• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pitcher sues Astros

Jack Hays said:
Deterrence would be my recommendation. Start by vacating the Astros' 2017 WS win.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that the losing team lost because they were too stupid to change their signs in a seven game series?
 
PirateMk1 said:
Here's the thing. If you can steal signs at all, then you need to presume your signs are being stolen. That gives sign maker the advantage because they can test if your stealing the sign, and they can switch up the signs. Quite frankly the whole bruhaha is about nothing. The world series is seven games. You mean to tell me the losing team lost because they were too stupid to change their signs.
Click to expand...
You seem to be arguing that cheating--expressly breaking the rules--is "nothing" since competitors could conceivably detect the advantage and nullify it.

Since when does my cheating become your (and @JackHays', and @RogueValley's, and everybody else's) problem?

If I hack your account tomorrow, is it no big deal because you were too stupid to pick a more secure password?
 
COTO said:
You seem to be arguing that cheating--expressly breaking the rules--is "nothing" since competitors could conceivably detect the advantage and nullify it.

Since when does my cheating become your (and @JackHays', and @RogueValley's, and everybody else's) problem?
Click to expand...

There's cheating and then there's cheating. You already steal signs. You just cant do it with "technology". I can come up with a scheme right now to duplicate what the Astros did without breaking the rule which really wasn't at the time. The rule is inane to begin with, because the limitation is minimal at best. The rule by the way was just the commissioner saying dont do that, back in 2017 or so. We are the point we it should be asked is that cheating? I dont think it is, as it IMO affects the results of the contest minimally especially over a series of matches. One game there MIGHT be a difference, a series of 7?

My major point is if stealing of signs is allowed in ANY way at all, and baseball allows this manually, then it is incumbent on the user of the signs to be wary and recognize this fact.

Hacking the account in ANY way is illegal. That said if my account password was 123456 or something as inane then yea I earned it, and deserve to pay the stupid tax.
 
The Los Angeles Dodgers are the 2017 WS Champions. Joc Pederson is the MVP. Clayton Kershaw won game 5 in an epic performance that cemented his place as the greatest pitcher of his generation.


All this was taken away by cheating bitches.

nota bene said:
So did the Astros win the World Series or "win" it?
Click to expand...
 
nota bene said:
From USA Today:

The Houston Astros wronged a lot of people, in a lot of ways.

But the damage they did to Mike Bolsinger – to his career and to his whole life – was particularly harsh, and the former Toronto Blue Jays pitcher wants them held accountable. Bolsinger filed a civil lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court on Monday, accusing the Astros of unfair business practices, negligence and intentional interference with contractual and economic relations.

Yes, Bolsinger is seeking unspecified damages, but they’re not all for himself. He wants the Astros to forfeit the roughly $31 million in bonuses from their ill-gotten World Series title, and for the money to go to charities in Los Angeles focused on bettering kids’ lives, as well as to create a fund for retired baseball players who need financial assistance.
[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Tahoma,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/nancy-armour/2020/02/10/mike-bolsinger-sues-houston-astros-says-cheating-changed-his-career/4712164002/[/FONT]

An Astros fan wrote a web app to document the trash-can banging used to signal, and Bolsinger was the pitcher most affected. The lawsuit claims that there were bangs on 12 of his 29 pitches in one 2017 game. He may not have had the right stuff to pitch for the Majors, so do you think his lawsuit is legit?
Click to expand...

Oh puh-leeze.

Cheating has always been part of the game. Spit balls, sandpaper, pine tar, corked bats, Roids, stealing signs...nothing new here.
 
If we're going to start voiding titles lets look at the Yankees in 2009 because they had 1 of the biggest steroid users in the history of the game on their team, and without his bat in the playoffs the Yankees don't even get to the WS, let alone win it. And Arod was definitely still doing steroids in 2009..

Then of course the Red Sox had Manny and Ortiz on some of their Ws teams in to 2000's.. Both of their names were on the 1st steroid report.

I can go on and on..

Speaking of Arod where is he going to come up with $3 bil to buy the Mets? LOL... February is a slooooow month for sports.
 
PirateMk1 said:
I dont think it is, as it IMO affects the results of the contest minimally especially over a series of matches. One game there MIGHT be a difference, a series of 7?
Click to expand...
Obviously the Astros deemed it enough of an advantage to bear the investment, training, and risk.

Its effectiveness may have some bearing on the lawsuit, but not on the ethics of rule-breaking.

PirateMk1 said:
The rule by the way was just the commissioner saying dont do that, back in 2017 or so.
Click to expand...
Was it a recommendation or was it an order?

If it was an order then it's a rule not to be broken. If the commissioner's verbal orders don't carry the same weight as written rules, what's the point of issuing verbal orders? They'd have no authority.

PirateMk1 said:
My major point is if stealing of signs is allowed in ANY way at all, and baseball allows this manually, then it is incumbent on the user of the signs to be wary and recognize this fact.
Click to expand...
Why should "it is incumbent on the user of the signs to be wary" and "the Astros should be punished for cheating" be mutually exclusive?

Let's consider two scenarios: either sign-stealing is an accepted skill/competency in baseball, or it isn't.

If it is considered a part of the sport, then it's subject to regulation just like any other sport. A golfer can't use just any high-tech club he wants. A Formula One racer can't race a car with any high-tech engine he wants. Rules are put in place to ensure competitors possess genuine skill, and by assumption sign-stealing is a skill in baseball.

If sign-stealing isn't considered a part of the sport, we can reasonably conclude it's "allowed" only because detecting and proving conventional sign-stealing reliably is impossible. This certainly doesn't mean that technologically-assisted forms of sign-stealing that can be reliably detected/proved should be given a free pass. By assumption, sign-stealing isn't a part of baseball.

