BASEBALL: #2 TCU at WVU - Sunday Game Thread

[PO Frog]

I agree with you on the number of teams being different. My comparison was simply relating to an eye test of the team. There are two factions on this board. One that chalks it up to long season and a bad week. I agree on that. The other faction is that the team did not play well this weekend and quite frankly despite their record (considering their schedule to date) really had not played to their capabilities for most of the year. I agree with that as well. The factions are mutually exclusive. They will get into the tournament but I think most people on this board do not talk about getting to the tourney, that is a given. They think CWS. Fair or unfair, the expectations is there by the team and the fans based on what they performed a year ago and had coming back. Bottom line they do not look like a CWS team right now to me. I am not basing on this weekend only but what I have watched all season. However you are right there is a lot of games still to be played and I will cheer them along the way. I just hope we don't see much more of what we saw this weekend, or the team expectations will not be met. They need to start getting their game going now. Hope this 13 game streak was not our peak.

If they are mutually exclusive, you can't be a part of both groups.

 

[HornedFrog4Life]

Pretty sure there's a "not" missing from the above.

In honor of the old FW Cats how about the "knot" hole gang

 

[HornedFrog4Life]

Pretty sure there's a "not" missing from the above.

In honor of the old FW Cats how about the "knot" hole gang

If they are mutually exclusive, you can't be a part of both groups.

If they are mutually exclusive, you can't be a part of both groups.

As Pharm pointed out, I did leave out a "not" by mistake. They are not mutually exclusive. My point was simply that those who believe it is a long season should not [ hundin] about those commenting about our overall performance based on eye test. This is a board with opinions. Nothing necessarily right or wrong. In this case I agree with both. It is still a long way to go, but after 35 games do far, the eye test for me has not been as good as I think most of us would have liked or expected. Sure we are 27-8 but hope our less than stellar performance does not catch up to us and we take the game up a couple of gears. The talent and potential is there to do so, even the players have commented on that.

 

[JogginFrog]

If they are mutually exclusive, you can't be a part of both groups.

 

[GP's Step-Son]

Difficult to say what is going on but you can put this series on All the coach's and the Kids. For the last couple of weeks, these kids act like the gas can is empty.

Presently, I cannot picture this team in Omaha

Do what?

We were riding a 13 game winning streak heading into the WVU series, if that's a snapshot with the gas tank empty I sure would like to see what it looks like full.

 

[Pharm Frog]

I sure would like to see what it looks like full.

As we all would. Hoping it shows up around post-season time and stays through the final series in Omaha.

 

[Horny 4 Life]

Danced around like a Kansas City [ swishy ].

Absolutely slaying it. I'm dying here.

 

[Mountaineerlegion]

Hey Frogs,

Two quick questions...

First, do any of you have video of our center fielder's behavior that was apparently an affront to baseball? I didn't get to watch any of the games and would like to see what the uproar is about..

Second, what did our announcers say that was apparently baseball blasphemy? I got the impression it was a comment that a runner should have been out because the ball beat him to the bag even though he wasn't tagged. If this is what it was about I don't see why it is so hard to believe someone said it. Maybe senility has set in but I remember this being the defacto standard in MLB...particularly so on tags at second during stolen base attempts. I'm not saying that is what the rule says, just that that was the way it was called in MLB. MLB addressed the practice specifically with the umpires and the practice of calling it that way faded away. Perhaps our announcer is as old or older than I am and had a senior moment...gawd knows they happen more and more regularly. If you're not old enough to remember it don't dismiss it as impossible.

To further make my point, MLB hasn't used the rule book strike zone I grew up with since 1988. Umpires were calling strikes at the bottom of the knees as opposed to the top of the knees and gave pitchers an inch or more off the outside corner. It was so prevalent they changed the rule in 1988 to accommodate the midpoint of the knee, and again in 1996 to match the bottom of the knee that had been the defacto standard for a long time. Ironically they are now thinking of going back to "my" top of the knee strike zone. Also note, there has been similar changes to the top of the zone. Back in my day it went all the way up to the armpit and an earlier version had it going to the top of the shoulder. Lastly, to this day they haven't addressed the generous outside corner. Soooo, what may seem on the surface to be an outlandish statement, may be rooted in very real history.

 

[frognutz]

Hey Frogs,

Two quick questions...

First, do any of you have video of our center fielder's behavior that was apparently an affront to baseball? I didn't get to watch any of the games and would like to see what the uproar is about..

Second, what did our announcers say that was apparently baseball blasphemy? I got the impression it was a comment that a runner should have been out because the ball beat him to the bag even though he wasn't tagged. If this is what it was about I don't see why it is so hard to believe someone said it. Maybe senility has set in but I remember this being the defacto standard in MLB...particularly so on tags at second during stolen base attempts. I'm not saying that is what the rule says, just that that was the way it was called in MLB. MLB addressed the practice specifically with the umpires and the practice of calling it that way faded away. Perhaps our announcer is as old or older than I am and had a senior moment...gawd knows they happen more and more regularly. If you're not old enough to remember it don't dismiss it as impossible.

To further make my point, MLB hasn't used the rule book strike zone I grew up with since 1988. Umpires were calling strikes at the bottom of the knees as opposed to the top of the knees and gave pitchers an inch or more off the outside corner. It was so prevalent they changed the rule in 1988 to accommodate the midpoint of the knee, and again in 1996 to match the bottom of the knee that had been the defacto standard for a long time. Ironically they are now thinking of going back to "my" top of the knee strike zone. Also note, there has been similar changes to the top of the zone. Back in my day it went all the way up to the armpit and an earlier version had it going to the top of the shoulder. Lastly, to this day they haven't addressed the generous outside corner. Soooo, what may seem on the surface to be an outlandish statement, may be rooted in very real history.

On point #2, yeah that is basically what he said. Whether the runner is tagged or not when stealing 2nd if the ball gets there first he should be called out every time.

Maybe that's the case if you have one ump working the entire game from home plate, but not when you have someone calling it less than 5 feet away.

Will defer to you (the WVU fan) to comment on the age and senility level of your announcers, but we're well into the instant replay age in MLB, so pretty sure the "don't need to tag him to call him out" deal is dead if it ever existed in the first place.

 

[flyfishingfrog]

Hey Frogs,

Two quick questions...

First, do any of you have video of our center fielder's behavior that was apparently an affront to baseball? I didn't get to watch any of the games and would like to see what the uproar is about..

Second, what did our announcers say that was apparently baseball blasphemy? .

So obviously you don't actually ever watch WVU baseball since I discussed this with 3 friends that are WVU alumni and big baseball fans - and they all knew exactly what I was talking about before I even finished - and suggested that he was a really good CF (which he is - made several amazing plays during our series) so the fans were putting up with it - but would not be surprised if he started getting ear holed as teams learned about it as the season wears on....

And the WVU announcers said flat out that the TCU runner should have been called out because the ball got there before him on the steal - even though it was obvious the runner slid around a really weak tag.

Not that the WVU infielder should have made the play or that the umpire got the call wrong - simply flat out that because the ball got there first, the umpire should have called the runner out.

Whether they meant it that way or not - it was an incredibly stupid statement for a team that is supposed to be knowledgeable about baseball. Sounded like a statement my grand daughter would make along the lines of "TCU should win because WVU has ugly uniforms"...

 

[Purp]

Sounded like a statement my grand daughter would make along the lines of "TCU should win because WVU has ugly uniforms"...

Your granddaughter is a wise sage.