Yes 1 5.56%

No 17 94.44%

Please no Reds fans or Cards fans vote in this thread.



Did La Russa cheat with the rain delay?

I'm obviously biased and think that La Russa is a dirty manager. He does a lot of shady things, and this one just adds to his record.

Once again, no Reds or Cards fans vote on this poll.

The game was delayed for two hours, 10 minutes during the top of the first. That meant Reds starter Edinson Volquez couldn’t pitch after warming up.

What do you mean he couldn't pitch? I'm confused...

:-)

If this were the early 20th century, then it would be no problem, but the way the game is played now, his arm was warmed up, then sat for 2hrs 10min. I wouldn't have started him if my life depended on it.

Did the StL starting pitcher suffer the same fate or did he not warm up at all?

Andy, I think in this situation Cheat is a strong word.
He didn't make it rain and he doesn't have the ability to start or delay the game.
That said, he got one over on the Reds, but I wouldn't call it cheating.

He pitched the top of the inning and then got sat down after the rain delay.

I should have had a third option in the poll: Did La Russa make a dirty move?

So, BOTH pitchers warmed up and didn't return, right?

Don't know if he "cheated" the delay or not, but given Larussa's propensity to out-think himself, the delay decision normally would have gone against the Cards, not for them. He just lucked out this time.

I say that about Larussa as a Cards fan; I think he is one of the worst managers they've had, and don't really care for how he handles the pitching staff.

Take one vote off, I voted no before I read the rules. But there are two sides to every story. Should Tony have let Baker as soon as possible that he switched pitchers, probably. But Baker had the same option available to him as well. Tony is pretty good but he is not God and can't make it rain. Even knowing information about the weather that was available to everyone does not guarantee that rain will come. If it had not, the way Batista was pitching would have won the game for the Reds. It was a chance Tony took and it worked out in his favor. Unless there is written testimony about the time he made the switch to the time Baker was told it's all hearsay at this point.

On another note, there is way to much drama between our clubs that is not needed and has nothing to do with the game. Once a call is made in baseball it sticks, so no amount of should have could have been is going to fix anything. All this should have been in the past but unfortunately our fans in the stands have not let it go, and still let Phillips rile them up. I would like to see all of this drama go away.

Somehow, I think the other manager would have had access to a TV or iPhone and they could have looked up the weather themselves. Acting as though the home team manager was the only one capable of having such information is naive IMO. In 1947, you might have a case, but not in 2011 when every single player on the roster and coaching staff has a smart phone of some sort in their pocket.

No, he didn't cheat. He took advantage of the rule. Baseball should change the rule.

Even today weather forecasting is as much art as science. He didn't cheat.

I don't see it as cheating. They both have access to the same information. LaRussa decided to not start his original pitcher knowing that the game could possibly be delayed with the weather. Many managers have done the same thing over the years by starting a long reliever. A manager has the right to change his players up to the point of them taking the field without penalty of losing that player for the game.

This. :-)

No they didn't. That's the problem. Umpires told Dusty one thing; they told La Russa another.

:-)

:-) You weren't supposed to vote. I won't tell anyone, Dan. Oh wait, I just did.

So what? To act as though he cheated seems to implicate that the other team had no means of communication. If you think they showed up to the stadium with no sense of what the weather was going to do and had no means of monitoring it throughout the entire time they're there, you're very naive.

You know Dan doesn't actually read other posts, he just makes his own. :-)

So then it's on the Umps, right? :-)