Josh Beckett of Boston Red Sox suspended six games for pitch at Bobby Abreu's head

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/s...=ESPNHeadlines

AWESOME.

Thanks for posting this Wassit.

pitcher suspensions are always so lame .. he will protest it till his next start, make it then immediately drop it, take six days off and push his next start back a couple of days. ..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gRYFYN1

pitcher suspensions are always so lame .. he will protest it till his next start, make it then immediately drop it, take six days off and push his next start back a couple of days. ..

---

Yeah, good point.

But the fine is real enough. Of course we don't know how much that fine is, but whatever it is, it's real enough money.

Plus, IIRC, suspensions also result in a loss of pay (which is in addition to any fines), so he would lose 6/162 of his salary, if this is correct. I know it is in the NFL, but not so sure in MLB where the players obviously have a stronger union.

EDIT: And doing the math on Beckett's $10.5 million salary, 6/162 of that works out to be nearly $400,000. Not an insignificant amount of money.

EDIT2: And I just checked the CBA, and yes, they lose their salaries in addition to any fines. So, even though it's impact "on the field" is somewhat less for a starting pitcher, the impact on their checking accounts is real enough.

Good. Happy to see that head hunting d!ck get nailed. He's been doing it for years, what took them so long? Sometimes though poetic justice reaches out and bites him in the butt.

Take April 21, 2006 for example. Runners 1st and 2nd with 2 out for Boston in the top of the eighth already comfortably leading the Jays 6-2, Jason Frasor hits Alex Gonzalez (who took an ofer on the night - so he hadn't done any damage up to that point - most Red Sox fans will tell you he and his .299 OBP did more damage to them than the other team ;) ) to load the bases. Let's go over that again down by four in the top of the eighth with 2 already on base, you hit someone who is not an offensive threat at all. This is not the time to play target practice, this is the time to get a goddamn out already and try to rally and win this thing.

I guess because Josh Beckett considers himself "old school" and lives by "the code" he decided he had to retaliate and hit Aaron Hill to lead off the bottom of the eighth...on the first pitch. Intent? Yes I think so. Unbelievably, for once, it lit a fire under the Jays butts because the next hitter Russ Adams took him deep. One out later Vernon Wells took him deep and we booed Beckett right off the field as he was lifted for Mike Timlin, who promptly served one up to Troy Glaus to make it 6-6. The Jays eventually won this game 7-6 in 12 on a Lyle Overbay double off Rudy Seanez, which barely scored Troy Glaus all the way from first base.

The moral of the story in case Mr. Hothead/Meathead Beckett wants to know is that the best revenge always comes on the scoreboard. Well, that and it might be a good idea to figure out whether there was intent before you go out and bean the first hitter on the first pitch the next inning, unless one is too simple-minded to realize that Gonzalez does not represent any threat, so why would Frasor want to load the bases by hitting him? If you want to play a sport with a "code" go play hockey. One tango with one of those enforcer brutes should be the ticket...hehe :D

One thing I've always thought all sports should do is that if you protest, its final. There's no dropping it. So you keep playing until its resolved and then you serve any suspension you have then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

Yeah, good point.

But the fine is real enough. Of course we don't know how much that fine is, but whatever it is, it's real enough money.

Plus, IIRC, suspensions also result in a loss of pay (which is in addition to any fines), so he would lose 6/162 of his salary, if this is correct. I know it is in the NFL, but not so sure in MLB where the players obviously have a stronger union.

EDIT: And doing the math on Beckett's $10.5 million salary, 6/162 of that works out to be nearly $400,000. Not an insignificant amount of money.

EDIT2: And I just checked the CBA, and yes, they lose their salaries in addition to any fines. So, even though it's impact "on the field" is somewhat less for a starting pitcher, the impact on their checking accounts is real enough.

---

For pitchers I have always felt it should be number of starts they miss not days...so in this case it should have been six starts, tell me if you think that would make a pitcher or manager think twice about head hunting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wassit3

For pitchers I have always felt it should be number of starts they miss not days...so in this case it should have been six starts, tell me if you think that would make a pitcher or manager think twice about head hunting

---

Just out of interest - what do you do with a reliever?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wassit3

For pitchers I have always felt it should be number of starts they miss not days...so in this case it should have been six starts, tell me if you think that would make a pitcher or manager think twice about head hunting

---

They did a 6 game suspension knowing that he will miss one start, if they wanted him to miss say 5 games for example im sure they would have suspended him for a month.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

They did a 6 game suspension knowing that he will miss one start, if they wanted him to miss say 5 games for example im sure they would have suspended him for a month.

---

Yep.

5 starts is absurd for a suspension. It's essentially equivalent to a 30 day suspension.

Also, how exactly would you enforce a "6 start" rule? It'd have to be "30 days".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wassit3

For pitchers I have always felt it should be number of starts they miss not days...so in this case it should have been six starts, tell me if you think that would make a pitcher or manager think twice about head hunting

---

Yeah, I think it would have a definite impact on a pitcher or manager thinking about head hunting.

It's hard to figure out how to enforce it though, unless you do make it 30 days. I mean, if it's just starts, then as manager, I'll pencil in him as my starter over the next 6 days, then claim see, he missed six starts.

Then, if you make it 30 days, then it's a much, much bigger financial impact, and it affects a pitcher in other ways too. I mean, technically, when suspended, I'm pretty sure players can't participate in any official activities, which means a starter would go 30 days without pitching at all. Sure, he could throw on the side, but it's not the same.

I dunno, I see your point, it's just hard to pragmatically make it happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

It's hard to figure out how to enforce it though, unless you do make it 30 days. I mean, if it's just starts, then as manager, I'll pencil in him as my starter over the next 6 days, then claim see, he missed six starts.

---

Or pencil somebody else in as the starter, let him go an inning or two, then bring in the "suspended" guy.

This is bull, the pitch beckett threw was at least a foot to 2 feet above his head. I think Beckett has enough control over his pitches that if he wanted to hit him in the head he would have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Sox Fan 734

This is bull, the pitch beckett threw was at least a foot to 2 feet above his head. I think Beckett has enough control over his pitches that if he wanted to hit him in the head he would have.

---

Or he was throwing over his head on purpose?

Furthermore, time was called while he wasn't facing the plate. He turned to make his pitching motion, noticed that the umpire called time, and was thrown off by it. His release point was too high and it sailed towards Abreu. No intention of hitting him, he was just caught off-guard by time called by the ump.