Thou Shalt Not Steal

If that is the case and Their paper would not even mention it do yo really think ours would?!?!?!?

Stealing. A New Brand of Baseball.

If you pass along business secrets of a former employer in the real world, you get prosecuted or blackballed. If you do it in baseball...well, that's kind of like using an illegal substance, huh?

Michael Norton - Some Ballyard

http://mlblog.someballyard.com

The Rockies should be given some kind of a handicap like in golf or bowling if only because of Dan O'Dowd being their GM.

It wasnt in the AZ paper, because it is a total **** article.

WAAAh - poor rockies have to play by the rules too... waaah...

My question is: Eric Byrnes was on this team all year long last year - if he was the one who "tattled" why did they wait until after the season to say something?

Ask yourself - if you know your opponent is breaking the rules - would you say something? Managers ask for umps to check pitchers for foreign substances on occasion - is that tattling?

This is just silly...

If this was AZ that reported it (Estes was on SD last year), than GOOD FOR THEM.

"It wasnt in the AZ paper, because it is a total **** article."

Lol. Apparently, the info didn't meet the Republic's lofty journalistic standards ;-)

Ringolsby makes it clear he doesnt know who filed the formal complaint, yet he asserts Byrnes and Estes "told Arizona officials" about the sign stealing. He doesnt specify how he "knows" this, but two other things are pretty clear from this blurb. One, Ringolsby didnt fabricate his Byrnes/Estes speculation from whole cloth, and two, the Rockies "think" the Dbacks filed the formal complaint. I'd like more upfront evidence too, but as this is a newspaper and not a court of law, that's significant information - and to suggest this doesnt deserve reportage is contradicted by comments here.

"My question is: Eric Byrnes was on this team all year long last year - if he was the one who "tattled" why did they wait until after the season to say something?"

It's too bad you dont work for The Republic, Dan, because then Arizona's FO might actually have to confront your question :-)

"WAAAh - poor rockies have to play by the rules too... waaah..."

Who's whining here? Me? Ringolsby? He's made an educated guess and I've critiqued the Dbacks apparent decision based on that information, pointing out good and bad ramifications. You're the one sobbing IN CAPS, not us.

"Ask yourself - if you know your opponent is breaking the rules - would you say something?"

It depends. AZ "knows" what Weiss does (the same way Ringolsby "knows" the Dbacks filed the complaint), but they cant prove it, so they employed a rulebook technicality to get Walt off the bench. It's not the same as catching a pitcher red handed with a foreign substance, or picking up a broken, corked bat. Plaintiff here went the extra mile to alter the Rockies dugout dynamics, and whether Colorado was over the legal limit or not, I suspect that kind of litigation will draw an unfriendly counter response. If the Rockies build a lead Opening Day, dont be surprised if Byrnes takes a fastball in the back. Hassling Dback pitchers about potential equipment violations, perhaps?

Moreover, sign stealing is a time honored, accepted, integral part of the game to a degree that corked bats and KY jelly are not.

Nobody likes getting formally reprimanded by a righteous competitor, one who effectively runs to mama (ie league office) to resolve these kinds of ticky tack issues.

1. I dont think the AZ Rep or FO should have to comment on a beat writers speculation about who turned in the notice. We dont know who did it. Like i said, estes was with SD last year... wouldnt it make sense to have a pitcher be more aware of this than Eric Byrnes of all people - Who (BTW) played with COL for 15 games in early 2005.

The "waah" comment was for the rockies, not you.

My opinion is that having too many coaches on the bench (one apparantly who's primary and maybe only job function was to steal signs) is more than a "ticky-tack" issue or a rulebook technicality. Its a rule. Not some loophole based on wording or anything like that - Each team is allowed a specific # of coaches - simple. Obviously, MLB agrees.

While sign stealing is definately part of the game, having a extra coach to do so, is not.

Kudos to AZ, or SF, or SD, or LA...

I dont think the FO "has to" comment either, that's their perogative. But it's an interesting, and odd, enough issue that the FO should at least be queried.

btw, this "beat writer" who wrote the "total ****" article, has been covering baseball for thirty years, won the Spink Award in 2005 and is in the Hall of Fame. Seems to me any local reporter, none of whom have that pedigree, ought to give Moorad a jingle, unless it's easier to simply roll over in bed and ask Jeff face to face.

On rule vs technicality, this is a rule that MLB "obviously" doesnt care about enforcing until someone complains, in which case MLB puts on their justice hat. You can tell how much MLB cares by the penalty they invoked - just $10K per game, no game forfeitures, etc. Heck, if Weiss is really good at his job, the Rockies may treat these fines as just another cost of doing business. More likely, they'll figure out a cheaper workaround.

Surely most teams are aware of Weiss. Word gets around. But it appears that 28 or so of the Rockies 29 opponents didnt feel that kicking Weiss out of the dugout was their best course of action. That doesnt mean they're necessarily right, of course, but suggests to me that the "costs" of involving MLB to "resolve" ths, likely outweigh the benefits here.

I probably shouldnt have referred to him as a beat writer - i must have been surprized that an author who has been around baseball for 30 years, and is in the writers hall of fame, would write this kind of stuff that doesnt make alot of sense to a reasonably knowlegeable reader.

If he has some insider information, than fine - but to print that AZ was the culprit because Estes (who was on COL in 2004, and AZ in 2005) and Byrnes (who, again, was on the 2005 team for only 15 games) frankly is not very believable. Estes was on SD last year and hasnt been on the rockies since 2004. I find it VERY unlikely that AZ got this info from Estes over a year and a half ago, and just sat on it until now? sorry, not buying it.. If byrnes played in 15 games, how many was weiss present? ten? And again, if Byrnes squawcked about it, why wait until now?

As far as MLB not being concerned until someone complains... well SOMEONE complained, and they enforced the rule. If they are doing a bad job enforcing rules, than shame on MLB - not the teams playing by them.

"I find it VERY unlikely that AZ got this info from Estes over a year and a half ago, and just sat on it until now?"

There could be all sorts of reasons for this kind of delay. Even though the grievance process is sealed, maybe the Dbacks wanted a lttle extra "cover" waiting til after Estes left. This complaint isnt the kind of thing you want the neighbors finding out about. Maybe it just took AZ a while to get their ducks in a row before filing. Maybe some circumstances changed where they just recently decided to actually file. As I say, everyone knows about Weiss. It's not at all unusal for teams to sit on this kind of information - it's far more unusual to file a grievance.

"If he[Ringolsby] has some insider information, than fine - but to print that AZ was the culprit because Estes ...and Byrnes...frankly is not very believable."

I agree that the evidence presented in his blurb (it's hardly fair to call it an article) is very sketchy, but that's on purpose. I suspect Ringolsby has reliable sources within MLB and he knows who filed the complaint, but there's no point in spelling everything out with grievance details if it'll compromise his sources(with MLB or the Rockies). This isn't exactly Watergate, after all :-)