Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: World Soccer Digest for Soccer Fans!

texas toast

oh, for the days when we merely complained about how many baserunners isringhausen gave up before he finally closed out the game. since his injury, the cardinal relievers have gone 0-6 with 0 saves. their aggregate line:

ip h w so hr w-l era whip
46 55 14 35 8 0-6 5.48 1.50

kind of ironic that as all this is going on, trevor hoffman breaks the all-time record in saves, eh?

the cardinals finish the year with a 34-47 road record, their worst since 1997. they remain well positioned to win the division despite the whitewashing in houston; even if they get swept by the padres and achieve their third 8-game losing streak of the season, they will still be in first -- no matter what houston does. and if st louis should go winless for the rest of the season? even then, i'm not sure houston would catch up. and the cards won't go winless; more likely they'll will win one vs the pads and two or three vs the brewers, and that ought to take care of the "race." but suppose they really do blow this division -- would it really be so awful? it would be awful if a team that had a real shot to win a championship were to piss that chance away in 10 days of bad baseball. it would be awful if a fan base that had developed a sense of admiration for its team were forced to watch their beloved boys self-destruct. but neither of those things applies in this case. the cardinals don't have a good shot to win their 1st playoff series, much less the whole tournament; and we fans have been more aggravated by than admiring of this year's cardinal team. so while i'd rather see the cardinals win the division than not, a full-blown choke wouldn't make the top 5 -- maybe not even the top 10 -- on the list of my greatest disappointments as a fan.

and it most certainly would not rank up there with the 1964 phillies, whose spirit has been invoked with increasing frequency after each successive loss in houston. the '64 phils were a .600 team -- 90 wins, 60 losses -- when they commenced to gagging up the season; they hadn't lost more than 4 in a row all year until their infamous 10-game losing streak in late september. the phils flushed 5 1/2 months of excellence down the crapper in less than two weeks, whereas the 2006 cardinals' run of excellence lasted no more than 2 months; their last few drops of that quality swirled down the drain sometime in early august, i reckon. the '64 phillies were a good team who suddenly, shockingly turned into a bad one the last two weeks of the year. but if the '06 cardinals blow the lead, it'll come not as a shock but rather as a confirmation of something we've known all along -- they're just not a very good team.

changing gears -- la russa called out edmonds in the paper today:

"By my count, there have been at least four pinch-hit opportunities in the last three days," La Russa said before the game. "And all the games were tight. It's disappointing he's not here."
given la russa's (in)sensitivity to the health status of mulder and izzy this season, and rolen last year, i can't say i blame edmonds here. he's probably just taking sensible precautions.

the same article says anthony reyes will pitch on wednesday. that would put him in line to pitch monday's makeup game, if the game is necessary to get the cards into the playoffs. . . . almost makes you hope they have to play the game, just to see if la russa would dare pitch the kid. it's even possible the cards would have to play that game not to clinch a playoff spot but rather to force a tie -- ie, they wind up half a game behind on sunday, and need to win monday just to force a one-game playoff for the division. anybody know if such a game -- ie, a tuesday playoff following the monday makeup game -- would be a home game?

if it were to come to that, jason marquis would be on turn . . . . . and in any other season, that might loom as a nightmare scenario. but in 2006? it would only be fitting for reyes and marquis to pitch the last two, do-or-die regular season games.

0 recs  |  Comment 84 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Thank you...
for pointing out that this situation and 1964 are not the same at all.
Bengie Molina for 2007 Cardinals Catcher!

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Sep 25, 2006 8:23 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I don't think
the 1 game playoff with Houston has been determined.  If I remember correctly, they flipped a coin to decide where a StL/Cin playoff game would be played (which would have been in StL), but they haven't flipped for the Houston one.

by Big Red on Sep 25, 2006 8:33 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I think
he'sa talking about the rain-out with SF. It was determined that the game would be played only if it had playoff ramifications; i.e., home field or wild card/division winner.

by cardsrul on Sep 25, 2006 9:06 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nope
He was asking whether or not the Houston one-game-playoff would be at home or away.  

