JDM says absolutely no cheating and team will be cleared

[oldtimer]

Have to wait for the report but for now it does mean something to Red Sox fans. JD is considered a good guy and him saying that gives hope that nothing major or widespread was going on.Roenicke basically said the same thing .Assuming he wants the manager job he has to know if he gets it he is gone if the report is bad.

 

There is also a report that Cora was fired because Henry was afraid to Sox could be faced with vacating the 2018 series and thought firing would help.

 

We will all have to wait and see

 

So what are the specific legal uses of the replay room? Are they only to assess calls so they can be challenged or can the hitters look to see how the pitcher got them out or whether the umpire incorrectly called a pitch? How would a player looking over replays not see what signs were called?

[a700hitter]

ESPN needs to revamp their baseball broadcast regardless of what Mendoza said. The broadcast is unwatchable. Mendoza is merely the worst of the lot

Matt Vastersian has to be the worst play by play guy since Bob Gamere

ESPN Sunday Night baseball has to be watched with the sound off. They fired Schilling for his politics. He was great analyst for pitching. They brought on Mendoza to increase their diversity score, but she is awful and hasn’t improved much during her tenure. The only one who adds value to the broadcast is ARod, but you have to be able to tolerate his massive ego and phoniness. It’s a disaster. I only watch it when the Red Sox or Yankees are playing or my Fantasy week outcome is still in the balance.

[notin]

If anything I would have preferred that JD shut the f*** up and talk to his Player Representative with the PA because the PA is the only group of the three headed beast that is baseball, MLB, the Franchises and the PA plus Media that IMO has any chance of stepping to the plate and demanding that MLB manage a process that is actually intended to deal with the crux of the issue head on.

 

How do you know he didn't talk to a Player Rep first? And why are you so positive he is lying?

 

So far, the entire story is:

 

Anonymous source: Red Sox used the replay room to steal signs in 2018!! But not in 2019! And not in the postseason!

JD Martinez: Not true at all.

 

JD was there. Maybe he is not wild about someone screaming that the only time he won a World Series title, he was part of some elaborate cheating scandal. Right now, presumption of guilt really does mena giving more credibility to an anonymous source than to someone willing to use their name.

 

We don't really know anything, and that doesn't mean MLB and Manfred are creating some massive elaborate cover-up. It's actually possible that nothing will be found because there is nothing to find. Trevor Bauer has said he heard the Astros banging the trash can as far back as 2014. which is interesting inasmuch as it means they might have been cheating this way 2 years prior to hiring Alex Cora. So assuming Cora started the whole scheme in Houston and then obviously (using the completely presumptive "once a cheat, always a cheat" logic) brought it over to Boston might not be anything more than "ironclad innuendo."

 

That MLB launched an investigation means nothing. They had to after the Fiers bombshell. They also investigated the buzzers based on the tweets of someone claiming to be Carlos Beltran's niece, a claim that operates on two crazy assumptions: 1) Carlos Beltran shares all his nefarious activites with members of his extended family and 2) the Astros kept Beltran in the loop of new cheating techniques after he left the team and went to the Yankees. Both of which are laughable. But... there was an investigation!!!

 

I have no idea how rampant cheating is throughout the league. But the whole notion of "every rumor means guilt" is taking everything a bit too far. There is a chance they are actually not guilty of anything. And we really don't know anythng until this investigation is complete.

 

I will say the notion that the media wants to bury this is beyond preposterous. The media LIVES for these moments. Every story is more clickbait, which turns into more revenue dollars. ESPN doesn't care if the Red Sox or Astros or Yankees or Hiroshima Carp are cheating or not. But they do care if people will tune in or click a link to find out about it. Beyond it becoming a convenient excuse for not finding anything out, what possible reason would the media have for wanting to bury this story? They are in the news business, and saying "there is no news" is very bad for that particular business.

 

And if we learned nothing else from Deflategate, we saw how willing they are to keep a story like that alive...

Edited January 19, 2020 by notin

[jung]

So much for waiting for the report...

 

We don't have to wait for the Boston Report to know that Manfred is tailoring this to an outcome. We can see it in the Houston Report:

- the Houston report completely exonerates Ownership and Upper Management which basically firewalls Ownership

- No active players named or suspended or sanctioned in any way when we know PLAYERS in the batters box knew what to listen for to get the signs and in some instances it was PLAYERS in the dugout walkway banging on a trash can. One "retired" player called out. Whoopdie-dingdong!

 

So sorry but Manfred has already proven lacking before we even get to the Boston Report.

[Elktonnick]

ESPN Sunday Night baseball has to be watched with the sound off. They fired Schilling for his politics. He was great analyst for pitching. They brought on Mendoza to increase their diversity score, but she is awful and hasn’t improved much during her tenure. The only one who adds value to the broadcast is ARod, but you have to be able to tolerate his massive ego and phoniness. It’s a disaster. I only watch it when the Red Sox or Yankees are playing or my Fantasy week outcome is still in the balance.

