|
="Edgy DC":987xel92]It'd be nice to read Razor Shines saying that he has a responsiblity there also.
I was long since unconscious. The video I saw this morning was inconclusive. Was it clear that he missed last night?[/quote:987xel92]
It wasn't conclusive to me from the side. They never showed it from above. Did he brush up against it? of course, Church not arguing suggests that he did miss it. Razor apparently wasn't watching, but Torre and the Dodgers were..
|
Vic Sage
May 19 2009 09:06 AM
|
|
how about trading him back to the Nats for Nick Johnson?
|
Swan Swan H
May 19 2009 09:09 AM
|
|
I said it in the IGT, but as I was watching I thought he missed it. His foot landed flat on the field level, and unless he just nicked the side of the base he certainly didn't step on it.
I think the lack of argument from Church and Manuel speaks pretty clearly as to whether he missed it.
|
Edgy DC
May 19 2009 09:15 AM
|
|
The Nats need infielders, not outfielders.
The other thing is that similar mysteries plagued him in DC. Despite outhitting and outfielding his competition, he had to fight for any playing time he could get, and would be farmed out at the first sign of a slump while his lessers continued to enjoy major league concierge service. There were whispers of attitude issues and differences with his manager, but nothing specific.
I had consigned it to the "Whatever" file. It's the Nats after all, but now I wonder if there may be something relevant there.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
May 19 2009 09:17 AM
|
|
| ="David Lennon"]Clearly, Church and Manuel don't have much of a relationship. Maybe it's distrust from the whole mess last year. Maybe it's because of playing time. It's kind of a chicken-egg situation. Did it go south because of the lack of playing time? Or was it bad and that's when Jerry stopped using him. Either way, Jerry was not pleased by the third-base blunder and I definitely see Church being moved in a deal. I think he has value, too. He's a good defensive rightfielder and in teh right spot, is a productive hitter. We've seen glimpses here. I like Church personally, as do many of his teammates, but he's probably better off somewhere else. |
|
metirish
May 19 2009 09:44 AM
|
|
I would have hoped that Manuel was above such nonsense and that this team had moved past this silly crap.
|
HahnSolo
May 19 2009 09:45 AM
|
|
I watched it on Mets Fast Forward this AM, and it looked like he might have missed it. However, I also noticed, and it was also pointed out by Boomer and Carton, that the 3rd base ump did not appear to be looking at the base.
|
Edgy DC
May 19 2009 09:49 AM
|
|
In fairness, that doesn't mean that the second-base guy wasn't following the play.
|
Ceetar
May 19 2009 09:51 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC":2fnb9t9w]The Nats need infielders, not outfielders.
The other thing is that similar mysteries plagued him in DC. Despite outhitting and outfielding his competition, he had to fight for any playing time he could get, and would be farmed out at the first sign of a slump while his lessers continued to enjoy major league concierge service. There were whispers of attitude issues and differences with his manager, but nothing specific.
I had consigned it to the "Whatever" file. It's the Nats after all, but now I wonder if there may be something relevant there.[/quote:2fnb9t9w]
<table align="right"><tr><td align="center"><img src="https://www.gfg.com/cardimg/340/66087.jpg" width="350"><br><font size="1">The Amazin' Casey Stengel Post</td></tr></table>You get a sense in baseball sometimes that there are certain people that there are certain attitudes that are expected, and ones that keep people on the outside. There is a lot of 'old school' type mentalities that are a little unfair, and I wonder if maybe Church is just a guy that doesn't fit the mold. It doesn't make him a bad player, but he may have trouble being 'liked' by certain 'baseball guys'.
|
Ceetar
May 19 2009 09:52 AM
|
|
Woah that Casey Stengel image is huge!
|
Frayed Knot
May 19 2009 10:22 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC":1yt9vzvj]In fairness, that doesn't mean that the second-base guy wasn't following the play.[/quote:1yt9vzvj]
No, the 3rd base ump was right there and it was he who made the call.