" anybody know if such a game -- ie, a tuesday playoff following the monday makeup game -- would be a home game?"

Of course the San Fran game would be a home game...they were in St. Lou when it got rained out.  Would only make sense that that game be played at home...

Plus, no one will know if we need to play San Fran until after the last game.

by Big Red on Sep 25, 2006 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Define Irony....
the last 2 games (and the last game at milwaukee), were all lost when our LOOGY's gave up a homerun to a lefthanded batter.
Bengie Molina for 2007 Cardinals Catcher!

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Sep 25, 2006 8:42 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

yup
Lefthanded One Out Guy.

LOOG

by Schnake on Sep 25, 2006 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

loogy
left handed one out guy.

by jroman on Sep 25, 2006 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Slightly Irksome Relations?
Today's St. Louis Post Dispatch chronicles a prickly back and forth between TLR and Rolen concerning him being left out of the lineup saturday. SR describes being "benched" despite insisting he's perfectly healthy. In other words ... not his doing.

I guess I'd bench him too. Toss out that uncharacteristic two-game explosion against the Giants in lopsided games, and Scott has posted a Sept. mark of .148 / 2rbi. Watch him hit, and you'll observe what's been described as a "slow bat" (a phrase I remember Tony using more than once). His 1st Half/2nd Half breakdown is about as lopsided as can be (.330/.250). The numbers point to a player running on fumes.

by Urban Pawnee on Sep 25, 2006 9:49 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Tavarez
Further proof that you NEVER know what that crazy man will do.

by madridbend on Sep 25, 2006 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wwo
I've been amazed every time I pick up a Boston game and he's starting.  It's wild.

by sdrone on Sep 25, 2006 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't be fooled....
He did that complete game win for a team OUT OF CONTENTION for any type of post-season spot....no pressure ...if it was in the heat of a pennent race?...Bombs away!!!

by Timbo02 on Sep 25, 2006 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

So?
It's still 9 innings.

by sdrone on Sep 25, 2006 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

yes.......
I'm aware of that...thanks for pointing it out...really

by Timbo02 on Sep 25, 2006 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

what a
fantastic point man...thanks.

by Timbo02 on Sep 25, 2006 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

he also
broke 3 clubhouse phones to celebrate!

by dontEATnachos on Sep 25, 2006 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sigh
I guess it's getting more and more solid that Edmonds won't be back next year.

That sucks.

by sdrone on Sep 25, 2006 11:22 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Re: Edmonds
Certainly, Edmonds will not be starting today with David Wells (lefty) on the mound.

But Woody Williams is scheduled to go tomorrow and I expect that Edmonds will start, even if he doesn't feel 100% ready.  If he has even modest success in the next week you can bank on him being on a playoff roster--assuming there is a playoff roster--regardless of the season-long pissing match with our manager.      

My gut tells me he'll start tomorrow, but I have no idea what to expect.

youneverknow

by meat on Sep 25, 2006 11:38 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Any good bullpen arms available this offseason?
Other than Wainwright, Hancock, and Looper (maybe even Thompson), I see no reason in keeping any of the rest. What does the FA market look like? anything decent?
Bengie Molina for 2007 Cardinals Catcher!

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Sep 25, 2006 11:54 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

ray king
will be available . . . .

by lboros on Sep 25, 2006 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

sssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
We don't want Jocketty or Tony to find out............

by fuegophil on Sep 25, 2006 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

List
http://www.mlb4u.com/freeagency.php?order=position

FA's after this season, sorted by position.

There's a TON of "name" LHRP's out there, though I'm not intimately familiar enough with the results they've gotten to endorse any of them.  

IMO, Tyler Johnson should absolutely be kept as a part of the mix next season.  He is exactly the kind of yungin' that should be given every chance to develop.  It's not his fault that Rincon exploded and he was thrust into the spotlight.  I think he's acquitted himself fairly well, all things considered.

Looking at the list of FA's from the right side, there's also a ton of guys who'll be available.  Too many to name; it's a stupidly long list.

