Throwing at ARod

Nope. Not so. Remember a series vs. Cleveland when Pena said outright that Clemens nailed someone on the tribe for a reason.. Don't remember who, but Tony Pena admitted it and BOTH Pena and Clemens got like 5 games each. Admit it and for sure both Farrell and Dempster go bye bye for suspensions, keep it like this? Where just Rodriquez and the rest of the world knows, without a word being admitted? Nothing is proven.

Rodriquez's defense of steroids.. "nothing is proven, so I can play", same thing. He ain't admitting anything and neither should Demp/Farrell.

Plus, if you're going to participate in baseball's ridiculous macho culture and throw a hard object at another human being at 90 mph because you don't like him, might as well man up afterwards and admit it, right?

Why? Ok, so it happened more in the past. So what? Why does that make it a good thing?

Intent matters.

And yes, they do put up netting in the areas most likely to cause injury to bystanders. Umps wear armor, ball-boys have helmets, and there's talk if making pitchers wear protective hat linings. You think that should all be removed?

Never understood a pitcher drilling a guy if he homered off him. Always seemed like a pussy move. The only time I think it's justified is if they deliberately threw at one of your guys. It's one of the few things about the DH I don't like because I always felt if a pitcher did this he should get one in the ribs next time he's up.

I'll give you a rational Baseball reason the Beaning was beneficial:

Dempster sucks so bad that chances are that A-rod would have took him deep in that AB anyway , or doubled or tripled. Might as well hit him and take the bat out of his hand making yourself a Folk hero in Fenway forever.



The HBP was meaningless in the outcome of the game, you take away A-rod's run and the sox still loose.

I remember 1990. It was Indians leadoff hitter Stan Jefferson who got drilled by Clemens. I remember manager Joe Morgan being asked about the intent of the pitch and instead of pulling a John Farrell, I think he said something like, "We voted as a team and it was unanimous 35-0 that we were going to hit him", and for his honesty he got fined, but I recall people respecting his candor, and Joe Morgan was an honest man and one of the better managers the Sox have had in my lifetime.

I think the Sox did it to come together as a team that year. They had a miserable 1989 season which featured a fight where Joe Price or Mike Smithson hit somebody and when the other team ran out on the field, practically nobody came to the aid of the pitcher prompting Mike Greenwell to label his teammates as "a bunch of whimps and fairies" and when asked his opinion of Greenwell's comments, honest Joe Morgan said it was "an accurate assessment".

So when the Sox acted like tough-guy idiots that day in 1990, they all rallied around Clemens and that meant that they were united, something they hadn't been in 1989. Don't know if it mattered much, but the Sox did squeeze out the division title in 1990, and they couldn't do that it 1989, despite a weak division.

Unsportsmanlike conduct? Like lingering a little too long in the batter's box after hitting a home run or saying something mean about you in the media or appealing a PED suspension as permitted under the Collective Bargaining Agreement? Give me a break. Most of the more egregious forms of unsportsmanlike conduct have official umpire-administered penalties (e.g., balks, running outside the basepaths, etc). Almost everything else that might "earn retaliation" is a petty, imagined slight. Care to give an example of what would warrant a HBP? (By the way, leaning out over the plate isn't actually against MLB rules.)

I don't particularly care how one might implement a policy that would remove intentional beaning from the game. I just think it's a stupid, juvenile aspect of baseball culture that would be better off going away. It certainly shouldn't be glorified, especially when it cost the Red Sox a game.

The way you state everything makes it sound like you are ALWAYS correct and every other opinion should be disregarded. I know there is a chance for injury every time someone is hit by a pitch, but how often does it happen? Seriously what percentage of HBP's result in injury? While you're lecturing everyone on how throwing a ball at someone is assault, why don't you tell us how the NBA should ban driving into the paint (because, you know, a guy taking a charge could hit his head on the floor), the NFL should ban the whole tackling aspect of the game (who needs that), and the NHL should ban checking and have all fights broken up immediately. When it comes down to it, eliminating things like fighting in hockey, railroading the catcher, etc. would be bad for the game because, simply put, it's part of the game. These things may not fill the seats, but eliminating it sure would decrease many peoples interest in the sport.

And sure, A-Rod has the right to appeal, but when 13 guys named on a list are suspended for illegal drugs, and EVERY SINGLE ONE forfeits their right to appeal other than him, clearly something is wrong. Everyone knew he cheated multiple times, tried to cover it up in many different ways, and ratted out other players. Yet he comes back to the game, acts like everything is cool, and expects to be treated just like everyone else? So one guy intentionally throws at his feet then his back and you're claiming it's assault? Come on man, you're entitled to your opinion, and I'll always respect that, but when you come on here and act like your opinion is the RIGHT opinion, and everyone else is just an idiot for thinking otherwise, well it gets on my nerves. So there's my opinion on the matter.

I think the players are more upset about their union fees being used towards a lawyer for A-rod, when everyone else caught did the right thing and took the suspension, while now they (the players) are paying for a lawyer for a-rod when they and a-rod himself knows he did steroids

none of the other players tried to buy/steal and destroy the evidence before MLB got it... thats why its larger

So can you explain to me why the punishment for attempting to cover up a PED violation should be three times greater than the violation itself? It's ridiculous on it's face.