None of the cheating accusations I've heard thus far seem very credible.
That's the fun thing about being caught cheating, no one will ever believe you're playing fair ever again
Especially when it's all the same actors still, no one actually suffered any consequences and none of you were willing to repent and more often were antagonistic to the entire fanbase yeah.
If the Astros and Red Sox each had to give up their last titles there would be a lot less talk about how they're filthy cheaters
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
+2
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
The problem is MLB needs another Kenesaw Mountain Landis as commissioner, not Milquetoast Rob Manfred.
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
They recorded signs to decode them (but did not do it live during a game and transmit the information to their players) as i understand it. The Sox relayed information back from a player on second base who was decoding manually, as is normal and legal in order to relay information to a batter. All of this is legal. You can use technology to steal signs just not of a game currently in progress.
Where it became illegal is that the replay operator informed players whether or not the signs had changed during a game (but does not say that he decoded the signal changes during the game, just that he told them that they had changed) so that they would know they had to properly decode signals when on second base. Which is illegal.
But way less illegal than what the Astros did. Its easy enough to see how the actions could be seen as legal, since you're not decoding signals during the game and not relaying the decoded information, just letting your players know things had changed (but as soon as you use video to do that it becomes illegal). So when you say "stealing signs using tech is illegal" its very easy to see how you could not realize that telling people you no longer had the right code would constitute stealing signs. Even telling them the updated code might be seen as not illegal. "illegally stealing signs" colloquially means that someone other than the player on second base is watching the signs and then relaying the information.
Everyone on the Astros knew what they were doing was illegal; no one on the Red Sox realized that relaying that information during the game was illegal. Indeed, if you had asked me before the ruling came down i probably would have said "letting your players know that signs had changed during a game seems maybe a little sketch, but only a little, given that you used technology to acquire that info". Its not functionally different than having a guy in center field walk to the dugout to tell the players signs have changed. Its not going to effect anyone currently on second base anyway, so technology doesn't really aid you all that much. So even if they decoded the information and relayed that to the players it would have been far less of an issue than what the Astros did.
The Sox investigation seems... like a "both sides" kind of hedge, a way for the League to say "see someone else was stealing signs so ignore the Astros". But in no way was it nearly as bad, qualitatively or quantitatively, as what the Astros did, which is one of the worst scandals since the Black Sox threw games.
I suspect the Sox players knew what they were doing was sketchy. But my understanding (based on anonymous reports, so grain of salt) is that - with no one from MLB stationed by monitors at the time - the level of shenanigans they engaged in were pretty common around the league.
Eh. My thought would have been so long as you have a guy on second relaying the signs to the guy at the plate then you’re in the clear. Unless the guy at second is wearing a video camera or is getting the signs from an ear piece.
There is a reason no one cared about the Red Sox cheating. It might have violated the letter of the law but didn’t really violate the spirit of it.
Man the dodgers just stepped right on their dicks. I'm sure the execs are mad we won't get a houston/dodgers rerun or an LA/boston series. Nope Atlanta getting murdered by the Astros.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
They recorded signs to decode them (but did not do it live during a game and transmit the information to their players) as i understand it. The Sox relayed information back from a player on second base who was decoding manually, as is normal and legal in order to relay information to a batter. All of this is legal. You can use technology to steal signs just not of a game currently in progress.
Where it became illegal is that the replay operator informed players whether or not the signs had changed during a game (but does not say that he decoded the signal changes during the game, just that he told them that they had changed) so that they would know they had to properly decode signals when on second base. Which is illegal.
But way less illegal than what the Astros did. Its easy enough to see how the actions could be seen as legal, since you're not decoding signals during the game and not relaying the decoded information, just letting your players know things had changed (but as soon as you use video to do that it becomes illegal). So when you say "stealing signs using tech is illegal" its very easy to see how you could not realize that telling people you no longer had the right code would constitute stealing signs. Even telling them the updated code might be seen as not illegal. "illegally stealing signs" colloquially means that someone other than the player on second base is watching the signs and then relaying the information.
Everyone on the Astros knew what they were doing was illegal; no one on the Red Sox realized that relaying that information during the game was illegal. Indeed, if you had asked me before the ruling came down i probably would have said "letting your players know that signs had changed during a game seems maybe a little sketch, but only a little, given that you used technology to acquire that info". Its not functionally different than having a guy in center field walk to the dugout to tell the players signs have changed. Its not going to effect anyone currently on second base anyway, so technology doesn't really aid you all that much. So even if they decoded the information and relayed that to the players it would have been far less of an issue than what the Astros did.