       

youneverknow

by meat on Sep 25, 2006 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why hasn't Thompson?
Why has Thompson not been used at all lately? He can't be any worst than the rest of these bums?

by DimitroffVodka on Sep 25, 2006 12:32 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

i wonder
the same thing. seems like they've been extremely careful with him

by lboros on Sep 25, 2006 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hopefully, he won some points with TLR and DD
last night. Granted, it was basically mop-up duty, no pressure. But, still, he looked pretty sharp.

by steve in georgia on Sep 25, 2006 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

dan patrick arguing for pujo
programming note.....if anyone else listens to the dan patrick show (espn radio) or has the ability, today would be a good day.  he's got the teaser that he will state his case as to why albert pujols should win the nl mvp this year.  he says that it's a no-brainer, but he is also convinced that howard will win it.

just an fyi to you all...

by busch league on Sep 25, 2006 1:32 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

time
forgot to mention that dan patrick show is on right now.  lasts until 3:00 central. he's not saying when he's going to state the argument, but it will be during today's show.

and yes...i spend 3 hours of my work day listening to the radio.  good stuff.

by busch league on Sep 25, 2006 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, that's nice of him
after at the beginning of the season he and Olberman said there was no doubt Pujols was on steroids.

by Hardcore Legend on Sep 25, 2006 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

come on
They never once said this. Why do people make this stuff up without any actual backing?
SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Sep 25, 2006 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

They absolutely did
for 3 straight days, Olberman was on the show saying he had seen the non-redacted document on it and that it had Chris Milhfeld's name on it, the personal trainer of Albert Pujols.

Olberman went as far as to use this information on his MSNBC twice, calling in experts on the use of HGH and the inability to hide it.

His exact words were "In this post-steroids era, so to speak, Albert Pujols was heralded as the future of the league, a "clean" player putting up historic numbers....<pause> OOPS!  In the latest revelations in this on-going baseball steroids saga..." so forth and so on.

Olberman and Patrick made it very clear that Milhfeld's name was on the document and also overtly implied this meant Pujols was far from clean.

by Hardcore Legend on Sep 25, 2006 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

wow, lot of typos there. Let's try it again...
for 3 straight days, Olberman was on Patrick's show saying he had seen the non-redacted document and that it had Chris Milhfeld's name on it, the personal trainer of Albert Pujols.

Olberman went as far as to use this information on his MSNBC show twice, calling in experts on the use of HGH and the ability of atheletes to hide it.  He then trotted out quotes from Pujols that implied Pujols went to Milhfeld to get better almost the day after the season, when shown along side the 'revelation' gave the implication that Pujols was so driven to be the best that who knows what he would do.

His exact words were "In this post-steroids era, so to speak, Albert Pujols was heralded as the future of the league, a "clean" player putting up historic numbers....<pause> OOPS!  In the latest revelations in this on-going baseball steroids saga..." so forth and so on.

Olberman and Patrick made it very clear that Milhfeld's name was on the document and also overtly implied this meant Pujols was far from clean.

by Hardcore Legend on Sep 25, 2006 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

wait now
All Olbermann did was link Pujols to Milhfeld. He never once said that Albert Pujols used steroids. And Dan Patrick never said that on air either.

Lets not put words in guys mouths. There WAS a link between Albert and Milfeld. Again, this is NOT the same as saying for three straight days that Albert used roids.

SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Sep 25, 2006 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree
i listened to this very exchange for a couple of days on the dan patrick show.  never at any time did olbermann or patrick say pujols was juiced.  they did say there was a direct link from milhfeld to pujols.  olbermann specifically said that it doesn't mean that pujols is "dirty" but what it does is bring him now into the category of "suspicious."  he even said it was sad because pujols was the guy everyone was looking at because of his huge numbers and everyone knew he was clean.  

so there was nothing ever said about pujols being dirty.  i didn't even get the implication.  i thought they were very careful when talking about the link.  

by busch league on Sep 25, 2006 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

agreed
And if EVERY Cardinal fan didnt get a BIT suspicious when that link came public then they are extremely naive.
SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Sep 25, 2006 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, Olbermann said
talked to that on Dan Patrick's radio show.