Watching with the sound off only works when they actually show the action on the field. Half the time the images on the screen aren't of anyone actually playing the game.

[Bellhorn04]

Watching with the sound off only works when they actually show the action on the field. Half the time the images on the screen aren't of anyone actually playing the game.

 

Agreed. A lot of the time they're showing the idiots in the booth. A-Rod probably has it written into his contract that his pretty face has to be on-screen for X number of minutes.

[Elktonnick]

Agreed. A lot of the time they're showing the idiots in the booth. A-Rod probably has it written into his contract that his pretty face has to be on-screen for X number of minutes.

 

It isn't just the A-Rod crowd. ESPN broadcast the game when Porcello threw an immaculate inning. Eduardo Perez was so busy talking about some party he was at that they never mentioned Porcello's immaculate inning until the next inning with "Oh by the way......"

[S5Dewey]

If there's anything good that came out of the 2019 disaster season it's that maybe the Sox won't have the Sunday Night games this year and we won't have to listen to The Three Stooges.

[jung]

If there's anything good that came out of the 2019 disaster season it's that maybe the Sox won't have the Sunday Night games this year and we won't have to listen to The Three Stooges.

 

Well they have to replace Medoza with somebody. She has already lost her ESPN gig. I would contend that she lost it for all the wrong reasons. But she is out.

[jacksonianmarch]

So what are the specific legal uses of the replay room? Are they only to assess calls so they can be challenged or can the hitters look to see how the pitcher got them out or whether the umpire incorrectly called a pitch? How would a player looking over replays not see what signs were called?

 

Looking at how a pitcher got them is fair game. Seeing if a call can be challenged is fair game. Anything in the past, even as recent as a past at bat is fine. But using tech to decipher pitch sign sequence and then relaying it to the batter in real time is cheating. If that occurred in boston, then their punishment could be worse than Houston’s since they were the source case of initial warnings. At this point, you have to let it play out

[Elktonnick]

Well they have to replace Medoza with somebody. She has already lost her ESPN gig. I would contend that she lost it for all the wrong reasons. But she is out.

 

The reporting I've seen indicated that ESPN was looking to replace her long before this whole affair started.

[jacksonianmarch]

She’s abysmal on the Sunday Night broadcasts. She doesn’t bring much to the table and ESPN is looking for an entertaining broadcast. It’s baseball, there’s down time. You cannot have a robotic broadcast to appeal to the casual fan. I’d also advocate for ARod moving off it as well, although his commentary is at least useful

[Bellhorn04]

With regard to JDM's professions of innocence, it seems strange that if the Sox did nothing the investigation is so long.

[Elktonnick]

Well they have to replace Medoza with somebody. She has already lost her ESPN gig. I would contend that she lost it for all the wrong reasons. But she is out.

 

BTW I can find no announcement anywhere that ESPN has actually fired Mendoza. The only thing that I have found is that they are considering replacing her with David Cone.

[Bellhorn04]

BTW I can find no announcement anywhere that ESPN has actually fired Mendoza. The only thing that I have found is that they are considering replacing her with David Cone.

 

Mendoza has a job with the Mets now. That's the reason she might be out, isn't it?

[Elktonnick]

Mendoza has a job with the Mets now. That's the reason she might be out, isn't it?

 

Don't know. There was an article yesterday saying that ESPN was considering replacing her with Come but other than that nothing.

[Bellhorn04]

Looking at how a pitcher got them is fair game. Seeing if a call can be challenged is fair game. Anything in the past, even as recent as a past at bat is fine. But using tech to decipher pitch sign sequence and then relaying it to the batter in real time is cheating.

 

What about this scenario:

 

Hitters watch video during the game and think they have decoded sign sequences. They spread the info around the dugout. When somebody gets on second base, they signal the hitter.

 

Cheating or not cheating?

[Elktonnick]

What about this scenario:

 

Hitters watch video during the game and think they have decoded sign sequences. They spread the info around the dugout. When somebody gets on second base, they signal the hitter.

 

Cheating or not cheating?

 

Cheating! Violated Commissioner's memo.

[Bellhorn04]

Cheating! Violated Commissioner's memo.

 

And do we really think there are any teams who would never have used the easily accessible video to study signs during a game?

[jad]

The word 'cheating' should be banned from all sports talk.

[Elktonnick]

And do we really think there are any teams who would never have used the easily accessible video to study signs during a game?

 

That is why the Commissioner sent the memo.

[Elktonnick]

The word 'cheating' should be banned from all sports talk.

That violate the 1st amendment and would be (wait for it) cheating.

[notin]

That violate the 1st amendment and would be (wait for it) cheating.

 

Except that it doesn’t

[Elktonnick]

Except that it doesn’t

You obviously do not appreciate satire.

