Warning: Contains Strong Language *Updated*

UPDATE: I had an epic conversation about this with Sam last night, in which we hashed out finally that yes, the Red Sox technically broke a rule by not having a trainer make an official injury visit and then giving MDC unlimited warmups. And okay, if extra warmup pitches didn't mean anything, there wouldn't be a rule limiting their number depending on the injury or non-injury situation. She also pointed out, rightly, that the Sox could've left Girardi without recourse to protest if they'd just followed procedure and brought a trainer out.

However.

Tthe idea that MDC getting extra warmup pitches was the turning point in the game -- the other corollary to getting a protest upheld -- is absurd beyond words.

To me, if Girardi was going to protest the umps' decision, there should be some viable alternative he would want to have occurred which would directly affect the outcome of the game -- for example, the umpires call a guy out at the plate before the other team goes on to win in the same inning, Girardi argues he was safe, therefore the alternative suggested is that they should have called him safe or overturned the 'out' call. In that example scenario, there's also a direct connection between the umpires' call and Girardi's team scoring a run and winning or losing the game.

So what are the alternatives Girardi is suggesting in the MDC warmup situation? Stop him throwing warmups? Sit him down and have the Sox stand a fresh reliever up with a strict limit of 8 warmup pitches? Force Beckett to continue the inning? Bring Beckett, Farrell and Tito back out on the field, have the trainer visit, and then have them leave again?

Meanwhile, MDC proceeded to issue three walks in his 1.1 inning appearance. Is Girardi trying to say he believes beyond a reasonable doubt that extra warmup pitches is the difference between that and, say, three home runs? That his DEFENDING WORLD CHAMPION Yankees are so pathetic they need to win on a technicality because Manny Del Carmen, of all people, got extra warmup pitches, and therefore they had a significantly decreased chance of winning?

For his argument that the game should be vacated on account of procedural violations to hold water, he would have to have some way of knowing that MDC would've given up the winning runs had he had fewer warmup pitches. That seems a specious and ridiculous claim to me, biased though I am. That and Girardi's apparently psychic ability to tell whether Beckett is actually injured, and / or apparent claim that a lack of trainer visit proves somehow that Beckett is not actually injured.

All of this initiated, by the way, while his team was still up by five runs, while they remain ahead of the 8.5 GB Sox in the standings by 5.5 games even after the loss...a month and a half into the regular season.

I hope the league laughs Girardi out of their offices. I wouldn't "protest" planting a "Kick Me" sign on his back on his way out the door, either.

***

Sam: um the yankees have placed this game under protest

Me: what?

Sam: they are unbelievable.  girardi placed the game under protest because of the josh thing

Me: what does that mean

Sam: idk.  i guess if the sox come back and the yankees lose he'll appeal to mlb to try to get it thrown out

Sam: because he'll claim the sox cheated with the josh/manny del bit

Sam: remy says it's very rare to see it go through

Sam: "the league has to determine whether it was a factor in the outcome of the game".  and remy doesn't think it will regardless of what happened.

Sam: here you are

Sam: "PROTESTING GAMES.
Each league shall adopt rules governing procedure for protesting a game, when a manager claims that an umpires decision is in violation of these rules. No protest shall ever be permitted on judgment decisions by the umpire. In all protested games, the decision of the League President shall be final.
Even if it is held that the protested decision violated the rules, no replay of the game will be ordered unless in the opinion of the League President the violation adversely affected the protesting teams chances of winning the game.
Rule 4.19 Comment: Whenever a manager protests a game because of alleged misapplication of the rules the protest will not be recognized unless the umpires are notified at the time the play under protest occurs and before the next pitch, play or attempted play. A protest arising on a game-ending play may be filed until 12 noon the following day with the league office."

Sam: remy thinks that because this happened when the yanks were up 5-0, and manny del only threw like 3 pitches to end the inning, it wouldn't "adversely affect the protesting team's chances of winning the game" so it PROBABLY wouldn't be upheld by the league

Me: they are [@!$$#%&#$]*

Me: there.

Me: that's all you need

Sam: they seriously are.  like, what a dick move.

Me: that is seriously the most pathetic thing in the world

Sam: only the yankees

Me: on the one hand i have to admit bill belichick has pulled some serious dick moves

Me: on the other

Sam: the yankees

Me: i can't recall them being quite as petty and involving the referees as this**

Me: his dick moves consist mainly of still playing a football game even though he's blowing out the other team

Sam: involving the LEAGUE PRESIDENT

Sam: that's who's supposed to make a final determination on protested games
Sam: it's not like he ran out to argue with the ump.  he's gonna make the league president look at it
Me: how very a-rod of them

Or, there's what @toeingtherubber said.

__________________________________________________

*Truly filthy expression redacted for profanity and potential further social offensiveness besides. Just pick your own favorite unrepeatable expression and substitute it.

** Bring up Spygate if you must, but only if you read this first. And I still think the prideful Bill Belichick would chew off his own arm before he would whine to the league President, directly or indirectly, about an in-game injury timeout he didn't feel was genuine, or have it entered into the official record pre-emptively, while ahead by five scores, that it affected his chances of winning the game. He's petty, ruthless and vengeful, yes. But pathetic and pedantic? No.

Comments

[MoonstarMA]

I have to second what @toeingtherubber said. What a bunch of baloney! Kharmic justice for them turning around and losing the game. I did like how Remy kept pointing out that the more they argued, the more time MDC was given to warm up and that by the time the discussion was over, MDC was completely warmed up. Hee-hee!

[Stephen Wood]

Great stuff Beth! I remember meeting Yaz at a medical conference. He was signing baseballs for Enfamil and barely looked up, but I got my turn and I told him that he was my favorite player growing up and that I cried when he retired ( I really did) and he actually looked up smiled and talked to me for a bit about the Sox and life and i could tell he knew I was genuine. It made my day! Your stories are fantastic! Keep up the great work!

[Durgesha]

Hi Carol! I'm delighted my post bhrguot back a great memory. You know, I've read articles that mentioned the similarities between Cubs fans and Red Sox fans! Seems both teams have a particularly devoted fan base extremely loyal and passionate through thick and thin. A hot week indeed! Is it too soon to bring up the A word? (Autumn) xo