Now, Olbermann is just about creating controversy these days, not actually reporting things.....

by sdrone on Sep 25, 2006 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

they certainly did
imply that he was on steroids.  they kept talking about "all the big names that would come out" w/ the jason grimsley thing.  "it should be reported that his trainer (mihfield) is pujols' trainer and, oh yeah, by the way, remember how bonds' trainer got him the roids."  they most certainly did imply that pujols was on steroids and that he would be linked to grimsley, etc.  I don't listen everyday but I hope that they have since retracted the assumptions they were jumping to.

by chuckb on Sep 25, 2006 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

implying
and saying something are two VERY different things. Again, let's not put words in guys mouths.
SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Sep 25, 2006 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Llboros - clarification
your post makes it seem as if you wouldn't be disappointed if the Cardinals failed in the postseason. Is that your stance?

I can't imagine such a sentiment.  Sure, we are sucking pretty hard right now to use some loose language, but I know that when I wake up the morning after our final game this season, there will be a huge hole in my life.  They only thing that I can imagine that would cushion that blow is a WS title.

by Hardcore Legend on Sep 25, 2006 2:08 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Slow day at work?
Dunno if he'll bite on that... Maybe you should try insulting his momma...

by guayzimi on Sep 25, 2006 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hardcore
i would like the cards to win in Oct...however if i had to choose them A losing now and giving up the division or B making the playoffs and getting swept...ID pick B for two simple reasons
  1. My inlaws live in Houston..never live that down
  2. my brothers are cub fans...never live it down
At least if they make it in the playoffs and lose the torment will be far less

by punchinjudy on Sep 25, 2006 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wasn't insulting him
if it came across as such, then help me rephrase it so it doesn't seem that way.

by Hardcore Legend on Sep 25, 2006 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

you read me correctly hardcore
if they don't make the playoffs, i won't be particularly disappointed. and i won't have a huge, unfillable void in my life.

by lboros on Sep 25, 2006 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

ok
that's disappointing.

Thanks for clearing it up.

by Hardcore Legend on Sep 25, 2006 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

you're disappointed in me?
that's about the funniest thing you've ever posted, my friend.

how old are you, anyway?

by lboros on Sep 25, 2006 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The Point
I think the point of the entire season is to make the playoffs.  Maybe the Cards didn't field the best team they could have this year.  Maybe they did, I don't know all the answers.  But I don't believe that you won't tune in come October.  I don't believe that anyone that reads Cardinals blogs honestly does not care if they make the playoffs.  I'm not saying they will win...but anything can happen.  We don't have the best team in the playoffs, that's true.  But the best team doesn't always win the WS.  I don't think they always do, at least.  That's kind of a neat thing about baseball - the season isn't over until the last out on the last day, you can't run the clock out.  Making the playoffs is truly a special thing and should not be taken for granted.  The Cards could talespin back into early 90s mediocrity and not come back for a long time.  I, for one, will cherish it if we make the playoffs.  The players, at the very least, have my support.  It's good for the team, and good for the city of St. Louis.  To this point, their record states that they have been the best team in the national league central.  That's enough to keep me excited about the playoffs, for now.

by Toddius396 on Sep 25, 2006 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

i never said i did not care
i said that if the cardinals don't make the playoffs this season, it won't rank very high on the list of the baseball-related disappointments i have experienced.

you're all free to feel differently. you're even free to judge me, if you must.

by lboros on Sep 25, 2006 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Disappointment...
... is the product of an unfulfilled expectation or hope. I am and will be disappointed by the Cardinals this year, but only to the extent that I had expectations of them, and my expectations, I believe, have been pretty realistic.

Thus, I'll be annoyed and a bit unhappy for a few hours after they lose their last game, but in no way will it compare to the 2004 WS in the degree of disappointment I experience. As with my current expectations, I had pretty realistic expectations then, and they disappointed big time.

