I can't blame him for using discretion to now throw any of the pitchers out of the game so far, but it's the initial warning that was the problem That's the problem. You're saying discretion is no longer in play -- you're going to throw out the next guy who comes close. Otherwise the warning means nothing. That's not necessarily true. The umpire can still use discretion after issuing a warning and it's pretty obvious that the Braves don't want to hit a pitcher (Gallagher) and a pitcher-wannabe (Izturis). I agree that the warning was stupid, but there haven't been any other pitches thrown with intent that would warrant an ejection. Then what does the warning really mean? An ump can always throw a pitcher out when there was intent to hit someone, whether there was a previous warning or not. It's true that an umpire can throw a pitcher out an any time whether or not there has been a warning issued, but it rarely happens that way. The warning means they don't want any more pupose pitches being thrown, and in this case it has prevented the Cubs from retaliating... until tomorrow. at which time the pitcher and Lou will be ejected immediately. the net effect of giving warnings is usually a benefit to the offending team. LaRussa has used it for years. beaning someone who honestly beats him, or in retaliation for an honest mistake, then crying foul when anyone pitches close to his batters. the right call is to eject Hudson immediately, or issue the warning after Marquis beans Jones. Agreed.