Milton Bradley Suspended 2 Games (Appealing Suspension)

[UMFan83]

Milton Bradley's Wrigley Field debut Thursday could result in his first suspension wearing a Cubs uniform.

 

In a memorable introduction to Chicago, Bradley quarreled with plate umpire Larry Vanover after taking a third strike with the bases loaded in the sixth inning of a 7-4 loss to St. Louis, then quickly was ejected from the game.

 

Vanover declined to comment afterward, but second-base umpire Dan Iassogna said a report was being sent to the commissioner's office because it was a "contact" incident.

 

Asked how Bradley made contact with Vanover, Iassogna declined comment. Any player making contact with an umpire is subject to a fine and a suspension.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-17-cubs-milton-bradley-apr17,0,4364804.story

 

The article goes on to say that the Cubs will try to fight it because the contact was incidental contact between the bill of Bradley's cap and the ump.

 

Either way, if he gets suspended, it took all of 9 games for Bradley to both get injured and get suspended because of his temper.

[imb]

Either way, if he gets suspended, it took all of 9 games for Bradley to both get injured and get suspended because of his temper.

 

Hahaha, that's fantastic.

[Guest]

The bill of Bradley's cap?

 

How pathetic.

[questionmarkgrace]

what a stupid rule. Especially when I have seen umpires purposely get in the face of players, bating them. The umpiring system just sucks overall.

[Keener98]

Well lets hope the Cubs would appeal it, but Lou would probably just sit there like he did when it happened. I still cant believe Lou didnt defend Bradley at all. Come out of the dugout as soon as Milton starts arguing just to make sure he doesnt do anything stupid, but nope Lou sits there. I really wish we had the old fiery Lou, instead of the Lou we have now.

 

With that said, I fully expect if our offense keeps sucking, that Lou gets booted like he did back in 2007.

[Derwood]

The joke of it all is that all they'll review is the fight and not the 2 balls that were called strikes in that at-bat.

[Guest]

What's weird to me is that I thought I saw Bradley's helmet make contact with the umps cap the first time I saw it. But, I rewound it a couple of times and didn't see the contact when I was actually looking for it.

[Guest]

The joke of it all is that all they'll review is the fight and not the 2 balls that were called strikes in that at-bat.

 

Exactly. If they review the whole thing, Bradley made his point and then the ump made his. No harm, no foul.

 

No reason to appeal. Just serve it while he's still missing games because of the groin issue.

 

And since the ump decided to file a report, the Cubs should file a report regarding the horribly called game by the umpiring crew.

[Sammys Boombox]

The joke of it all is that all they'll review is the fight and not the 2 balls that were called strikes in that at-bat.

 

I'm not a fan of the players' union, but I wish they would push for more player rights when situations like this occur. It's like MLB is in lock-step with the umpires' union.

 

As somebody who umps very competitive youth baseball I understand the idea that you can get chucked for any arguing of the zone, but sometimes in situations like that on what I'm sure Vanover thought was a border-line call you have to use your judgment and let the guy give off some steam. I wouldn't make a report on a player who barely, incidentally touched me when I made a "borderline" call in his opposition in such a big situation.

[nilodnayr]

The joke of it all is that all they'll review is the fight and not the 2 balls that were called strikes in that at-bat.

 

I'm not a fan of the players' union, but I wish they would push for more player rights when situations like this occur. It's like MLB is in lock-step with the umpires' union.

 

As somebody who umps very competitive youth baseball I understand the idea that you can get chucked for any arguing of the zone, but sometimes in situations like that on what I'm sure Vanover thought was a border-line call you have to use your judgment and let the guy give off some steam. I wouldn't make a report on a player who barely, incidentally touched me when I made a "borderline" call in his opposition in such a big situation.

 

To be fair though, the rule is in place so umps don't have to/aren't allowed to be subjective on the arguing of balls/strikes. Everyone knows that rule, if you break it you get thrown out. Similarly with having to file a report if there is contact. From what I understand its not the ump to determine if it was incidental or not, but I could be wrong.