I have to agree with LB here - this lost season isn't very high on the list of disappointments I've experienced at the hands of this team. I'm actually looking forward to the off-season discussion and the rebuilding of a winning roster - I'm kinda getting tired of complaining about how bad things are right now.

by lawman3842 on Sep 25, 2006 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well
I don't think the point had to do with not HOPING they would do well.  But not particularly EXPECTING them to.  If the Cards are bounced in the first round in 2006, I won't be terribly disappointed either because that's about what I expect from them, unlike say 2001 or 2002 when I felt like they lost to lesser teams.  Those were disappointing.  And neither of those compared to the disappointment of losing in 1985 or 1987 to clearly inferior teams in the WS, or choking away the 3-1 lead in 1996 (albeit to a better Atlanta team).

Do I hope they pull it all together and get hot for a couple weeks and make a magical run?  You bet, and I will be watching the games for that very reason.  But it will be a very pleasant surprise if they actually do it.

by blove121 on Sep 25, 2006 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I didn't say you were insulting anybody...
just that doing so might be more likely to elicit a response.

The thing is, it's easy to have a love-hate relationship with a maddening, inconsistent sports team like the '06 Cards. There's a lot of emotional ups and downs... If a fan momentarily loses faith or makes some ill-advised utterance - and I'm not saying the guy is guilty of doing either of these things - he shouldn't be called out and made to account for his actions...

Having said that, I realize you were just trying stir things up a bit, which is generally a good thing...

by guayzimi on Sep 25, 2006 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

From the OP (emphasis added)

so while i'd rather see the cardinals win the division than not, a full-blown choke wouldn't make the top 5 -- maybe not even the top 10 -- on the list of my greatest disappointments as a fan.

by Valatan on Sep 25, 2006 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

hell,
i'd argue it wouldn't make the top 5 on the list of my greatest disappointments during the larussa era.

by sdesserman on Sep 25, 2006 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

i just want to go on the record
 and say that I live in houston and if we don't don't win the division, i'm not sure i'm gonna be able to step outside until next october.  it will be one of the biggest baseball related disappointments here b/c astros fans hide when they're losing, but they're smug as hell when they're winning!

by chuckb on Sep 25, 2006 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

um i dont think
i read it as an inuslt, but i was just saying i could see that too...i see both sides of it Obviously we all want them to win, but if they are going to lose and we can chose that then I say win the division..and lose in playoffs...

Can any of us tolerate hearing from cub fans or Stros fans that they gave th edivision away?

by punchinjudy on Sep 25, 2006 2:52 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Hardcore on more thing
I saw on AMC last night they were playing a movie calle HOMBRE..maybe you could find a movie poster of it and edit it to be alberts head on the poster...thought it would be funny

by punchinjudy on Sep 25, 2006 2:54 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

one-game playoff
according to this article, the venue for one-game playoffs was decided by a series of coin flips on September 12th.  Houston wasn't close enough in the standings to warrant a coin flip for a St. Louis/Houston one-game playoff at that point.  (We would've hosted such a game against Cincinnati).

So I guess it remains to be seen.  

by mikeoat on Sep 25, 2006 3:16 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comparison to '64
I do not mean to say that the '06 Cards are as good as the '64 Phillies, only that it will be remembered as a monumental colapse.

Personnaly I just couldn't stand the stigma to my beloved Cardinals.

The '06 Cards- The New '64 Phillies?

by Zubin on Sep 25, 2006 3:29 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Not monumental
The thing I think all of us can agree on is that an 8 game losing streak is actually nothing new for this team (having gone on 2 already).

Has their steady sucking since facing the White Sox in June makes this seem more inevitable than a great collapse.

Like Lboros says, sure I'd rather see my team in the postseason than not (how many teams with multiple 8-game losing streaks have won the World Series? That would be sweet.) but I don't think it will be viewed as a great loss if we don't make it.

I certainly won't be nearly as heartbroken as I was with our performance last year or in '04.

by dontEATnachos on Sep 25, 2006 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

It would be forgotten...
by 2008. 1964 was a much bigger deal because of the fact that only one team from each league made the postseason (world series).
Bengie Molina for 2007 Cardinals Catcher!

