PDA

View Full Version : Mike Pelfrey thinks Scott Rolen has a good acting career ahead of him



fearofpopvol1
07-05-2010, 11:03 PM
Based on the overturned call this evening. Pelfrey just said it in the Mets post-game...and he wasn't joking. He was furious about the call and said Scott didn't know where it even hit him and there's no way it hit Scott's forearm.

The Operator
07-05-2010, 11:06 PM
I think Mike Pelfrey's got a bit of a Carlos Zambrano streak in him.

LoganBuck
07-05-2010, 11:06 PM
Look at the replay before you pop off Pelfrey.

TheNext44
07-05-2010, 11:07 PM
Based on the overturned call this evening. Pelfrey just said it in the Mets post-game...and he wasn't joking. He was furious about the call and said Scott didn't know where it even hit him and there's no way it hit Scott's forearm.

Just tell him to check to tape. It's clear it didn't hit his bat.

He can be upset the umps overturned the call, which has very little precedent, but he can't claim the ball was foul tip.

And good pitchers overcome worse luck than that to win all the time.

HeatherC1212
07-05-2010, 11:08 PM
I thought it looked a little iffy in real time but the replay shows the ball change direction after hitting his arm. It was no where near the bat. Pelfrey needs to check the tape.

Caveat Emperor
07-05-2010, 11:09 PM
Mike Pelfrey, welcome to the "Just Shut Up" club.

fearofpopvol1
07-05-2010, 11:09 PM
For the record, I don't think Pelfrey claimed it hit Rolen's bat, I think he just was claiming it didn't hit Rolen's arm/jersey.

The guy sounded like a big time sore loser, though.

CTA513
07-05-2010, 11:11 PM
Rolen should invite him over so they can watch the replay together.

fearofpopvol1
07-05-2010, 11:13 PM
Just tell him to check to tape. It's clear it didn't hit his bat.

He can be upset the umps overturned the call, which has very little precedent, but he can't claim the ball was foul tip.

And good pitchers overcome worse luck than that to win all the time.

He said in the post-game, he saw the replay and the umps got it completely wrong.

CTA513
07-05-2010, 11:15 PM
He said in the post-game, he saw the replay and the umps got it completely wrong.

Mets might want to have Pelfrey get his eyes checked then.

Falls City Beer
07-05-2010, 11:15 PM
Mets might want to have Pelfrey get his eyes checked then.

It couldn't have been more obvious on replay. This kid needs to put a sock in it.

The Operator
07-05-2010, 11:16 PM
He said in the post-game, he saw the replay and the umps got it completely wrong.

Then that's clearly a case of the eyes seeing what they want to see.

Wasn't even close in slow motion. The umps got it right.

Screwball
07-05-2010, 11:19 PM
Wow, very poor stuff from Pelfrey. It doesn't get much worse than crybaby sore losers.

I'm glad the Reds spanked him tonight.

RedsManRick
07-05-2010, 11:25 PM
I guess it Rolen's fault Pelfrey gave up hits to Stubbs, Miller, and Wood too, huh?

Caseyfan21
07-05-2010, 11:26 PM
Good for him. I'm glad he feels that way. The Reds won and he lost though.

Caveat Emperor
07-05-2010, 11:31 PM
I guess it Rolen's fault Pelfrey gave up hits to Stubbs, Miller, and Wood too, huh?

Yeah -- if he makes a pitch to a couple dudes hitting under .250, it's all a moot point.

fearofpopvol1
07-05-2010, 11:32 PM
I guess it Rolen's fault Pelfrey gave up hits to Stubbs, Miller, and Wood too, huh?

He addressed this too. Said it changed the composure of the whole inning.

TheNext44
07-05-2010, 11:33 PM
I didn't know that Pelfrey was related to Chris Carpenter.

The Operator
07-05-2010, 11:42 PM
Hello, Whine-One-One?

fearofpopvol1
07-06-2010, 12:44 AM
More on this from mets.com: http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100705&content_id=11957808&vkey=recap&fext=.jsp&c_id=nym

RedsManRick
07-06-2010, 12:51 AM
I love the whole "airing their grievances line at the end. Grievances about what? That the umps got together, made the correct call, and you whined, moaned, and proceded to give up hits to 3 of our worst hitters?

reds44
07-06-2010, 01:33 AM
There's no way that ball hit the bat. I'm not sure if it hit Rolen either, but it definatley did not hit the bat.

reds44
07-06-2010, 03:02 AM
For the record, the Mets broadcasters agreed it was nowhere near his bat.

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=9694157&c_id=cin

REDblooded
07-06-2010, 03:06 AM
Well Mike, I feel like you have a good career as a magician ahead of you... You took one run, and turned it into 6. Well done.

