattingly should have been removed and the closer should have been allowed to pitch to one more batter before another relief pitcher was brought/forced in.

My head hurts!
Yep. The umpire got the call wrong. It is designed to prevent the manager from going out to the mound, waiting until the ump breaks it up, strolling back to the dugout and immediately strolling back to the mound to take the pitcher out, thus giving the reliever more time to get loose. If you make a second visit before the pitcher throws a pitch, you get tossed and the pitcher must finish pitching to that batter before he can be replaced.

voodoochile
07-22-2010, 02:17 AM
Because this is theoretically possible, baseball has a rule that closes the loophole.

Rule 8.06(d) states that if a manager attempts to circumvent the visitation rule by going to a catcher or an infielder outside the circle to relay something to the pitcher, that will count as a mound visit. I imagine that if a pitcher left the circle to talk to a manager, the umpires consider that a mound visit, if only because outside of the circle the pitcher becomes an infielder.

Similarly, when I was a kid, I used to wonder why pitchers went to the trouble of throwing pitchouts to intentionally walk a hitter instead of going to their mouths four times to get four automatic balls called against them. Then while reading my baseball rule book in the back seat during a long family trip, I learned that the first time a pitcher goes to his mouth, it's a ball (unless it's a cold night and there is an agreement to the contrary, of course). The second time, the pitcher is supposed to be ejected.

I've actually seen that called many years ago, though I forget the teams who were playing. A coach had made one trip to the mound already in the given inning then the manager came out to argue a call and on the way back to the dugout yelled something to the pitcher. Umps ruled it was a second visit and made them change pitchers.