Jump to content
North Side Baseball
  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

agreed, this would be much more acceptable if an established major leaguer did it

 

Or Alan Iverson/Ron Artest.

 

 

I say ban him for life. (and ban AI and Artest for life too).

Posted

agreed, this would be much more acceptable if an established major leaguer did it

 

Or Alan Iverson/Ron Artest.

 

 

I say ban him for life. (and ban AI and Artest for life too).

 

When did Allen Iverson attack a fan/ref? I honestly don't remember.

Posted

When did Allen Iverson attack a fan/ref? I honestly don't remember.

 

You are right Rocket. Allen has only been convicted (felony wise) for the racial fight that almost got him kicked out of school after he took a chair to a girls head. He was also charged with trying to kill his cousin and his roomate with a gun during a domestic arguement.

 

I am sorry, he really isnt violent. *rolls eyes*

Posted

When did Allen Iverson attack a fan/ref? I honestly don't remember.

 

You are right Rocket. Allen has only been convicted (felony wise) for the racial fight that almost got him kicked out of school after he took a chair to a girls head. He was also charged with trying to kill his cousin and his roomate with a gun during a domestic arguement.

 

I am sorry, he really isnt violent. *rolls eyes*

 

Hahaha, sorry for asking a legit question. Jesus Christ, are you this much of a jerk in real life too?

Posted
http://www.nbc10.com/news/9049470/detail.html

 

That site has video too.

 

He needs to be gone for the year if not banned from baseball. That is ridiculous. Some punk drafted high out of highschool thinks he has the world on a silver plate. F that. This is unacceptable.

 

agreed, this would be much more acceptable if an established major leaguer did it

 

Who said anything about major leaguers? I'd ban a major leaguer too for this conduct.

Posted

When did Allen Iverson attack a fan/ref? I honestly don't remember.

 

You are right Rocket. Allen has only been convicted (felony wise) for the racial fight that almost got him kicked out of school after he took a chair to a girls head. He was also charged with trying to kill his cousin and his roomate with a gun during a domestic arguement.

 

I am sorry, he really isnt violent. *rolls eyes*

 

Hahaha, sorry for asking a legit question. Jesus Christ, are you this much of a jerk in real life too?

 

alot of snideness going around on this message board lately unfortunately.

Posted

Hahaha, sorry for asking a legit question. Jesus Christ, are you this much of a jerk in real life too?

 

sadly, yes. I blame it on big oil.

Posted
50 games Max IMO....this is NO WHERE close to Artest like.

 

I dunno, Artest at least had SOME sort of excuse through provocation i.e. someone threw something at him.

 

(disclaimer: not saying I agree with Artest .001%)

Posted

The Ron Artest Experience will forever be burned into America's collective sports memory. Between the riot it caused, the sheer number of surreal moments that happened during the incident, and the fact that it completely destroyed the Pacers, there was just so much that came out of it that anything less than a year-long suspension would have seemed soft. This isn't on the same level as that.

 

However, Young did attack an umpire. That is one of the biggest no-nos in ANY sport. Cripes, there are even times when athletes are justified in attacking fans (such as when those idiots in Detroit wandered out onto the court looking for a fight). Unless the umpire is freaking Robert De Niro in The Fan, there is NEVER justification for attacking an umpire.

 

He threw a dangerous object at the umpire. Moreover, he threw it at a fast velocity. He hit the ump. He could have seriously injured the umpire.

 

Anything between a 50-100 game suspension wouldn't surprise me.

Posted
When Carl Everett head-butted an umpire he got a 10 game suspension. Roberto Alomar got 5 games for spitting at an umpire. Is this really that much worse?
Posted
When Carl Everett head-butted an umpire he got a 10 game suspension. Roberto Alomar got 5 games for spitting at an umpire. Is this really that much worse?

 

I think so. Spitting at an umpire is degrading and insulting, but there's no threat of physical harm. There is a threat of harm with headbutting, but not that much. Winging a bat at high speed towards an ump, IMHO, implies an intent to do serious bodily harm to the ump.

 

I say suspend him for the remainder of the year, put him on probation for the next 2-3 years. Any further conduct which results in contact with an umpire leads to a lifetime suspension.

Posted
Winging a bat at high speed towards an ump, IMHO, implies an intent to do serious bodily harm to the ump.

 

After seeing the video on ESPN, I don't think that's what happened. I couldn't see Young himself, but it looked like it probably hurt the bat more than the umpire. He hardly even flinched.

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Winging a bat at high speed towards an ump, IMHO, implies an intent to do serious bodily harm to the ump.

 

After seeing the video on ESPN, I don't think that's what happened. I couldn't see Young himself, but it looked like it probably hurt the bat more than the umpire. He hardly even flinched.

Because it hit him in the chest protector right after he turned around. That would have really, really hurt if it hit him in the side, back, head (even with the helmet), or leg. I think it's pretty to show intent to harm.

Posted
Winging a bat at high speed towards an ump, IMHO, implies an intent to do serious bodily harm to the ump.

 

After seeing the video on ESPN, I don't think that's what happened. I couldn't see Young himself, but it looked like it probably hurt the bat more than the umpire. He hardly even flinched.

Because it hit him in the chest protector right after he turned around. That would have really, really hurt if it hit him in the side, back, head (even with the helmet), or leg. I think it's pretty to show intent to harm.

 

I don't buy that. By the motion of the bat, it looks like he underhandedly flicked the bat at him, much like many hitters do after they've been walked. He meant to throw it at him, sure, but intent to harm? I personally don't think so. I bet he gets somewhere between 15-30 games, which IMO ranges from fair to slightly excessive based on previous punishments.

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Winging a bat at high speed towards an ump, IMHO, implies an intent to do serious bodily harm to the ump.

 

After seeing the video on ESPN, I don't think that's what happened. I couldn't see Young himself, but it looked like it probably hurt the bat more than the umpire. He hardly even flinched.

Because it hit him in the chest protector right after he turned around. That would have really, really hurt if it hit him in the side, back, head (even with the helmet), or leg. I think it's pretty to show intent to harm.

 

I don't buy that. By the motion of the bat, it looks like he underhandedly flicked the bat at him, much like many hitters do after they've been walked. He meant to throw it at him, sure, but intent to harm? I personally don't think so. I bet he gets somewhere between 15-30 games, which IMO ranges from fair to slightly excessive based on previous punishments.

Absolutely. I honestly can't say that I've seen a bat flipped that hard before. That wasn't just a toss, that was chucked.

 

Was wrong about the helmet, though. He took it off. If that hit the ump anywhere other than where it did, there could have been serious damage done.

Posted
It didn't look like a soft chuck, but that absolutely did not look like a bat thrown with the intention of causing harm.
Old-Timey Member
Posted
It didn't look like a soft chuck, but that absolutely did not look like a bat thrown with the intention of causing harm.

It's a baseball bat, though. If you throw it hard and throw it at someone, how is there not intention to harm?

 

The bat was even still on it's way up when it hit the ump.

Posted
It didn't look like a soft chuck, but that absolutely did not look like a bat thrown with the intention of causing harm.

 

What difference does it make whether he wanted to hurt the guy? It's still recklessly dangerous conduct (which can make someone criminally liable for something, regardless of their intent).

Posted
It didn't look like a soft chuck, but that absolutely did not look like a bat thrown with the intention of causing harm.

 

What difference does it make whether he wanted to hurt the guy? It's still recklessly dangerous conduct (which can make someone criminally liable for something, regardless of their intent).

 

Agreed. Who cares how hard it was? The fact remains the same that he hit a guy with a bat.

Posted
When I 1st saw the report I figured Young tossed the bat and after it hit the ground it changed direction and grazed the ump. I was shocked at seeing the video of how hard and high the bat was thrown. I would be surprised if he plays again this year and would not have a problem w/ charges being brought against him. If I did that in a sball game I am pretty sure charges would be brought against me.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

×
×
  • Create New...