 

And on a side note I've really never understood how you get around not arguing balls/strikes. Sure seems to me that theres a lot of bickering when a player is upset with a call and not everyone gets thrown out.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The joke of it all is that all they'll review is the fight and not the 2 balls that were called strikes in that at-bat.

 

I'm not a fan of the players' union, but I wish they would push for more player rights when situations like this occur. It's like MLB is in lock-step with the umpires' union.

 

As somebody who umps very competitive youth baseball I understand the idea that you can get chucked for any arguing of the zone, but sometimes in situations like that on what I'm sure Vanover thought was a border-line call you have to use your judgment and let the guy give off some steam. I wouldn't make a report on a player who barely, incidentally touched me when I made a "borderline" call in his opposition in such a big situation.

 

To be fair though, the rule is in place so umps don't have to/aren't allowed to be subjective on the arguing of balls/strikes. Everyone knows that rule, if you break it you get thrown out. Similarly with having to file a report if there is contact. From what I understand its not the ump to determine if it was incidental or not, but I could be wrong.

 

And on a side note I've really never understood how you get around not arguing balls/strikes. Sure seems to me that theres a lot of bickering when a player is upset with a call and not everyone gets thrown out.

 

Yeah, guys can get a word in about balls and strikes if they want, they can't stomp over to the umpire and yell in his face about it.

[jersey cubs fan]

The joke of it all is that all they'll review is the fight and not the 2 balls that were called strikes in that at-bat.

 

I'm not a fan of the players' union, but I wish they would push for more player rights when situations like this occur. It's like MLB is in lock-step with the umpires' union.

 

As somebody who umps very competitive youth baseball I understand the idea that you can get chucked for any arguing of the zone, but sometimes in situations like that on what I'm sure Vanover thought was a border-line call you have to use your judgment and let the guy give off some steam. I wouldn't make a report on a player who barely, incidentally touched me when I made a "borderline" call in his opposition in such a big situation.

 

To be fair though, the rule is in place so umps don't have to/aren't allowed to be subjective on the arguing of balls/strikes. Everyone knows that rule, if you break it you get thrown out. Similarly with having to file a report if there is contact. From what I understand its not the ump to determine if it was incidental or not, but I could be wrong.

 

And on a side note I've really never understood how you get around not arguing balls/strikes. Sure seems to me that theres a lot of bickering when a player is upset with a call and not everyone gets thrown out.

 

A player will comment right after a call and usually get away with it if he handles it well (keep your eyes toward the pitcher while jabbering, keep the words to a minimum, stay in the batters box). A coach can jabber a little as well. The problems come up when the player (batter, catcher or pitcher) makes it obvious he's arguing and delays the game in some way by arguing. Also, when a coach comes out of the dugout to argue a pitch call, or doesn't relent after stating his displeasure. If you bitch at multiple calls, you're gone. But the biggy, I think, is coming out to discuss something else (a close call at first) and then referencing a ball/strike call from earlier in the game.

[PackLandVA]

Big deal if he gets a game or two suspension. He's gonna need days off throughout the season anyway. It's not like he's gonna make 155+ starts.

[Soonernation]

The idiot behind the plate should be suspended the same amount of games as Bradley gets IF he is suspended; if the guy hadn't blown the call, none of this would have happened

[Mephistopheles]

You guys are incredible. You're blaming everybody but Bradley.

[Cynosure]

You guys are incredible. You're blaming everybody but Bradley.

 

Bradley didn't really do anything wrong... I would have been pissed too after a few bad calls in that at-bat at such a critical point. Big freaking deal, the bill of his helmet touched the umpire.

[Soonernation]

You guys are incredible. You're blaming everybody but Bradley.