[jacksonianmarch]

What about this scenario:

 

Hitters watch video during the game and think they have decoded sign sequences. They spread the info around the dugout. When somebody gets on second base, they signal the hitter.

 

Cheating or not cheating?

 

Cheating. That’s using media to steal signs.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The word 'cheating' should be banned from all sports talk.

 

Had a long debate with an educator concerned about the culture of baseball being a bad influence on kids. My problem is that she kept repeating the word “cheating” about aspects I have always accepted as part of the sport.

 

My point is that sign-stealing – in all its forms – is inherent and will always prevail in baseball. Pitchers and catchers have secret codes, so the offense tries to break the codes to be better prepared to try to succeed.

 

Remember, the defense is also always trying to swipe signs – they want to be better prepared to succeed by knowing when a batter may square around to bunt or when a baserunner may attempt to steal a base (that the latter phrase has been part of baseball vernacular for over 120 years shows how confusing this team sport may be to non-fanatics).

 

Last summer we heard Alex Cora use the phrase “pay attention to details”. Everybody in the dugout is taught as a teenager or even younger to always study the pitcher or watch the base coaches for a reason.

 

It’s curious that no public apologies have yet come from Cora, AJ Hinch or Carlos Beltran. Their former employers say all these guys are sorry, but only for embarrassing the clubs by disregarding the commissioner’s orders (and let’s face it, for getting caught).

 

Notice how no one has apologized for trying to do what even the MLB says is still ok (as long as it’s not done with live video)? Could it be because they actually don’t think what they did was wrong – because of their lives as ballplayers, and what they know about so many others?

 

By the end of our talk, we each could see both sides; she had me questioning the intricate language system of our pastime, but she also wondered if “cheating” is a poor choice of words…

[Elktonnick]

Had a long debate with an educator concerned about the culture of baseball being a bad influence on kids. My problem is that she kept repeating the word “cheating” about aspects I have always accepted as part of the sport.

 

My point is that sign-stealing – in all its forms – is inherent and will always prevail in baseball. Pitchers and catchers have secret codes, so the offense tries to break the codes to be better prepared to try to succeed.

 

Remember, the defense is also always trying to swipe signs – they want to be better prepared to succeed by knowing when a batter may square around to bunt or when a baserunner may attempt to steal a base (that the latter phrase has been part of baseball vernacular for over 120 years shows how confusing this team sport may be to non-fanatics).

 

Last summer we heard Alex Cora use the phrase “pay attention to details”. Everybody in the dugout is taught as a teenager or even younger to always study the pitcher or watch the base coaches for a reason.

 

It’s curious that no public apologies have yet come from Cora, AJ Hinch or Carlos Beltran. Their former employers say all these guys are sorry, but only for embarrassing the clubs by disregarding the commissioner’s orders (and let’s face it, for getting caught).

 

Notice how no one has apologized for trying to do what even the MLB says is still ok (as long as it’s not done with live video)? Could it be because they actually don’t think what they did was wrong – because of their lives as ballplayers, and what they know about so many others?

 

By the end of our talk, we each could see both sides; she had me questioning the intricate language system of our pastime, but she also wondered if “cheating” is a poor choice of words…

 

To cheat: to act dishonestly or unfairly to gain an advantage.

Using electronic means to obtain another team's signs is by definition is to act dishonestly or unfairly to gain an adbantage. It is by definition cheating.

[notin]

You obviously do not appreciate satire.

 

This is not always the ideal format for recognizing tongue-in-cheek banter

[jad]

To cheat: to act dishonestly or unfairly to gain an advantage.

Using electronic means to obtain another team's signs is by definition is to act dishonestly or unfairly to gain an adbantage. It is by definition cheating.

 

This is a classic case of 'begging the question' (i.e., assuming one's conclusion).

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

To cheat: to act dishonestly or unfairly to gain an advantage.

Using electronic means to obtain another team's signs is by definition is to act dishonestly or unfairly to gain an adbantage. It is by definition cheating.

 

I scoured the internet dictionaries for definitions, but nothing cited technology within the context of a professional sports milieu...

 

The commissioner supplied all teams with video, which he said was ok to use to look at the past and the present, but not for the future. A lot of guys still used tech in the past to look at the then-present for the future, which they're paying for now in the present... but you can bet tech will continue to be used in the future (and don't be surprised if some of these present scapegoats will be back in the future). It's convoluted, because the only thing black-and-white about this whole issue is Manfred said stop, many didn't, and he's apparently making an example of a few that won.

 

Curt Schilling recently said, "That system would have made me easy to face in October" -- which is understandable, and I'm not defending the use of video. But Schilling also once defined good pitching as "deceiving batters to take strikes and swing at balls."

 

I'm not a Cora apologist; he chose not to follow an edict and paid the price. But I am a baseball apologist, in that I acknowledge the game has always been about secret codes and deception and seeking an edge -- everybody does that -- and I can't imagine that ever changing.