Did Larussa Cheat?

[Starscream]

Please no Reds fans or Cards fans vote in this thread.



Did La Russa cheat with the rain delay?

Dusty Baker is obviously very unhappy about how information concerning the weather forecast was handled last night. Is there a chance the matter will be referred to Major League Baseball?

“I haven’t talked to Walt (Jocketty) about it,” he said. “What can MLB do? Forfeit the game? Give it back to us? You can’t fault the umpires. They told me we’ve got a window here. It’s going to rain some time tonight and we’re going to play through it, based on what they were told.”

The umpires told Baker that at home plate as they went over the ground rules. The head umpire supported that version.

“They told us we had a window of an hour. That window turned into two minutes,” crew chief John Hirschbeck told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

The game was delayed for two hours, 10 minutes during the top of the first. That meant Reds starter Edinson Volquez couldn’t pitch after warming up.

St. Louis manager Tony La Russa was asked if the Cardinals considered not starting the game, given the forecast.

“The forecasts were flying fast and furious,” he told reporters. “They’re just guessing. You don’t know what’s going to happen. But right after we announced it was starting on time — around 7:05 — somebody said it was raining at (Interstate) 270 and they thought it’d be here in 15 minutes. By then, it’s pretty tough to back off.

“Sure enough, five minutes into the game it’s raining.”

At home the Reds rely on reports from stadium operations chief Declan Mullin.

“I don’t know if he’s the best weatherman around,” Baker said. “But it seems like he can predict in minutes.”

Baker said he wasn’t told until 15 minutes before game time that Kyle McClellan wasn’t starting. McClellan reportedly was told at 75 minutes before the game.

Again, Baker was not happy.

“Yeah, I lost my pitcher,” he said. “We lost the game. I was upset because we still had action on winning that game.”

I'm obviously biased and think that La Russa is a dirty manager. He does a lot of shady things, and this one just adds to his record.

Once again, no Reds or Cards fans vote on this poll.

[forgop]

The game was delayed for two hours, 10 minutes during the top of the first. That meant Reds starter Edinson Volquez couldn’t pitch after warming up.

What do you mean he couldn't pitch? I'm confused...

[Starscream]

The game was delayed for two hours, 10 minutes during the top of the first. That meant Reds starter Edinson Volquez couldn’t pitch after warming up.

What do you mean he couldn't pitch? I'm confused...

:confused:

If this were the early 20th century, then it would be no problem, but the way the game is played now, his arm was warmed up, then sat for 2hrs 10min. I wouldn't have started him if my life depended on it.

[forgop]

:confused:

If this were the early 20th century, then it would be no problem, but the way the game is played now, his arm was warmed up, then sat for 2hrs 10min. I wouldn't have started him if my life depended on it.

Did the StL starting pitcher suffer the same fate or did he not warm up at all?

[jonumberone]

Andy, I think in this situation Cheat is a strong word.
He didn't make it rain and he doesn't have the ability to start or delay the game.
That said, he got one over on the Reds, but I wouldn't call it cheating.

[chippewastud79]

Did the StL starting pitcher suffer the same fate or did he not warm up at all?

He pitched the top of the inning and then got sat down after the rain delay.

[Starscream]

Andy, I think in this situation Cheat is a strong word.
He didn't make it rain and he doesn't have the ability to start or delay the game.
That said, he got one over on the Reds, but I wouldn't call it cheating.

I should have had a third option in the poll: Did La Russa make a dirty move?

[forgop]

He pitched the top of the inning and then got sat down after the rain delay.

So, BOTH pitchers warmed up and didn't return, right?

[jcruse64]

Don't know if he "cheated" the delay or not, but given Larussa's propensity to out-think himself, the delay decision normally would have gone against the Cards, not for them. He just lucked out this time.

I say that about Larussa as a Cards fan; I think he is one of the worst managers they've had, and don't really care for how he handles the pitching staff.

[688sonarmen]

Take one vote off, I voted no before I read the rules. But there are two sides to every story. Should Tony have let Baker as soon as possible that he switched pitchers, probably. But Baker had the same option available to him as well. Tony is pretty good but he is not God and can't make it rain. Even knowing information about the weather that was available to everyone does not guarantee that rain will come. If it had not, the way Batista was pitching would have won the game for the Reds. It was a chance Tony took and it worked out in his favor. Unless there is written testimony about the time he made the switch to the time Baker was told it's all hearsay at this point.

On another note, there is way to much drama between our clubs that is not needed and has nothing to do with the game. Once a call is made in baseball it sticks, so no amount of should have could have been is going to fix anything. All this should have been in the past but unfortunately our fans in the stands have not let it go, and still let Phillips rile them up. I would like to see all of this drama go away.

[forgop]

Somehow, I think the other manager would have had access to a TV or iPhone and they could have looked up the weather themselves. Acting as though the home team manager was the only one capable of having such information is naive IMO. In 1947, you might have a case, but not in 2011 when every single player on the roster and coaching staff has a smart phone of some sort in their pocket.