WebScorpion
07-06-2010, 03:53 AM
At least when Cueto melts down, he knows it's his fault for letting things get to him. This kid is still blaming it on the call. He's got more growing up to do than Cueto...there's something about this Mets team I don't like. If a little call like that derails the whole game, they won't go far in the playoffs. More and more I'm thinking these Reds can go deep into the playoffs...they don't get shaken up, and when one guy falters two guys step up their game. I think with the Halladay game they turned a corner...they KNOW they can beat anyone now and they play like they expect to win. Even when they're down, you can see they don't expect to stay down. Ask Pelfrey if he wants some cheese with that whine. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-devil20.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)

oneupper
07-06-2010, 08:11 AM
Mike Pelfrey isn't as good as his stats this year. Reversion to mean can be mean.

Caveat Emperor
07-06-2010, 08:14 AM
Regardless of who's correct, Rolen should probably be on the lookout for a real pitch heading at him tonight.

hebroncougar
07-06-2010, 08:16 AM
Regardless of who's correct, Rolen should probably be on the lookout for a real pitch heading at him tonight.

You think so? Even after the replays showed he was correct? I think Pelfrey needs to grow up, and get over it. Rolen did nothing wrong, he WAS hit by the pitch. If they hit Rolen, Wright better catch one on the flip side.

redsmetz
07-06-2010, 08:24 AM
It's ironic that Pelphrey said that Rolen might have a good acting career ahead of him because I thought when I watched the clip this morning that Rolen did a horrible job of selling it. Not when he started down the line believing he had been hit, but immediately when he was hit. A more specific response might have gotten the call right up front (note I said "might"). But Pelphrey needs to just move on. He let the game get away from him after that, which is fine by me.

Screwball
07-06-2010, 08:31 AM
It's ironic that Pelphrey said that Rolen might have a good acting career ahead of him because I thought when I watched the clip this morning that Rolen did a horrible job of selling it.

Yeah I thought that too. Rolen needs to watch more World Cup.

GoReds
07-06-2010, 08:37 AM
Pelfrey has to believe that the call changed the course of the game for him, otherwise he has to accept that he made poor pitches then after. I'm sure the dude was angling for a potential replacement spot on the All-Star roster and - from his perspective - one pitch may keep him from the AS game.

Wonder if he has any AS bonus money available in his contract...

Hoosier Red
07-06-2010, 09:25 AM
I found Manuel's argument to be more persuasive. While the call was correct upon replay, I agree with Manuel that there's no way the 1B or 3B would have been able to see that.

The home ump made his original call, and respected Rolen enough to believe him, then went looking for an umpire with a "better angle" to bail him out.

Still better that the correct call got made.

RFS62
07-06-2010, 10:53 AM
Rolen's street cred in the league is what sold the call.

Pelfrey better think again if he thinks he can gain anything by questioning Rolen's integrity.

There's no crying in baseball, Mike.

Chip R
07-06-2010, 10:53 AM
I found Manuel's argument to be more persuasive. While the call was correct upon replay, I agree with Manuel that there's no way the 1B or 3B would have been able to see that.

The home ump made his original call, and respected Rolen enough to believe him, then went looking for an umpire with a "better angle" to bail him out.

Still better that the correct call got made.

I don't know how this year will turn out but the Reds seem to be getting the benefit of the doubt on a lot of calls. I saw a few calls in the Cubs series go our way and this one too.

OnBaseMachine
07-06-2010, 11:54 AM
Regardless of who's correct, Rolen should probably be on the lookout for a real pitch heading at him tonight.

If so, the Reds need to call up Aroldis Chapman after the game and have him ready for tomorrow night. I don't think teams want to get in a beanball battle with the Reds.

HeatherC1212
07-06-2010, 12:07 PM
I don't know how this year will turn out but the Reds seem to be getting the benefit of the doubt on a lot of calls. I saw a few calls in the Cubs series go our way and this one too.

Apparently this is what happens when you have a good team. We Reds fans aren't as familiar with this concept so it's going to take some getting used to this season, LOL :laugh: :thumbup:

bucksfan2
07-06-2010, 01:24 PM
I found Manuel's argument to be more persuasive. While the call was correct upon replay, I agree with Manuel that there's no way the 1B or 3B would have been able to see that.

The home ump made his original call, and respected Rolen enough to believe him, then went looking for an umpire with a "better angle" to bail him out.

Still better that the correct call got made.

With the exception of CB Bucknor most MLB umpires are very good at what they do. I can't even imagine how many pitches they have seen during their careers. More than anything else you get a feel for a game and they way things work.

