Phillies (Wheeler) vs Brewers (Peralta): 9/1/23, 7:10pm

[BrewerFan]

2 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

I responded to this above, but it reminds me of an even crazier scenario that is possible under the rules, though it has never happened in the major leagues. 
 

It is possible for a pitcher to be both the winning and losing pitcher in a game. Any idea how that could happen. 

No...I can't fathom how that'd be possible.

The ONLY plausible scenario would have been when they picked up suspended games a month or two later(which I don't even know if we still do that) and said pitcher was traded over that time period, but then he's not going to be eligible to pitch in that game...I don't believe.

 

Maybe it's happened back in the 1890s when a player was traded or...something, but I don't think you can pitch for two teams in one game, even if it's suspended.

[BruisedCrew]

1 minute ago, BrewerFan said:

No...I can't fathom how that'd be possible.

The ONLY plausible scenario would have been when they picked up suspended games a month or two later(which I don't even know if we still do that) and said pitcher was traded over that time period, but then he's not going to be eligible to pitch in that game...I don't believe.

 

Maybe it's happened back in the 1890s when a player was traded or...something, but I don't think you can pitch for two teams in one game, even if it's suspended.

It would involve a suspended game and a pitcher who is the pitcher of record for one team when the game is suspended being traded to the other team before the game is resumed and giving up the winning run for that team. 

The rules do allow a player who has been traded to play for his new team in that situation. 

[BrewerFan]

2 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

No. If he fields it cleanly he had an easy out at third and probably could have thrown Miller out too. 

I don't think he's even thinking about 3rd there and he's not in a good position to get the out there. Everyone is running on contact, it's gonna be a race to the bag and I don't think he makes that play. 

Probably gets Miller at 1st if he fields it cleanly, but it's not a gimme. Not saying it's not an error, but I don't think it's a guarantee he's getting Miller at first on a ball that wasn't hit all that hard.

[BrewerFan]

Just now, BruisedCrew said:

It would involve a suspended game and a pitcher who is the pitcher of record for one team when the game is suspended being traded to the other team before the game is resumed and giving up the winning run for that team. 

The rules do allow a player who has been traded to play for his new team in that situation. 

 I guess it's possible under the rules, but the only time I've ever heard of something like this happening was the NBA and it was..Ralph Simpson(not Sampson, not the 7'4 guy from Houston). 

But ok, technically I guess it CAN happen under the rules. We just very rarely see suspended games that are not picked up immediately. When was the last one? A few years ago?

[BruisedCrew]

4 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

I don't think he's even thinking about 3rd there and he's not in a good position to get the out there. Everyone is running on contact, it's gonna be a race to the bag and I don't think he makes that play. 

Probably gets Miller at 1st if he fields it cleanly, but it's not a gimme. Not saying it's not an error, but I don't think it's a guarantee he's getting Miller at first on a ball that wasn't hit all that hard.

It is a moot point but if you look at the replay Santana was pretty far from third when the ball got past Bohm. I think he could have gotten to the bag or gone right at Santana for a tag if he had fielded the ball cleanly. 

The other point is that if he fields the ball cleanly and doesn’t get an out the game is still just tied. 

A classic example of taking your eye off the ball. 
 

[Pugger]

8 hours ago, RolliesMustache said:

Thanks, I've been a lurker and fan of this forum for a long time.  My Brewers fandom started as a 9 year old in 1978.  Just happy we've seen the Brewers Organization build into something we can all be proud of the past few seasons.

Welcome to the forum but you are just a kid.  ;-)  In 1970 I was in high school in Green Bay.

[BrewerFan]

Just now, BruisedCrew said:

It is a moot point but if you look at the replay Santana was pretty far from third when the ball got past Bohm. I think he could have gotten to the bag or gone right at Santana for a tag if he had fielded the ball cleanly. 

The other point is that if he fields the ball cleanly and doesn’t get an out the game is still just tied. 

A classic example of taking your eye off the ball. 
 

Of course it's a moot point and it'd just be tied. It's all a moot point now that the game is over. I'm just asking if anyone else thinks Miller beats it out. And Santana was about 1/3rd of the way to 3rd, but he's already sprinting while Bohm is on his heels.

[Nola Beery]

I was unable to follow the game except for an occasional peek at the score.  I didn't know about the crazy 8th inning until after the game. I think I'll get a kick out of reading the comments!   

[Pugger]

27 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

I don't get what you mean by "still doing this?" It's still a thing. Covid didn't disappear. 

I'm pretty sure now the rules are more lax and it's about being symptomatic or whatever and I don't believe they're testing for it everyday(giving the leeway). Or you could also test negative for it.

It's not the center of the universe, but it's also not extinct.

Unfortunately Covid is here to stay but it may not be as virulent as it was once was.

[Nola Beery]

15 hours ago, Brewcrew82 said:

On the flipside, a Reds win tonight and then a Brewers win puts us a half-game better than we were entering today, despite the Cubs' win earlier.

Shazam! Spot on.

[Nola Beery]

10 hours ago, SomewhereInTime said:

Good idea to bring in Williams, I always am in favor of using a closer to get out of a jam in the 8th if necessary.

I definitley would have thought so, too. But oooops! Glad that wasn't the last word.

[SomewhereInTime]

Just now, Nola Beery said:

I definitley would have thought so, too. But oooops! Glad that wasn't the last word.

Yeah I still think it was the right call, devin has had several outings this year where he entered in the 8th.  Sometimes things don't work at all though.

[Oxy]

1 hour ago, BrewerFan said:

I don't get what you mean by "still doing this?" It's still a thing. Covid didn't disappear. 

I'm pretty sure now the rules are more lax and it's about being symptomatic or whatever and I don't believe they're testing for it everyday(giving the leeway). Or you could also test negative for it.

It's not the center of the universe, but it's also not extinct.

The point is that Cov-19 was "a thing" because of all the unknowns about a new virus.  We mostly now "know" more about Covid than all the hundreds of virus strains that have made people sick and killed people for tens to thousands of years--yet there aren't special "influenza H1N1" IL stints for players.  So, no, covid doesn't "go away" but it does fall into the bin of every other thing that makes people sick.  It's not some crazy exotic unknown thing that we need to treat like The Andromeda Strain anymore

[BruisedCrew]

33 minutes ago, Nola Beery said:

Shazam! Spot on.

It’s easier to be “spot on” when you cover both sides before the games are played. 

[BruisedCrew]

34 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

Of course it's a moot point and it'd just be tied. It's all a moot point now that the game is over. I'm just asking if anyone else thinks Miller beats it out. And Santana was about 1/3rd of the way to 3rd, but he's already sprinting while Bohm is on his heels.

I guess that’s where we disagree. I think Bohm starting on his heels can cover 10-15 feet faster than old Santana with a sore ankle can cover 60. 
 

[areacodes]

1 hour ago, BruisedCrew said:

It’s easier to be “spot on” when you cover both sides before the games are played. 

Was that really necessary? I mean, it’s no secret that you and @Brewcrew82 don’t see eye to eye but for as much as you don’t like it when others go back and pull stuff from IGT’s or “tell others how to be a fan” you seem to do it to them frequently.

[Nola Beery]

22 hours ago, BruisedCrew said:

It’s easier to be “spot on” when you cover both sides before the games are played. 

It really wasn't THAT big of a deal.  I was simply happy that the more positive view turned out to be right while my negative view was (thankfully) wrong. 

PS- Disclaimer: I don't come here to argue, or to audition for a front office job or CC's job, or to display my miniscule knowledge of baseball.  I learn stuff, true.  But really I'm just a fan hoping to share the experience with other fans.  There aren't any Brewer fans in New Orleans that I'm aware of except my choir buddy Tom who does not post here. Cheers!   

[BruisedCrew]

3 hours ago, areacodes said:

Was that really necessary? I mean, it’s no secret that you and @Brewcrew82 don’t see eye to eye but for as much as you don’t like it when others go back and pull stuff from IGT’s or “tell others how to be a fan” you seem to do it to them frequently.