Couldn't tell from the brief replay I saw whether he was looking directly at the foot and base at that moment but essentially it's his only job there so I suspect he was. In any case, I'd certainly believe he did before taking Boomer & Carton's word for it that he wasn't. That's generally not a call umps make when they only suspect a guy goofed.
|
HahnSolo
May 19 2009 10:24 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC":28jn3asd]In fairness, that doesn't mean that the second-base guy wasn't following the play.[/quote:28jn3asd]
True, but on an appeal, can the ump ask for help? I was under the assumption that on an appeal play that base's ump had to make the call.
|
Rotblatt
May 19 2009 10:36 AM
|
|
I haven't even seen the replay yet, but just given our penchant for mental errors so far this season, I'm willing to buy that he missed it.
I'd be curious to know when the last time a call like that decided a game, and what that manager's reaction was: did he stick up for his player, or throw him under the bus?
IIRC, Manuel never liked Church. Didn't he refuse to say that Church had the starting job this spring, even though he was hitting the cover off the ball?
I like Church. He hit well pre-concussion for us, as well as this April (.845 OPS) and he's stellar defensively. I was really hoping that we'd be the first team to give him a full-time job, but obviously that's not gonna happen. If we're not going to use him, we might as well trade him, and we could certainly use a first baseman. Johnson would be expensive right now, though--he's hitting .336 with 24 RBIs--and like Edgy said, the Nats have more outfielders than they know what to do with.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 19 2009 11:09 AM
|
|
When you have outfielders, you play them in the infield.
|
Rockin' Doc
May 19 2009 11:25 AM
|
|
The MLB website clip of Church running the bases is totally inconclusive. You can't really tell anything from that video. I think the most conclusive evidence (circumstantial as it may be) that he missed the bag is the immediate reaction of the Dodger players pointing to third base and calling for the appeal and the total lack of an argument by Church, Manuel, or any of the Mets coaches.
I'm sure there must be better footage of the play than what is posted on MLB's website.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 19 2009 11:26 AM
|
|
I'm waiting to hear what Cookie Lavagetto has to say about it.
|
gerrard00
May 19 2009 11:48 AM
|
|
I really feel bad for Church, I don't think he was given a fair chance to succeed. Admittedly, missing third in that situation is inexcusable...but I'm not sure it's much worse than the new team wide aversion to sliding.
|
Edgy DC
May 19 2009 12:00 PM
|
|
Yeah, it does hurt that one of the guys to express his open flabbergastment was Beltran.
|
Frayed Knot
May 19 2009 01:39 PM
|
|
="HahnSolo":3r9ecv1y]="Edgy DC":3r9ecv1y]In fairness, that doesn't mean that the second-base guy wasn't following the play.[/quote:3r9ecv1y]
True, but on an appeal, can the ump ask for help? I was under the assumption that on an appeal play that base's ump had to make the call.[/quote:3r9ecv1y]
If the umps had "rotated" on the play and the 3rd base ump's attention was diverted elsewhere as a result (ie. a hit into the LF corner where he runs out to check on fan interference while home ump covers 3rd) he simply would have deferred to his fellow ump once the appeal was made.
|
Edgy DC
May 20 2009 06:16 AM
|
|
<blockquote>"When I asked my third-base coach if he missed the bag, he said he missed the bag," Manuel said.</blockquote>
So what's Shines' responsiblity there? Should he be stopping his hourse in full gallop and making him turn back and retouch, or should he look away and hope he was the only one who noticed?
Other Church bulletins:
| ="David Lennon"]Manuel denied Tuesday that there is a rift between him and Church - "I like Ryan" he said - and the outfielder played along. As for getting thrown under the bus after the game, Church shrugged.
As for the perceived rift, which Church hears about from fans as well as media, he insists that's not the case. "People read too much into it,"Church said. "They're not in here. [Manuel] cares, he's got a good heart and he wants me to succeed."
That doesn't mean Manuel can't get angry. And he explained away his skewering of Church by chalking it up to emotion. It's too early to know if they will be exchanging birthday gifts this year or following each other on Twitter. Neither Manuel nor Church used the term BFF to describe the other, in case you were wondering.
"You're doggone right I was mad at him," Manuel said, smiling. "If he was my son, I would have strangled him." |
Anthony Manuel:
<table><tr><td align="center"><img src="http://www.nyfuturestars.com/profile_pics/anthony_manuel.jpg"><br><i>"Errrr..."</i></td></tr></table>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
