Comments on: Jeanmar Gomez and the Indians play the suspension/appeal system like a fiddle

By: The Baseball Idiot

The Baseball Idiot — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 22:02:31 +0000

The pitching rotation is planned out in spring training, and every pitcher has every start charted for him well in advance.

Even missing one start messes up the entire rotation, not only for the pitchers start, but for matchup agains certain teams, and rest days.

Pushing back one day changes everyones schedule. This makes more of a difference than you are making out.

You’re an experience baseball writer Aaron. You should already know this.

By: Alex K

Alex K — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:07:18 +0000

If he threw at an opposing player on purpose he 100% deserves to be suspended. Any pither that intentionally throws a pitch at a batter deserves to be suspended.

By: Alex K

Alex K — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:05:28 +0000

When did I say the pitch was near his head? I said, ” Lord help us if someone who is “protecting their teammate” ever kills a guy with a pitch.” That doesn’t mean that this situation was the pitcher throwing at the other guys head. It means that just because you aren’t trying to throw at a guy’s head doesn’t mean that the ball won’t hit him in the head.

By: casey5jones

casey5jones — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:00:43 +0000

Actually Aaron, I think it’s pretty smart. He shouldn’t have been suspended in the first place and MLB knows this. However, they have to look like they’re doing something to make sure things don’t escalate. The reason? Probably advertising revenue (make sure they look like they’re condemning it to keep advertisers happy)

By: Kevin Gillman

Kevin Gillman — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:28:42 +0000

Get real, the pitch hit his back, not his head. Where you’re supposed to hit the batter, I would never support hitting someone in the head. But the fact is teams in the past took advantage of the Indians because they knew they would never strike back if one of their players was hit, whether it was in the head, in the wrist, in the back, wherever. Not anymore.

By: sknut

sknut — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:11:19 +0000

If its a starting pitcher can’t they change the wording to say suspended for one start? Would that be so hard to do?

By: flaviusflav

flaviusflav — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:59:21 +0000

They should be placed on an ‘ineligible’ list for 10 games.

The player should lose 5 games salary, and the team should be fined a set amount.

Half of the money should go to the team who was plunked, the other half to an MLB charity.

The 10 game suspension keeps teams from being able to manipulate the system, but the player doesn’t lose more salary than they would have with the 5 game suspension.

Fining the offending team, and giving that money to the other team should go a long ways to help motivate teams not to plunk the enemy.

By: Alex K

Alex K — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:56:22 +0000

You’re right! He should be able to throw a hard ball at another player. He really showed those dastardly Royals who they were messing with!

/sarcasm

Beanball wars/”protecting your teammate” are stupid. Just beat the other team, that hurts more in the long run. Lord help us if someone who is “protecting their teammate” ever kills a guy with a pitch.

By: chadjones27

chadjones27 — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:49:49 +0000

Then if I’m the manager, I’m going to annouce that I had planned on starting that pitcher in everygame for the next 5 days. 5 days, 5 starts. Suspension over. It’s not there’s anything in the rule book that states you can pitch on consecutive days.
The only way right now to enforce supsensions what caputop said, not allowed the dropping of appeals. Then MLB could announce the suspension right before the pitcher’s next scheduled start (assuming the typical 5 day rotation). Forces the pitcher to either sit that start or pitch/appeal. Still not ideal though.

By: jobotjones

jobotjones — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:44:34 +0000

This happens in the NFL also.

Can be a real shame too it makes a mockery of the punishment handed out and teaches no lesson to the guilty party.

Life goes on I suppose.

By: Kevin Gillman

Kevin Gillman — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:42:49 +0000

He never should have been suspended in the first place. All he was doing was protecting his teammates. Everyone knew, so my suggestion is for the umpire crew to allow the ballplayers play the game. No punches were thrown at all, just let them play the game.

By: Lukehart80

Lukehart80 — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:26:42 +0000

Amen. I know a 9 or 10 game suspension also means taking away more money from the player, but if they won’t respect the intended consequences of the 5 game version, step it up.

By: phukyouk

phukyouk — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:18:24 +0000

or just make it that he misses X starts instead of games.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:14:47 +0000

Yep, a 5 game suspension for a starter equates to a 0.2 game suspension. Every team does this. Appeal, drop the appeal, push the guys next start back 1 game. For a suspension to a starter to equate to a start, it has to be 9 games so that when a team does the appeal/drop appeal thing, it makes him miss an entire turn in the rotation.

By: caputop

caputop — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:12:22 +0000

Maybe suspensions for pitchers should be bumped up to 10 games instead of 5, which seems like a standard.

Another option would be to stop letting them “drop the appeal,” either appeal, or don’t. Stop letting them abuse the system to miss the games they want to.