Necessary? No.

Was it necessary for them to interpret my comment the way they did instead of the way it was clearly written?

Should I have interpreted this statement as assuming that the Brewers were going to lose and the Cubs were going to sweep? I didn’t. 

22 hours ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Might want to win today. A loss and two Cubs wins shrinks the lead to a game an a half. 

I note that your only posts this week have been to critique mine. Why not talk about the games and the team?

[Brewcrew82]

26 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

Necessary? No.

Was it necessary for them to interpret my comment the way they did instead of the way it was clearly written?

Should I have interpreted this statement as assuming that the Brewers were going to lose and the Cubs were going to sweep? I didn’t. 

I note that your only posts this week have been to critique mine. Why not talk about the games and the team?

Come on. If you can't see the difference between your post and the one of mine which you quoted, you're being blind. Seems like other people don't have a problem seeing it. 

When you add "I'm kind of glad I'll be in Europe that weekend" (did I quote that right?), the implication is apparent. 

[areacodes]

54 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

Necessary? No.

Was it necessary for them to interpret my comment the way they did instead of the way it was clearly written?

If multiple posters, over a period of time, keep misinterpreting your posts - to a point where you feel the need to have a signature about it and point it out - maybe it is actually your posts and not everybody else?

[BruisedCrew]

38 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Come on. If you can't see the difference between your post and the one of mine which you quoted, you're being blind. Seems like other people don't have a problem seeing it. 

When you add "I'm kind of glad I'll be in Europe that weekend" (did I quote that right?), the implication is apparent. 

There was no implication. It was a simple statement that I’d rather be in Europe (for the first time in my life by the way) than worrying about Brewers-Cubs games. 

Sorry if you can’t comprehend that. 

 

[BruisedCrew]

1 minute ago, areacodes said:

If multiple posters, over a period of time, keep misinterpreting your posts - to a point where you feel the need to have a signature about it and point it out - maybe it is actually your posts and not everybody else?

There are multiple posters on this board that band together and like each other’s posts almost reflexively.

But that signature was in response to a specific incident two years ago. It was in August and the Brewers had a 7;game lead in the division and I posted something about the remaining schedules for the Brewers and second place Reds. I got a response telling me that there was no point in raising that because, in that poster’s opinion, the race was “statistically over” (whatever that even means). He cited the fact that the projections showed the Brewers with close to a 95% chance of winning the division, as if nobody has ever failed with those projections.  He then said that even bringing up that point meant that I expected the Brewers to blow the division race, a total non sequitur).

I recognize that I often take a more cautious or negative approach than some others . But just raising or recognizing something as a possibility is clearly different than expecting it to happen. IMHO that is an erroneous leap of logic, and that’s what Brewcrew82 did yesterday. When that happens I’m going to push back on it. The fact that you and several of the other usual posters patted him on the back doesn’t make him any more right. 

[Brewcrew82]

56 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

There was no implication. It was a simple statement that I’d rather be in Europe (for the first time in my life by the way) than worrying about Brewers-Cubs games. 

Sorry if you can’t comprehend that. 

 

Yeah, you trying to retroactively spin that statement doesn’t reflect on my comprehension.

Everyone else’s recognizes the implication. 

[BruisedCrew]

42 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Yeah, you trying to retroactively spin that statement doesn’t reflect on my comprehension.

Everyone else’s recognizes the implication. 

So, you think “everyone else’s” agrees with you? What is that based on? A couple of “likes” from predictable sources?

You’ve made your point, and I have disagreed with it. I think I know better than you and your friends what I meant when I responded to edfunderburk’s post.

Time to move on. I’m going to the game tonight so you won’t have to deal with my posts at least until I get home. Enjoy it. 

[BrewerFan]

8 hours ago, BruisedCrew said:

I guess that’s where we disagree. I think Bohm starting on his heels can cover 10-15 feet faster than old Santana with a sore ankle can cover 60. 
 

Sure.