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Sep 25, 2006 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Lots of injuries this season..
Seems to me we have had a real run on injuries this season that we mostly avoided in the past few years.  Edmonds, Mulder, Rolen, Albert, Eck...all have sat for significant periods of time. Now you add in the demise of the pitching staff, especially the bullpen, and you have a team that is not going to be a overpowering regular season club.  IF they can make the playoffs, and lets face it, even with them losing like they did this weekend, the odds are pretty good they win the Central, It is POSSIBLE that they could go on a bit of a roll... a error here or there, a timely HR or RBI...and they are the winners of the 5 game series no matter who it is against.. Winning the Next Seven game series would be a much harder test for sure...but again, it's possible.... so that is what I am going with. I'm going to ride them into the ground and hope and beg and pray every single moment that is left in this season...till they are eliminated. Whatever happens?..Happens. But I'm not going to give up on them till the fat lady sings...and she isn't even clearing her throat yet folks.

by Timbo02 on Sep 25, 2006 4:00 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Frustrating as hell
Has there previously been such a complete and total bullpen collapse as that which occurred in this past week? I would have to think there has been at some point, but I'm not familiar with it...

If it wasn't bad enough to see my beloved Cards swept by Houston, having to listen to several hours of ESPN's sycophantic Clemens adoration was almost to much to bear. I was almost beginning to wish Tim McCarver and Hawk Harrellson would invade the broadcast booth and take over the play-by-play.

Of course, the night wouldn't be complete without a blown call by the ridiculously incompetent Angel Hernandez (anybody else hear that this guy moonlights as a replay official for the PAC-10?). I'll grant that we would likely have lost anyway, as the bullpen still had two innings left to pitch, but him boning us surely didn't help matters. I cringe every time I see him or Cuzzi anywhere near a Cards game...

And the icing on the cake? After Ausmus drove in his two runs, I swear my 3 year old son said "Fuck"...right in front of his mother of course...

Oh well, surely tonight will be better...

Won't it?

"Paging Dr. Kenneth Noisewater..."

by iron duke75 on Sep 25, 2006 4:11 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Angel Hernandez has got to be....
on the short list of the absolute worst umpires in MLB.  I went to the game Friday night, not paying any attention to who the umpires were.  After the first few batters and the reactions of both batters and pitchers, I quickly realized who was behind the plate.  I have never seen an ump where the strike zone consistently changes from batter to batter as his does.

by Cards67 on Sep 25, 2006 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

more bad umps
Throw Joe West and CB Bucknor on the list, too.  Both, along with Hernandez, just LOVE goading managers and players into getting tossed.  I was shocked he didn't run TLR when he came out to argue Biggio being out of the baseline.

by blove121 on Sep 25, 2006 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

My brother the umpire...
who went to Harry Wendlestedt's umpire school (Hunter W, the HP umpire last night, was one of his instructors), had an interesting perspective on that hideous call at 2B last night.

I always call Sam (my brother) when I see a questionable call and wonder about the rules. Joe Morgan had it partially right - which is more than he usually knows about the rules - when he said that Biggio makes his own path to the base. Biggio does have the discretion to run to the base along his own path; however, at the moment the tag is to be applied, the runner has a three-foot lane in which he may move either direction to avoid the tag; any further and he's called out for being out of the baseline. Sam indicated that because it was debatable when "the tag was to be applied" in that play, it was a "tweener" - a call that could go either way.

Hernandez's worst fault in that play was not missing the out-of-the-baseline call, but rather not being in position to see the tag - the footage made it look awfully close on the question of whether Belliard applied a tag, but the umpire's view was blocked by the runner - that's horrible positioning. The umpire is to be in a position to see a tag and/or a force play at the bag.

As the umpire couldn't see whether a tag was made or not, and as the baseline issue was so very close, Sam would've called the runner out as that was more probably the correct call.