[elderboy02]

No, he didn't cheat. He took advantage of the rule. Baseball should change the rule.

[VTDragon]

Even today weather forecasting is as much art as science. He didn't cheat.

[MedicCook]

I don't see it as cheating. They both have access to the same information. LaRussa decided to not start his original pitcher knowing that the game could possibly be delayed with the weather. Many managers have done the same thing over the years by starting a long reliever. A manager has the right to change his players up to the point of them taking the field without penalty of losing that player for the game.

[icehog3]

No, he didn't cheat. He took advantage of the rule. Baseball should change the rule.

This. :tu

[Starscream]

I don't see it as cheating. They both have access to the same information. LaRussa decided to not start his original pitcher knowing that the game could possibly be delayed with the weather. Many managers have done the same thing over the years by starting a long reliever. A manager has the right to change his players up to the point of them taking the field without penalty of losing that player for the game.

No they didn't. That's the problem. Umpires told Dusty one thing; they told La Russa another.

[Starscream]

No, he didn't cheat. He took advantage of the rule. Baseball should change the rule.

:rlz


Once again, no Reds or Cards fans vote on this poll.
:r You weren't supposed to vote. I won't tell anyone, Dan. Oh wait, I just did.

[forgop]

No they didn't. That's the problem. Umpires told Dusty one thing; they told La Russa another.

So what? To act as though he cheated seems to implicate that the other team had no means of communication. If you think they showed up to the stadium with no sense of what the weather was going to do and had no means of monitoring it throughout the entire time they're there, you're very naive.

[chippewastud79]

:rlz


:r You weren't supposed to vote. I won't tell anyone, Dan. Oh wait, I just did.

You know Dan doesn't actually read other posts, he just makes his own. :tu

[icehog3]

No they didn't. That's the problem. Umpires told Dusty one thing; they told La Russa another.

So then it's on the Umps, right? :confused:

[NCRadioMan]

So then it's on the Umps, right? :confused:

It's obviously one of the largest conspiracy's ever in the history of baseball and the only scandal that rival's this can only be the Black Sox ordeal.


:tf

[Starscream]

So what? To act as though he cheated seems to implicate that the other team had no means of communication. If you think they showed up to the stadium with no sense of what the weather was going to do and had no means of monitoring it throughout the entire time they're there, you're very naive.

It's not the end of the world, Duane. Don't get all worked up over it. Geez.:rolleyes:

[icehog3]

It's not the end of the world, Duane. Don't get all worked up over it. Geez.:rolleyes:

Did La Russa cheat with the rain delay?

I'm obviously biased and think that La Russa is a dirty manager. He does a lot of shady things, and this one just adds to his record.



Who's worked up here, Andy? ;) :r

[Starscream]

So then it's on the Umps, right? :confused:

St. Louis manager Tony La Russa was asked if the Cardinals considered not starting the game, given the forecast.


Home field advantage has its perks, I guess.:sh

[Starscream]

It's obviously one of the largest conspiracy's ever in the history of baseball and the only scandal that rival's this can only be the Black Sox ordeal.


:tf

At least the Reds won that year.:D

[Starscream]

Who's worked up here, Andy? ;) :r

Not worked up, Admiral. I just thought it would be an interesting topic for discussion.:)


But I guess that makes me naive according to someone.

[icehog3]

14-0 for Tony El. Like Dan suggested, MLB should change the rule if it creates controvery. :tu

[forgop]

It's not the end of the world, Duane. Don't get all worked up over it. Geez.:rolleyes:

I'm not worked up as I have no interest on either side. I'm just failing to comprehend how the guy cheated in any way. :sh:sh:sh It seems logical to believe that you do because you're the one asking the question, right?

[Starscream]

I'm not worked up as I have no interest on either side. I'm just failing to comprehend how the guy cheated in any way. :sh:sh:sh It seems logical to believe that you do because you're the one asking the question, right?
Yes, I'm biased a bit. Cheating or no cheating, it was a bit shady. I might be down with Dan's suggestion about changing the rule, but I'm not convinced a rule change would be in order for this one incident. But once again, read my post again which I have quoted below.
I just thought it would be an interesting topic for discussion.:)

[bobarian]

Seems like you've made up you mind and are looking for validation and not discussion. 14 people voted negatory and yet you still seem determined to cry foul. :sh

[St. Lou Stu]

It's obviously one of the largest conspiracy's ever in the history of baseball and the only scandal that rival's this can only be the Black Sox ordeal.


:tf

This calls for a Congressional Inquiry!

[Starscream]

Seems like you've made up you mind and are looking for validation and not discussion. 14 people voted negatory and yet you still seem determined to cry foul. :sh
Did you notice that I didn't vote yes in this poll? I'm not that determined.

If only internet retailers had as high quality sticks as B&Ms...:)

[Stephen]

The bigger question is, when did Dusty Baker start caring about his pitchers?:sh

[Starscream]

The bigger question is, when did Dusty Baker start caring about his pitchers?:sh

He didn't get to overwork him enough Friday night.:r