 

 

So if you were the one in that situation and you got screwed on a strike that wasn't even close you wouldn't have been pissed off? Bottom line is the guy blew the call and i don't blame Bradley one bit for getting in his face; Lou's ass should have been out there also

[Cynosure]

You guys are incredible. You're blaming everybody but Bradley.

 

 

So if you were the one in that situation and you got screwed on a strike that wasn't even close you wouldn't have been pissed off? Bottom line is the guy blew the call and i don't blame Bradley one bit for getting in his face; Lou's ass should have been out there also

 

Not on balls and strikes, let the hitters handle that... no reason for Lou there.

[Mephistopheles]

I'm sorry but you've gotta protect the umpires here. Yes, it was a bad call. However arguing is a waste of time. It won't change the call and won't lead to more "fair" calls later in the game(s). The umpires are doing their best and they aren't trying to screw him over with the calls. Bitch at them won't help anything. Be mad, but just walk away. That's something Bradley has never been able to do. His temper causes him to get into situations where things like this can happen.

 

Arguing and getting pissed off has never changed a bad call. Move on.

[mhuber92211]

I'm sorry but you've gotta protect the umpires here. Yes, it was a bad call. However arguing is a waste of time. It won't change the call and won't lead to more "fair" calls later in the game(s). The umpires are doing their best and they aren't trying to screw him over with the calls. Bitch at them won't help anything. Be mad, but just walk away. That's something Bradley has never been able to do. His temper causes him to get into situations where things like this can happen.

 

Arguing and getting pissed off has never changed a bad call. Move on.

 

So you are advocating to never argue and to always bend over and take it? Hmmmm.... Perhaps people shouldn't protest any injustment then in life and then we would progress just take off.

 

Emotions are part of the game and I didn't see the ump taking it easy either. In Fact the Ump wasted no time getting on Bradley and actually kept up the act after Bradley turned and walked away. It wasn't just the call, it was clear the Ump didn't like Bradley's actions the 1st 2 times on strike calls and would ring him up no matter what.

 

The point the group is making is that this Ump acted just as inappropiately as Bradley and the punsihment should not be one sided

[Mephistopheles]

So we're going to punish umpires for blowing one call because of some dbag player like Bradley who can't control his emotions worth squat? Find, be mad, say something to the umpire. That's fine. Getting completely blown apart like Bradley does (with regularity) is incredibly stupid, immature and worthless. The fact is, Bradley was and still is a bad tempered a-hole.

 

The umpires not at fault here. Bad calls happen and are a part of the game. Umpires don't go:

 

"Ohh that one looks close. Milton Bradley's an ass. If I call him out on this maybe he will go nuts and I can be on SportsCenter. STRIKE THREE!" all in 10 tenths of a second. The umpires initial reaction was that it was a strike. So he called it one. There's no conspiracy. He shouldn't be punished for one call because it caused Bradley to go nuts. If he makes bad calls the entire time, that's something else.

 

FWIW, if a call looks bad on TV and the umpire calls it a strike, I'm more likely to give the benefit of doubt to the umpires. TV angles don't give an accurate representation of the location vertically of the pitch. There's also a ton of gray area on the height of the strike zone. The fact is calls on balls and strikes get missed all the time and are part of the game. They help you just as often as they hurt you. So just live with it.

 

Milton Bradley on the other hand, has no control over his emotions and constantly puts him in situations to lose his cool. It's his own damn fault.

[hawkcub]

MB's explosion was typical of him. Does it make it right no. But come on we are talking about incidental contact of the bill of the cap. They are saying he's being suspended for contact not blowing up. That is what is BS.

[Mephistopheles]

If you touch the umpire, you've gotta go as far as I'm concerned. Incidental or not.

[hawkcub]

If you touch the umpire, you've gotta go as far as I'm concerned. Incidental or not.

 

Wow so your about being about being way over the to aren't you?

[manbearcub]

If you touch the umpire, you've gotta go as far as I'm concerned. Incidental or not.

if the bill of your cap touches the bill of the umps cap?