Sam's response to the questionable strike zone (i.e., ball three to Ausmus being over the plate, but two called strikes on Rolen being 6 inches inside and three inches high)? You can't argue balls and strikes...

by lawman3842 on Sep 25, 2006 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks ...
This is a great post on understanding the real problems with that call last night...I didn't know if it should have been out of the basepath or not...but the positioning point you make above is really the key.  Great info bro.

by Timbo02 on Sep 25, 2006 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

sorry to remain negative
but don't forget that the Cards are facing a lefty tonight. Things may not get better just yet. All we can do is root for the Phillies to beat the Stros.
"Forget about the curveball Ricky...Give him the heater!!"

by BleacherBum on Sep 25, 2006 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Cards win tonight...
6-3. Sorry!
Bengie Molina for 2007 Cardinals Catcher!

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Sep 25, 2006 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

no...
they won't win again until they go through another 8-game losing streak - we're getting swept this series only to turn it on in time for the Brewers and in time to hold onto the division.

by lawman3842 on Sep 25, 2006 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sorry
it's already been decided though. Cards 6, Padres 3.
Bengie Molina for 2007 Cardinals Catcher!

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Sep 25, 2006 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I hope
you're right! Realistic expectations... that's the key.

by lawman3842 on Sep 25, 2006 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'll be honest
I don't think this team will be satisfied with anything less than an 8-game losing streak.  They're that determined.

To get back to what I said Saturday night, they always play better after an 8 game losing streak.  Putting us in a perfect position to be on the up-swing of play.  Right into the playoffs.

It's brilliant!

by dontEATnachos on Sep 25, 2006 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Angel
I watched the game Friday and said that Hernandez was one of the worst umpires in the league and that he has a short leash. He will throw someone out of a game with the first hint of an argument. It's not that he makes mistakes, because we are all human, that doesn't bother me. It is the fact that he does not know the rules and will not ask for help. He is a "god" umpire and can do no wrong. I hate that guy. How can you miss that call last night? It seemed pretty obvious to me. Agreed???????????
Play hard, play to win, but make it fun!

by Edmonds is baseball on Sep 25, 2006 4:46 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Hernandez....
is by far one of the most inconsistant ump's in the game.  And I think he absolutely is always looking for an opportunity to become " part of the game". Whether it's a call like last night at 2nd base, or just having the most inconsistant strike zone on the planet. He has a VERY short fuse and worse than that has on occasion seemed to be LOOKING for confrontation with a player.

by Timbo02 on Sep 25, 2006 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

it was close
the runner does get 3 feet to either side of the baseline and, at full speed, it was close.  i think he was out of the baseline as most people do but it's not a slam dunk.  I agree w/ one poster earlier who said that belliard came damned close to tagging him and wonder if he didn't miss that as well.  But judging from larussa's comments, it doesn't seem as if belliard thought he tagged him.  

that was a tough call, and we had 3 close ones all go against us in a very short fashion last night.  I think they got 2 out of 3 right, but they all went against us.  Biggio was close to being out at 1st that would have made the missed DP irrelevant.  And we had a guy called just out @ 1st in the previous inning that could have led to a crooked #.

by chuckb on Sep 25, 2006 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

for those of us who
missed the Dan Patrick show today what did they say about the MVP race

2. The argument about Oberman and DP made me realize this...man nothinc came of that supposed article identifying Milfeld, and nothing has come of the whole Jason Grimsley thing either

by punchinjudy on Sep 25, 2006 5:51 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Start posting about the Cardinals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avatar_small
How to EASILY make tables for Fanposts
1753738656_110919ebe9_o_small
2010 Hot Stove Post #1: CHONE hitter projections

Recent FanPosts

Arch_small
Number 15
Small
Some thoughts on Holliday (and potential replacements)
Small
Ok let me try this again...
Knights-09_small
Disenchanted Blue Jays Fan Looking For A New Team
Painterlance_small
The Holliday Dilemma (Rocks Fan Perpsective)
375830-r1-025-11_011_small
Anybody read Bob Gibson's new book yet?
Flanders_small
Yadi2first
Small
40 Man Question..

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Jack_benny_small DanUpBaby

Editors

Bender1_small azruavatar

Adam1_small chuckb

Kid-a-bear_small the red baron