The Nats Thread

wtf bullshit review is this…YADA get down there and set them straight…that is a homer

hutch wrote:
wtf bullshit review is this…YADA get down there and set them straight…that is a homer

What's the rules say on this?  Ball was definitely lodged in there but easily retrievable.  Trying the watch the full course of the decision on mlb live, it's a 7 min video that keeps crapping out about 2 min in. 

chaz wrote:

hutch wrote:
wtf bullshit review is this…YADA get down there and set them straight…that is a homer

What's the rules say on this?  Ball was definitely lodged in there but easily retrievable.  Trying the watch the full course of the decision on mlb live, it's a 7 min video that keeps crapping out about 2 min in. 

so many isssues… was it even reviewable?….. matt williams was so passive.

either way I like the order for this inning.

chaz wrote:
What's the rules say on this?  Ball was definitely lodged in there but easily retrievable. 

It actually doesn't matter how retrievable it is.  You're looking at 6.09 e & f:

6.09
The batter becomes a runner when –
(e) A fair ball, after touching the ground, bounds into the stands, or passes through, over or under a fence, or through or under a scoreboard, or through or under shrubbery, or vines on the fence, in which case the batter and the runners shall be entitled to advance two bases;
(f) Any fair ball which, either before or after touching the ground, passes through or under a fence, or through or under a scoreboard, or through any opening in the fence or scoreboard, or through or under shrubbery, or vines on the fence, or which sticks in a fence or scoreboard, in which case the batter and the runners shall be entitled to two bases;

And 7.09(f) Two bases, if a fair ball bounces or is deflected into the stands outside the first or third base foul lines; or if it goes through or under a field fence, or through or under a scoreboard, or through or under shrubbery or vines on the fence; or if it sticks in such fence, scoreboard, shrubbery or vines;

Once it goes under there, it's a ground rule double.  Upton made it more difficult on himself by actually retrieving it after throwing his hands up - should have always left it there.

Technically, it's called an automatic double, but people have been calling them ground rule doubles for a long time, though technically those only apply to special rules for that particular ground.  They probably should not have reviewed it under the technical rule of ground rule double, but nobody understands the automatic double rule vs ground rule double rule so it's moot.

The call should have been double from the moment the ball went under the fence and Upton threw his hands up.

weird play, but its hard to get worked up over it being "overturned" when thats a pretty commonly cited ground rule, and really shouldnt have gotten to the point of needing to be reviewed anyway. upton not even trying to pick it up was kinda strange, but it is what it is. tough break.

lots of questionable baserunning and that brutal harper at bat in the 8th lost this game

nothing is a must win in april but the nats cannot afford to lose this series

So, Strasburg to the pen and Harper to the pine?

James wrote:
So, Strasburg to the pen and Harper to the pine?

being this deep into the season, i think this is the only logical adjustment to make at this point.

seeing a James Ford post on this thread i really expected something like "Fire the manager!"

oh welll…

The only doctor Ryan Zimmerman should be visiting is Dr. Jack Llewellyn.  Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

Anthony Rendon is on fire. He looked great on 3rd last night too.

I hope the beating up on shitty team things translates to being able to duke it out with the heavy hitters. Hopefully it's not like last year where we'd whoop the shit teams and then fall miserably to the big guys.

have really liked Rendon since he first came up.

hutch wrote:
have really liked Rendon since he first came up.

I'll just leave this here:

vansmack wrote:
There's an easy fix for the Nats offensive woes - call up Rendon, and have him play second base, like he has been in Double A ball.  He's hitting .350 down there - even if he hits .240 in the bigs, it's .100 points better than Espinosa.

The Nats have a helluva problem when Zimm returns.  Can't sit LaRoche while he's hitting, probably can't move him until the trade deadline, but Zimm has to be a first baseman the rest of his career.

agree completely.  zimm is done at third.  i'm perplexed at his issues… high school third basemen have less issues in the field than he's having.

stevewizzle wrote:
agree completely.  zimm is done at third.  i'm perplexed at his issues… high school third basemen have less issues in the field than he's having.

Focal Dystonia.

Haven't seen a case this bad since Knoblauch (not counting Ankiel because he was a pitcher).

stevewizzle wrote:
agree completely.  zimm is done at third.  i'm perplexed at his issues… high school third basemen have less issues in the field than he's having.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10748667/ryan-zimmerman-washington-nationals-play-some-first-base-due-arthritic-shoulder

It got real bad last year. Maybe Rendon being out there got to him too? I'd like to imagine that didn't rattle him. I'd have no problem with him moving to 3rd. He could play at 1st every couple of games. LaRoche and Rendon are kind of carrying the team offensively right now.

yeah nice to see adam showed up this year in april instead of his typical late-May emergence.

booked a trip to chicago to catch nats/cubs in June.  pretty stoked.

vansmack wrote:

stevewizzle wrote:
agree completely.  zimm is done at third.  i'm perplexed at his issues… high school third basemen have less issues in the field than he's having.

Focal Dystonia.

Haven't seen a case this bad since Knoblauch (not counting Ankiel because he was a pitcher).

Have you read The Art of Fielding?  Although I thought it borrowed too heavily from A Prayer for Owen Meany, it's a good read in which the protagonist, a college shortstop poised for the majors, deals with a nasty case of this.

Isn't this a contract year for LaRoche?

stevewizzle wrote:
yeah nice to see adam showed up this year in april instead of his typical late-May emergence.

booked a trip to chicago to catch nats/cubs in June.  pretty stoked.

James wrote:
Isn't this a contract year for LaRoche?

stevewizzle wrote:
yeah nice to see adam showed up this year in april instead of his typical late-May emergence.

booked a trip to chicago to catch nats/cubs in June.  pretty stoked.

yes. might have an option for a third year, but regardless, he's a free agent the end of this season.