It is my understanding that the home plate ump made the original call based upon a sound and then the ball hitting the catcher's mitt. I am sure it happens all the time, and when a ball is moving 90+ mph sometimes it is all you have to go upon. It was quite obvious that Rolen though he got hit on the arm and was walking down to 1b. When the ump called him out it looked like he went over and showed the ump his arm and where he had been hit. I can imagine in you get hit by a pitch there is a mark, even if you are grazed.

That said the umps could have gotten together with the home plate ump saying "I heard the ball hit something before the mitt and I though it was the bat but after seeing Scott's arm it seems like it hit his arm instead." He could be asking the other umps what they saw. For guys who have been around the game enough they could have a pretty good idea if the ball could have hit the bat in that situation. The 1b ump may not have been able to see the contact but he could have seen where Rolen was holding his bat. The 2nd base ump could have seen something similar but from a further distance.

Granted this call benefited the Reds but its nice to see the umps get the call right. Often we get on the ump's cases but in this situation its amazing that the call was reversed to the correct call without the use of replay. As for Pelfrey it sucks but you hit the batter and the onus is on you.

VR
07-06-2010, 01:30 PM
Regardless of who's correct, Rolen should probably be on the lookout for a real pitch heading at him tonight.

Whomever the recipient.....I envision a Nolan Ryan/ Robin Ventura type incident.


And yes, Rolen's street cred AND the way he handled it sold it. As soon as I saw his calm approach, I had a good feeling it would get reversed. Class act, that guy.

Redsfan320
07-06-2010, 01:34 PM
Class act, that guy.

Yes he is. Has there ever been any incident with him not hustling, whining about something, complaining about a contract thing, complaining about his team mates, etc.?

Obviously there was the TLR situation, but still...

320

George Anderson
07-06-2010, 01:43 PM
If MLB would just go with aluminum bats the umps would hear the ping and we wouldn't have problems like this. ;)

Far East
07-06-2010, 05:01 PM
For the record, I don't think Pelfrey claimed it hit Rolen's bat, I think he just was claiming it didn't hit Rolen's arm/jersey...
Wasn't it a full count pitch? If it did not hit the bat and did not hit Rolen, then it was a bases loaded walk -- same result as a bases loaded HBP.

reds44
07-06-2010, 05:01 PM
Wasn't it a full count pitch? If it did not hit the bat and did not hit Rolen, then it was a bases loaded walk -- same result as a bases loaded HBP.
I think it was 2-2.

medford
07-06-2010, 05:08 PM
I think it was 2-2.

yes, 2-2

Blitz Dorsey
07-06-2010, 05:38 PM
Regardless of who's correct, Rolen should probably be on the lookout for a real pitch heading at him tonight.

Well, if that happened, David Wright better watch out considering the fact that Rolen did nothing wrong. If the Mets throw at him, either the pitcher will get beat up, the Reds will throw at Wright, or both.

The Mets suck so bad that there is only one guy in their shaky lineup that you would even think about throwing at. The rest of them are borderline players. (Well, they will get Reyes back soon and Davis is having a good rookie year, but work with me here.) I know the Mets have a good record now, but I just don't see them sustaining it. Not a good club at all IMO. They don't completely suck like the Cubs (1908!!!) but they're not good and the second half will prove that to be true.

oneupper
07-06-2010, 06:18 PM
I don't know how this year will turn out but the Reds seem to be getting the benefit of the doubt on a lot of calls. I saw a few calls in the Cubs series go our way and this one too.

I noticed that also. I don't think it is a coincidence. My pet baseball "conspiracy theory" is that umps tend to favor teams they perceive as contenders as opposed to also-rans.
This year, the team is on the right side of the conspiracy.

Roy Tucker
07-06-2010, 06:45 PM
Whomever the recipient.....I envision a Nolan Ryan/ Robin Ventura type incident.



Nolan Ryan noogies.

TeamBoone
07-06-2010, 08:56 PM
Look at the replay before you pop off Pelfrey.

Amen.

I'm also sure that Rolen had a pretty good red mark on his arm, had anyone bothered to look.

TeamBoone
07-06-2010, 08:58 PM
Originally Posted by Chip R
I don't know how this year will turn out but the Reds seem to be getting the benefit of the doubt on a lot of calls. I saw a few calls in the Cubs series go our way and this one too.

But Chip, this one didn't just "go the Reds way"... it was the right call.

I interpret "go the Reds way" as a questionable call or pitch.

Chip R
07-06-2010, 09:04 PM
But Chip, this one didn't just "go the Reds way"... it was the right call.

I interpret "go the Reds way" as a questionable call or pitch.

Perhaps but the original call was that he was out. Usually those calls don't get overturned. Had one against the Cubs earlier this year that was overturned. IIRC it was a catch that was called a trap or vice versa.