PDA

View Full Version : JM Observations


Viva Magglio
06-17-2003, 11:07 PM
I have two new, well probably repeated, observations about Jerry Manuel. One is that Manuel does not defend his players. The other is that our team is not fundamentally sound.

When the controversy over Maggs home run that was not too place, Grady Little "out-worked" Manuel on that call. While we have seen Manuel ejected numerous times this season, he usually does not come out to argue close call plays that go against us. An example tonight was Willie Harris being called out at first when (per Rooney & Farmer looking at the replay) he was safe. Manuel did not come out to argue the call. I am not saying Jerry should have blown a gasket and gotten himself tossed, but he fails to work the umpires.

We see all the time how basketball head coaches work the officials to get close calls made their respective team's way. Manuel has to do the same with the umpire. Even if a close call going against us is the right call, Manuel should still at least question the call in order to gain the umpires' ear, if you will. That, down the road, could pay dividends as working the officials in basketball does.

Another problem with Manuel's leadership, or lack thereof, is that the White Sox are not fundamentally sound. Beyond the errors and mistakes on the bases, their outfield defense exposes this lack of fundamentals. For example, in the 9th inning, how come nobody was covering second when Bill Mueller doubled. If someone had been covering second, perhaps Mueller would have been held to a single. Granted, that is water under the bridge, but you see my point. And when do we ever hit the cutoff man?

We need a coaching staff that knows its X's and O's, and this present one does not.

Yet, all I can hear from Box 432 is the sound of fiddling.

DonkeyKongerko
06-18-2003, 12:48 AM
Hawk and DJ (and I) think Willie was safe at first. But I am by no means defending JM because a manager should get up and at least talk to the ump on a call like that. Good managers can do that and at least put doubts into an ump's head the next time there is a close call. In a way they are "managing" the umpires too.

...Yeah and our fundamentals suck too.

jeremyb1
06-18-2003, 01:16 AM
Originally posted by ˇViva Mágglio!
I have two new, well probably repeated, observations about Jerry Manuel. One is that Manuel does not defend his players. The other is that our team is not fundamentally sound.

When the controversy over Maggs home run that was not too place, Grady Little "out-worked" Manuel on that call. While we have seen Manuel ejected numerous times this season, he usually does not come out to argue close call plays that go against us. An example tonight was Willie Harris being called out at first when (per Rooney & Farmer looking at the replay) he was safe. Manuel did not come out to argue the call. I am not saying Jerry should have blown a gasket and gotten himself tossed, but he fails to work the umpires.

We see all the time how basketball head coaches work the officials to get close calls made their respective team's way. Manuel has to do the same with the umpire. Even if a close call going against us is the right call, Manuel should still at least question the call in order to gain the umpires' ear, if you will. That, down the road, could pay dividends as working the officials in basketball does.

Another problem with Manuel's leadership, or lack thereof, is that the White Sox are not fundamentally sound. Beyond the errors and mistakes on the bases, their outfield defense exposes this lack of fundamentals. For example, in the 9th inning, how come nobody was covering second when Bill Mueller doubled. If someone had been covering second, perhaps Mueller would have been held to a single. Granted, that is water under the bridge, but you see my point. And when do we ever hit the cutoff man?

We need a coaching staff that knows its X's and O's, and this present one does not.

Yet, all I can hear from Box 432 is the sound of fiddling.

i've yet to here anyone say that the ground rules state that ball should be a home run. hawk was adamant that it should be a double. if manuel knows the ground rules and that the ump got the call right, why argue it?

LASOXFAN
06-18-2003, 02:45 AM
And why wasn't Daubach in the line up tonight? I mean, Konerko is having the worst year of his career, it's BD's old team, he's fired up, and it gives you another lefty in the order. I mean, I'm no genius, but does it take one? What does BD do in his only at bat? DINGER! And he was psyched!! How much more of Manuel's pathetic leadership must we endure?

ChiSoxBobette
06-18-2003, 06:46 AM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
And why wasn't Daubach in the line up tonight? I mean, Konerko is having the worst year of his career, it's BD's old team, he's fired up, and it gives you another lefty in the order. I mean, I'm no genius, but does it take one? What does BD do in his only at bat? DINGER! And he was psyched!! How much more of Manuel's pathetic leadership must we endure?

Why Was'nt The Dauber In The Lineup The Last Couple Of Nights?
Only Our Fearless Leader Jerry Manuel Knows And I Don't Think He Even Knows. God How Long DO We Have To put Up With This Clueless Idiot And His Coaches. Oh Well I Guess Theres Always Next Year!

gosox41
06-18-2003, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
And why wasn't Daubach in the line up tonight? I mean, Konerko is having the worst year of his career, it's BD's old team, he's fired up, and it gives you another lefty in the order. I mean, I'm no genius, but does it take one? What does BD do in his only at bat? DINGER! And he was psyched!! How much more of Manuel's pathetic leadership must we endure?

:KW
This team was built for the long haul. Mnauel's job is 100% secure, no matter how bad we play.

Kilroy
06-18-2003, 07:12 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
i've yet to here anyone say that the ground rules state that ball should be a home run. hawk was adamant that it should be a double. if manuel knows the ground rules and that the ump got the call right, why argue it?

At first Hawk was adamant that it was a home run. Its not a question of ground rules.

I disagree that it was a double. We've all seen a player get his glove, or in one case Canseo's head, on the ball before it goes over the fence and is ruled a home run.

If the ball hit the top of the fence and simply went over it would have been a dinger no question. If the ball had hit the fair/foul pole it would have been a dinger no question. The ball hit both. Why is it not a dinger? Because the ump is a moron.

The pole can not be treated in the same fashion that a ball off the wall is treated. A ball off the wall falling back to the field is in play and live. A ball off the pole and back on to the field is a home run. The pole is both in play and out of play at the same time because a ball that hits it is fair, but a ball that hits it is also out of the field of play, or a home run.

On top of all that the pole is beyond the damn wall for chrissakes.
If a ball that lands beyond the wall in fair territory is a home run, then a ball that hits something beyond the wall that is in fair territory, as the foul pole is, has to be a home run.

There is no possible way that should have been ruled a double, imo.

TornLabrum
06-18-2003, 07:40 AM
Originally posted by Kilroy
At first Hawk was adamant that it was a home run. Its not a question of ground rules.

I disagree that it was a double. We've all seen a player get his glove, or in one case Canseo's head, on the ball before it goes over the fence and is ruled a home run.

If the ball hit the top of the fence and simply went over it would have been a dinger no question. If the ball had hit the fair/foul pole it would have been a dinger no question. The ball hit both. Why is it not a dinger? Because the ump is a moron.

The pole can not be treated in the same fashion that a ball off the wall is treated. A ball off the wall falling back to the field is in play and live. A ball off the pole and back on to the field is a home run. The pole is both in play and out of play at the same time because a ball that hits it is fair, but a ball that hits it is also out of the field of play, or a home run.

On top of all that the pole is beyond the damn wall for chrissakes.
If a ball that lands beyond the wall in fair territory is a home run, then a ball that hits something beyond the wall that is in fair territory, as the foul pole is, has to be a home run.

There is no possible way that should have been ruled a double, imo.

Plus the umpres' explanation doesn't cut it. They said it bounced off the blue. There is no way that a projectile with a downward trajectory bounces off the blue. It can only happen if it hits off the top of the wall, i.e. ABOVE the yellow. Obviously the umpires think they can give an explanation that violates the laws of physics.

PaleHoseGeorge
06-18-2003, 08:22 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Obviously the umpires think they can give an explanation that violates the laws of physics.

:tool
"Torn, the umpires are obviously auditioning for my job. Inventing lame excuses is what it is all about!"

:nandrolone
"I will miss the Orioles, Blue Jays, and Reds series, but will still be eligible for the Yankees and White Sox games, because my one BP bat (out of 76 total found "several innings later") was used in a game, and I can't tell the difference, and if you don't believe me don't say so out loud or I'll invoke the name of God to receive pity on my lying ass."