It's Either Cheating or It's Not

[LouGehrig]

How is a runner on second base who steals the catcher’s signs any different from the team employee who is located in a booth in the center field score board using a pair of binoculars to steal the catcher’s signs? There is no difference. They are achieving the same objective but by different means. Video taping is another method that can be used. Ask Bill. Bill who? Take your pick.

http://baseballpiggies.blogspot.com/2007/09/cheating-is-absolute.html

[bluezebra]

How is a runner on second base who steals the catcher’s signs any different from the team employee who is located in a booth in the center field score board using a pair of binoculars to steal the catcher’s signs? There is no difference. They are achieving the same objective but by different means. Video taping is another method that can be used. Ask Bill. Bill who? Take your pick.

http://baseballpiggies.blogspot.com/...-absolute.html

There is a HUGE difference. A runner is part of the game, a non-player in the scoreboard is NOT. Runners and/or coaches stealing signs is, and always has been, a LEGITIMATE part of the game. Just as the defense stealing the base coach's signs to the batter and runner(s).

It's a pity that you can't differentiate the legal from the cheating aspects of the game.

Bob

[LouGehrig]

Dictionary. com presents some definitions of cheating, which are listed below. Both the runner on second and the individual using binoculars are attempting to deprive the opponent by depriving the opponent of the maximum effectiveness of his skills. Telling a hitter what pitch is coming is depriving the pitcher of some of the effectiveness of his pitches.

Where is the rule that states players can't be given the opposition's signs?



v. tr.

1. To deceive by trickery; swindle: cheated customers by overcharging them for purchases.
2. To deprive by trickery; defraud: cheated them of their land.
3. To mislead; fool: illusions that cheat the eye.
4. To elude; escape: cheat death.


v. intr.

1. To act dishonestly; practice fraud.
2. To violate rules deliberately, as in a game: was accused of cheating at cards.
3. Informal To be sexually unfaithful: cheat on a spouse.
4. Baseball To position oneself closer to a certain area than is normal or expected: The shortstop cheated toward second base.

[Dalkowski110]

LouGehrig, are you actually going to argue with bluezebra, who was an umpire for FORTY-FOUR years?

[LouGehrig]

I am not arguing. I am presenting an enigma of logic.

My view is absolute, which is very difficult to live with from a practical view. Both the runner on second and the player with binoculars cheated. Gaylord Perry cheating. Barry and Roger might have cheated. It would be great if there were no cheating, but that will never happen, which has led to an arbitrary set of values. The runner on second can steal signs because he is in the game. What about Bob Turley stealing signs from the bench when he is not pitching that day? Is a substitute not in the game stealing signs not allowed, but if Turley, as slow as he was, went in as a pinch runner on second, he now can steal signs because his role has changed?

In 2001, the following was written:

Once again, the reason why the story created such a stir was because of the use of the Navy binoculars and the wiring system. Although there was nothing specifically written in the rulebook at the time that I am aware of, most would agree that it crossed the line in the traditional war of sign stealing,

Fifty years after the Giants were playing electronic games, there is still no language in the rulebook prohibiting such practice. But all major league general managers and managers received the following March 31, 2000 memo regarding electronic equipment from Sandy Alderson, the executive vice president of baseball operations.

It reads: "Please be reminded that the use of electronic equipment during a game is restricted. No club shall use electronic equipment, including walkie-talkies and cellular telephones, to communicate to or with any on-field personnel, including those, in the dugout, bullpen, field and--during the game--the clubhouse.

"Such equipment may not be used for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a club an advantage.

"Monitors for videotape of batters/ pitchers should be in the clubhouse or, if in the tunnel, well away from the dugout and view of players/coaches on the bench. No television camera replay should ever be turned toward the dugout.

"No microphones are permitted in the dugout without the approval of the Commissioner's Office (Fox Saturday afternoon and ESPN Sunday night telecasts have approval to microphone a manager or coach with consent of the person to be miked).

"No electronic equipment shall be used to revise an umpire's decision or to assist an umpire in making a decision."

Jim Evans, an A.L. umpire for 30 years says, "There is nothing in the rulebook. But I would not allow any electronic monitoring. It's not the way the game was meant to be played. I would encourage the team to file a protest if someone on the other team was caught using devices to steal signs."

Despite the fact that the rulebook does not address the use of electronic equipment Evans added, "Don't forget rule 9.01(c) that gives umpires the authority to rule on anything not specifically covered in the rulebook."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCI/is_6_60/ai_74090344

This does address the problem. It merely is a weak attempt to prevent the use of technology to cheat. If cheating is against the rules, it cannot be allowed. It is not against baseball rules that are written. Unwritten rules or rules made up by an umpire can be counterproductive and inconsistent.

[Captain Cold Nose]

To quote Bob:

"A runner is part of the game, a non-player in the scoreboard is NOT."

Seems pretty logical to me.

[bluezebra]

LouGehrig, are you actually going to argue with bluezebra, who was an umpire for FORTY-FOUR years?

And a fan for over SEVENTY years.

Bob

[LouGehrig]

To quote Bob:

"A runner is part of the game, a non-player in the scoreboard is NOT."

Seems pretty logical to me.

No question, but even LEO's break the law on occasion.

It is easy to understand that cheating by players who are in the game is acceptable but cheating by those not in the game, especially if they use techology, is not allowed.