Either way, the Astros are in the wrong. They're either breaking regulations to prevent technological assistance in what should be a skill -or- engaging in a practice that's categorically banned, even if it can only be detected in specific circumstances.

I don't know if a lawsuit is the right punishment for breaking the rules, but they should be punished for it, and the punishment should hurt regardless of how much they benefited.
 
Incidentally, the above post presumes that the commissioner's "no high-tech sign-stealing" rule (or something equivalent to it) was in effect before the game(s) the Astros were caught using the technology. (The order of events in the OP isn't clear, and I don't follow baseball.)

If sign-stealing isn't categorically banned and the no-tech rule was instituted after the Astros used the technology, then their conduct doesn't constitute cheating and I don't see where the lawsuit has a leg to stand on.
 
PirateMk1 said:
The signals have very little to do with the Asros winning. They won fair and square.
Click to expand...

.....using technology to steal signs is the literal exact opposite of “fair and square”.
 
COTO said:
Obviously the Astros deemed it enough of an advantage to bear the investment, training, and risk.

Its effectiveness may have some bearing on the lawsuit, but not on the ethics of rule-breaking.


Was it a recommendation or was it an order?

If it was an order then it's a rule not to be broken. If the commissioner's verbal orders don't carry the same weight as written rules, what's the point of issuing verbal orders? They'd have no authority.


Why should "it is incumbent on the user of the signs to be wary" and "the Astros should be punished for cheating" be mutually exclusive?

Let's consider two scenarios: either sign-stealing is an accepted skill/competency in baseball, or it isn't.

If it is considered a part of the sport, then it's subject to regulation just like any other sport. A golfer can't use just any high-tech club he wants. A Formula One racer can't race a car with any high-tech engine he wants. Rules are put in place to ensure competitors possess genuine skill, and by assumption sign-stealing is a skill in baseball.

If sign-stealing isn't considered a part of the sport, we can reasonably conclude it's "allowed" only because detecting and proving conventional sign-stealing reliably is impossible. This certainly doesn't mean that technologically-assisted forms of sign-stealing that can be reliably detected/proved should be given a free pass. By assumption, sign-stealing isn't a part of baseball.

Either way, the Astros are in the wrong. They're either breaking regulations to prevent technological assistance in what should be a skill -or- engaging in a practice that's categorically banned, even if it can only be detected in specific circumstances.

I don't know if a lawsuit is the right punishment for breaking the rules, but they should be punished for it, and the punishment should hurt regardless of how much they benefited.
Click to expand...

Sign stealing manually is allowed and celebrated. So what is the difference between manual sign stealing and technical. Not much if anything. So why is it even banned? I see your point if the practice of sign stealing was banned outright. But its not. Its the method thats banned. Therefor it is correct to question the validity of the ban and what it purports to prevent. The ban by the way is rather vague, dont use technology. Baseball uses technology to study their opponents which uses film. This is allowed. So if a team picks on signs that are consistently used, then are they then therefore banned from using them if can do so manually? This is a gray area the Astros tread into. Its not black and white.
 
Tigerace117 said:
.....using technology to steal signs is the literal exact opposite of “fair and square”.
Click to expand...

IMO, I am right you are wrong. Fair and square. :2razz:
 
I certainly do hope that the these players and execs from other teams that are so 'outraged' by this sign stealing mess that their houses are squeaky clean. I would hate for them to come across as gigantic hypocrites like Vanlander( who has LOUDLY blasted sign stealing, juiced baseballs and the use of steroids in the past) is sounding.

He does have a nice looking wife though, so there's that...
 
It was. And he the commissioner said he would hold management accountable which is supposedly why no players were punished.


COTO said:
Incidentally, the above post presumes that the commissioner's "no high-tech sign-stealing" rule (or something equivalent to it) was in effect before the game(s) the Astros were caught using the technology. (The order of events in the OP isn't clear, and I don't follow baseball.)

If sign-stealing isn't categorically banned and the no-tech rule was instituted after the Astros used the technology, then their conduct doesn't constitute cheating and I don't see where the lawsuit has a leg to stand on.
Click to expand...
 
As his punishment she should be forced to divorce him and marry a Dodger fan.



SenorXm/Sirius said:
I certainly do hope that the these players and execs from other teams that are so 'outraged' by this sign stealing mess that their houses are squeaky clean. I would hate for them to come across as gigantic hypocrites like Vanlander( who has LOUDLY blasted sign stealing, juiced baseballs and the use of steroids in the past) is sounding.

He does have a nice looking wife though, so there's that...
Click to expand...
 
TobyOne said:
As his punishment she should be forced to divorce him and marry a Dodger fan.
Click to expand...

Good idea.. And I'll now announce that I have switched allegiance and am now a Dodger fan.. So if she's looking for a Dodger fan I am available.. ;)

Go Dodgers!!!
 
PirateMk1 said:
Hacking the account in ANY way is illegal. That said if my account password was 123456 or something as inane then yea I earned it, and deserve to pay the stupid tax.
Click to expand...


The Dodgers "shouldn't have worn that dress".
 
ecofarm said:
The Dodgers "shouldn't have worn that dress".
Click to expand...

No, they shouldn't have lifted their dress, dropped their panties, bent over, and said **** me now. Sign stealing is part of the game. Apparently the Dodgers were complacent.
 
PirateMk1 said:
No, they shouldn't have lifted their dress, dropped their panties, bent over, and said **** me now. Sign stealing is part of the game. Apparently the Dodgers were complacent.
Click to expand...

One shouldn't allow rape apology to color other topics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom