Comments on: Card of the Week: 1982 Topps and Fleer Rod Carew http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890 This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6 By: Hartvig http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-71094 Fri, 12 Nov 2010 05:25:09 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-71094 just testing my gravatar

]]>
By: Murph http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-66152 Wed, 03 Nov 2010 20:58:58 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-66152 You're just not looking at this photo correctly. Your angles are completely wrong. Just for a second, try to picture the angle this really is. You are along the 3rd base line, probably near the dugout, looking towards first base. You're looking past the 3rd base line and then past the mound to get to Carew. Home plate is off to the right and second base is off to the left of the photo. First base, as I've said before, is just out of frame to the right. The dirt directly behind Carew is the first base cut out. The foul line runs right to left from just to the right of his glove along the top of this part of the dirt. That thin strip of grass, due to the crowning of the field, is well off in foul territory. There is no base or infield dirt or foul line back where that guy is standing. Like you said about the grandstand, the telephoto lens is making the guy appear closer than he is. No umpire would be that far from 1st base.
Best bet is that he is a bullpen catcher with shin guards on facing us. His socks would not be showing. I know very well how they were wearing their socks back then. And, if you want to look again, you can see a slight difference in the color of the pants and the shinguards. He's very far from us and out of focus, you're not going to see much. Just because you can't see anyone warming up doesn't mean there isn't some activity just off frame.

]]>
By: PhilH in Indiana http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-66036 Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:15:34 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-66036 It can only be the umpire.
The guy in the background is nowhere near the warning track along the grandstands, his right foot is almost on the dirt portion of the infield and you can see grass to his left and the warning track further back. That means he's standing on the foul line. Somebody protecting the bullpen would be farther down the foul line, not that close to the infield dirt, and you would also be able to see the players warming up in the bullpen right behind him, but the bullpen area is nowhere in the shot. Players had not started wearing their pants all the way down to their ankles back then, so even if it were a catcher with shinguards, you'd be able to see something of the white sox with blue stripes the players wore then, along with a slight difference in the color the pantlegs and shinguards even if the shinguards were blue. There's nothing in the picture to indicate the guy is wearing shinguards. Only an umpire is allowed this close to the infield dirt while the ball is in play.

]]>
By: Murph http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-65794 Wed, 03 Nov 2010 01:07:29 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-65794 Also...in 1981, the Sox were still wearing the white and blue untucked throwback style with white tops and blue pants. This is probably a bullpen catcher with blue shin-guards on protecting someone in the bullpen.

]]>
By: Murph http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-65792 Wed, 03 Nov 2010 01:02:32 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-65792 He's nowhere near where an ump should be. That person is standing near the warning track in front of the stands along the 1st base/rt field line in foul territory. With the telephoto lens being used in this shot the guy is very far away. The first base bag is just off frame beyond Carew's glove. The umpire is probably just off to the left of the photo.

]]>
By: PhilH in Indiana http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-65767 Tue, 02 Nov 2010 22:39:55 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-65767 It's gotta be the umpire. His feet are right on the border of the infield dirt and the outfield grass, might even be touching fair territory. Grounds crew are not allowed on the field during the game, neither is the bullpen crew, while the ball is "in play." Ballboys and ballgirls go chasing down foul balls, like Marla Collins did, but this guy is standing still while the ball is "in play." Umpires sometimes work games in shirtsleeves, no jackets, so he looks like he's not "in uniform." I guess it was "casual Friday" at Comiskey Park.

]]>
By: murph http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-65528 Tue, 02 Nov 2010 06:09:58 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-65528 I don't think that's an umpire in the background. I'm thinking the photo was taken from the thirdbase side and Carew (with an obvious firstbaseman's mitt) has grabbed a slow roller and is hoping to head the firstbase line and tag the runner. The guy in the background may be either a member of the grounds crew or someone from the Sox protecting someone in the bullpen (they were down the lines, weren't they?)

]]>
By: Mike Felber http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-65482 Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:21:58 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-65482 My apologies if I mistook your meaning Mr. Haberkom. Though it was not about your speculation that Obama was there, we could not tell that the " Republican section" was well intended. Certainly nothing wrong with noting demographic tendencies, that is distinct from its use in preemptive law enforcement for racial profiling.

What I still cannot tell was not intended to denigrate was the use of quotation marks around "community Organizer" & especially "President". I believe my comment was measured & appropriate given the quotation marks & context, there is no way to know that you did not mean to belittle the titles or his status as President. My ex Mayor did this about the former at the Republican convention in '98, mockingly pretending not to know what the former title meant, insulting him through a childish Yahoo put down.

And liberals are just as capable of doing the same, which I regularly decry. So in sum, it is the quotation marks we still cannot account for as "creative nonsense'. But I am open to hearing why they were used.

]]>
By: Philip Haberkorn in Indiana http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-65433 Mon, 01 Nov 2010 19:27:29 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-65433 RICK TOO, I couldn't fool you either.....

]]>
By: Philip Haberkorn in Indiana http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8890/comment-page-1#comment-65432 Mon, 01 Nov 2010 19:26:23 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=8890#comment-65432 CONGRATULATIONS JDV ! ! ! YOU WIN ! ! !... you're the only one who didn't fall for the "methodology" I used in posts 13 and 14.
Also, my critics need to back off and reconsider who's having knee-jerk reactionary problems regarding post 14. I was just having fun with Chicago politics of the early 1980s and tossed in the tripwire that I thought would clue everybody in on the fact that post 13 is utter nonsense. My thought process was, "if I can fool people into thinking I've narrowed down the date and location the photograph was taken, even to the exact play, then maybe I can convince them the President of the United States can be seen in the background among the fans." So I just went with it, based on the notion that Barack Obama was "home from college" for the summer.
My whole argument in post 13 is based on the assumption that the picture was taken in 1981, because the card came out in 1982. Carew played for the Angels in 1979 and 1980, and the picture could have been taken then, too. And if the play was a really difficult one, the batter might have been awarded a hit, not an error.
People jumping all over me for "mean spirited Political commentary" and "decline of civility...jejune & gratuitous sarcasm & often name calling..." and "divisive diatribe" need to take another look at what I posted. Politicians show up at ball games all the time, to get their pictures in the paper and to get free time on the radio, like Congressman Harold Washington might have done. College student Barack Obama, on the other hand, would have had to pay to get into the ballpark, nobody knew who he was at the time, so conceivably he could have been sitting in the grandstands. He wasn't there to get his picture in the paper, but lo and behold, he gets his picture on a baseball card ! ! !
All the empty seats being a "Republican section" is just my reference to all sorts of surveys and polls that indicate that those folks are more likely to be Cubs fans, hence all the empty seats at Comiseky Park's "republican section." Now if that isn't profiling, I don't know what is, but people don't object when it comes out in the form of a professional opinion poll instead of somebody posting it on a blog.
Next time you watch CSI, pay attention to how much nonsense and gobbledygook goes into one of their typical episodes. That's all I was doing, people.

]]>