The Sox investigation seems... like a "both sides" kind of hedge, a way for the League to say "see someone else was stealing signs so ignore the Astros". But in no way was it nearly as bad, qualitatively or quantitatively, as what the Astros did, which is one of the worst scandals since the Black Sox threw games.
I don't get why they needed someone with a camera to tell them signs had changed. It would be obvious with a couple pitches (or when there was a pitcher/catcher meeting to change signs).
I don't get why they needed someone with a camera to tell them signs had changed. It would be obvious with a couple pitches (or when there was a pitcher/catcher meeting to change signs).
Well. It would make it easier to relate certain information. Such as "we know they have 5 different codes, they stopped using code 1 and they usually go to 2 or 3 after that". And it would prevent players on 2b relaying bad information. It would be obvious after a couple of pitches sure. But that is two to four pitches of bad info
edit: the amount of advantage, even with active decoding during the game, would be pretty slim. Because you need a number of pitches in order to decode things. And you need a person on second base for them to go to their 2b codes. So if they changed codes in the game to a code you didn't already know you might not even have a chance to decode it before the game is over anyway. This is one reason why the "scandal" was kind of ignored.
Posts
Clearly you never saw a third strike inside the park home run!
pleasepaypreacher.net
Oh boy.
pleasepaypreacher.net
That's the fun thing about being caught cheating, no one will ever believe you're playing fair ever again
Eovaldi is getting a King Felix support day from the team.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Astros: lead off triple that could have been an inside the parker.
Boston has nine hits in the last 24 innings. They are terrible.
fuck the stros, i'm just here for dusty
On to next year!
Especially when it's all the same actors still, no one actually suffered any consequences and none of you were willing to repent and more often were antagonistic to the entire fanbase yeah.
If the Astros and Red Sox each had to give up their last titles there would be a lot less talk about how they're filthy cheaters
Come Overwatch with meeeee
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Nah, fuck that guy
The Astros’ sins are more extensively documented.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Where it became illegal is that the replay operator informed players whether or not the signs had changed during a game (but does not say that he decoded the signal changes during the game, just that he told them that they had changed) so that they would know they had to properly decode signals when on second base. Which is illegal.
But way less illegal than what the Astros did. Its easy enough to see how the actions could be seen as legal, since you're not decoding signals during the game and not relaying the decoded information, just letting your players know things had changed (but as soon as you use video to do that it becomes illegal). So when you say "stealing signs using tech is illegal" its very easy to see how you could not realize that telling people you no longer had the right code would constitute stealing signs. Even telling them the updated code might be seen as not illegal. "illegally stealing signs" colloquially means that someone other than the player on second base is watching the signs and then relaying the information.
Everyone on the Astros knew what they were doing was illegal; no one on the Red Sox realized that relaying that information during the game was illegal. Indeed, if you had asked me before the ruling came down i probably would have said "letting your players know that signs had changed during a game seems maybe a little sketch, but only a little, given that you used technology to acquire that info". Its not functionally different than having a guy in center field walk to the dugout to tell the players signs have changed. Its not going to effect anyone currently on second base anyway, so technology doesn't really aid you all that much. So even if they decoded the information and relayed that to the players it would have been far less of an issue than what the Astros did.
The Sox investigation seems... like a "both sides" kind of hedge, a way for the League to say "see someone else was stealing signs so ignore the Astros". But in no way was it nearly as bad, qualitatively or quantitatively, as what the Astros did, which is one of the worst scandals since the Black Sox threw games.
There is a reason no one cared about the Red Sox cheating. It might have violated the letter of the law but didn’t really violate the spirit of it.
pleasepaypreacher.net
you're welcome braves
Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
pleasepaypreacher.net
I don't get why they needed someone with a camera to tell them signs had changed. It would be obvious with a couple pitches (or when there was a pitcher/catcher meeting to change signs).
Well. It would make it easier to relate certain information. Such as "we know they have 5 different codes, they stopped using code 1 and they usually go to 2 or 3 after that". And it would prevent players on 2b relaying bad information. It would be obvious after a couple of pitches sure. But that is two to four pitches of bad info
edit: the amount of advantage, even with active decoding during the game, would be pretty slim. Because you need a number of pitches in order to decode things. And you need a person on second base for them to go to their 2b codes. So if they changed codes in the game to a code you didn't already know you might not even have a chance to decode it before the game is over anyway. This is one reason why the "scandal" was kind of ignored.
morton broke his fibula