If Jeter's parents in the stands gave him a sign that indicated the next pitch, would that be NOT ALLOWED, but if A-Rod gave him a sign from the bench, that would be fine? The key is "getting the sign," not HOW the hitter got the sign.

[Pete Rose Rounding Third]

I am not arguing. I am presenting an enigma of logic.

This seems roughly equivalent to speeding while keeping an eye out for the cops on the one hand versus speeding while using a radar detector on the other hand. They're both speeding, but in the first case the driver must be on constant vigil; in the second case, the driver is not encumbered by looking for law enforcement. Thus, the second driver is more likely to speed - and get away with it - than the first driver.

If one goal of our system of traffic laws is to eliminate/reduce speeding, then people who use radar detectors logically are creating more resistance in meeting that goal.

What am I trying to say here? Well, if a baserunner (driver) is stealing signs (speeding), then he might get ticketed (take a fastball to the ribs). If a team employee (radar detector) is stealing signs (speeding), the baserunner (driver) will never get punished by the opposing team's pitcher (local police).

It's not a perfect analogy, but if we're going to allow players to police themselves over this matter, then a non-player should not be allowed into the equation.

[bluezebra]

Dictionary. com presents some definitions of cheating, which are listed below. Both the runner on second and the individual using binoculars are attempting to deprive the opponent by depriving the opponent of the maximum effectiveness of his skills. Telling a hitter what pitch is coming is depriving the pitcher of some of the effectiveness of his pitches.

Where is the rule that states players can't be given the opposition's signs?



v. tr.

1. To deceive by trickery; swindle: cheated customers by overcharging them for purchases.
2. To deprive by trickery; defraud: cheated them of their land.
3. To mislead; fool: illusions that cheat the eye.
4. To elude; escape: cheat death.


v. intr.

1. To act dishonestly; practice fraud.
2. To violate rules deliberately, as in a game: was accused of cheating at cards.
3. Informal To be sexually unfaithful: cheat on a spouse.
4. Baseball To position oneself closer to a certain area than is normal or expected: The shortstop cheated toward second base.

1..A player or coach (or other bench personnel) stealing signs is LEGAL.
2..There IS NO rule in ANY baseball rule book against stealing signs.
4..A player 'cheating' toward a base is a figure of speech. He is just moving to better position himself to possibly make a play. He is not breaking a rule.

Bob

[Dalkowski110]

"No question, but even LEO's break the law on occasion."

...So what you're basically doing is comparing one of our best posters and a guy who umped for 4.5 decades to a corrupt police officer?!?! :noidea

[Captain Cold Nose]

No question, but even LEO's break the law on occasion.

It is easy to understand that cheating by players who are in the game is acceptable but cheating by those not in the game, especially if they use techology, is not allowed.

If Jeter's parents in the stands gave him a sign that indicated the next pitch, would that be NOT ALLOWED, but if A-Rod gave him a sign from the bench, that would be fine? The key is "getting the sign," not HOW the hitter got the sign.

Jeter's parents are not competitors with actual involvement in the game at hand. They are outsiders. THAT is the key.

[LouGehrig]

This seems roughly equivalent to speeding while keeping an eye out for the cops on the one hand versus speeding while using a radar detector on the other hand. They're both speeding, but in the first case the driver must be on constant vigil; in the second case, the driver is not encumbered by looking for law enforcement. Thus, the second driver is more likely to speed - and get away with it - than the first driver.

If one goal of our system of traffic laws is to eliminate/reduce speeding, then people who use radar detectors logically are creating more resistance in meeting that goal.

What am I trying to say here? Well, if a baserunner (driver) is stealing signs (speeding), then he might get ticketed (take a fastball to the ribs). If a team employee (radar detector) is stealing signs (speeding), the baserunner (driver) will never get punished by the opposing team's pitcher (local police).

It's not a perfect analogy, but if we're going to allow players to police themselves over this matter, then a non-player should not be allowed into the equation.

I like your logic and you make great points, but both are cheating. Making cheating easier is a variable that could lead to getting away with it, but it is still cheating.

The driver without the radar detector may get caught, but he was cheating.
The driver using the radar detector may NOT get caught, but he was cheating.

I have not brought in getting caught or punishment if one is caught into play. I am simply saying that one either cheats or one does not.

I admit, completely, that my position, while not untenable, is extremely impractical and in our society, unrealistic.

[bluezebra]

This seems roughly equivalent to speeding while keeping an eye out for the cops on the one hand versus speeding while using a radar detector on the other hand. They're both speeding, but in the first case the driver must be on constant vigil; in the second case, the driver is not encumbered by looking for law enforcement. Thus, the second driver is more likely to speed - and get away with it - than the first driver.

If one goal of our system of traffic laws is to eliminate/reduce speeding, then people who use radar detectors logically are creating more resistance in meeting that goal.

What am I trying to say here? Well, if a baserunner (driver) is stealing signs (speeding), then he might get ticketed (take a fastball to the ribs). If a team employee (radar detector) is stealing signs (speeding), the baserunner (driver) will never get punished by the opposing team's pitcher (local police).

It's not a perfect analogy, but if we're going to allow players to police themselves over this matter, then a non-player should not be allowed into the equation.

"Well, if a baserunner (driver) is stealing signs (speeding), then he might get ticketed (take a fastball to the ribs). "

The RUNNER?

Bob

[Pete Rose Rounding Third]

"Well, if a baserunner (driver) is stealing signs (speeding), then he might get ticketed (take a fastball to the ribs). "

The RUNNER?

In his next AB, of course.