PDA

View Full Version : WS Game 1


thunderheads
10-29-2009, 12:19 PM
Hey guys,
Nice to finally see the Gerry Davis stance in action, ...who was that guy behind the plate anyhow?:rolleyes::razz::wink:

Nice to see them get together and sort out that wierd double play.
http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?c...pic_id=7224330 (http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=7098741&topic_id=7224330)

Also, you knew it was coming, ...what CP was Gerry Davis wearing? See at 1:59 of the video .... what the heck?

BrianC14
10-29-2009, 04:39 PM
Hey guys,
Nice to finally see the Gerry Davis stance in action, ...who was that guy behind the plate anyhow?:rolleyes::razz::wink:

Nice to see them get together and sort out that wierd double play.
http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?c...pic_id=7224330 (http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=7098741&topic_id=7224330)

Also, you knew it was coming, ...what CP was Gerry Davis wearing? See at 1:59 of the video .... what the heck?

I think that given his association with Wilson, he's got a one-of-kind CP on there.

Love the double play! You've got to appreciate a shortstop that plays it smart like that.... Matsui thought he was out... Cano wasn't sure... that tells the whole story of the night - the Yanks were stymied! :)

thunderheads
10-29-2009, 04:49 PM
I think that given his association with Wilson, he's got a one-of-kind CP on there.



That may be a new proto-type from GDsports? Maybe he's giving it a test drive?:?

shickenbottom
10-29-2009, 06:39 PM
Did anyone notice the initial call bye the 1B umpire. Safe with the off the bag for the pulled foot at about 7 seconds. This is before the discussion.

Great focus and making of the right call .

Assign
10-29-2009, 06:40 PM
That may be a new proto-type from GDsports? Maybe he's giving it a test drive?:?

Really?
Trying something new during a pivotal game seems odd...don't you think.
This sounds liek somethign he might try in the pre-season gaems.

thunderheads
10-29-2009, 06:44 PM
Really?
Trying something new during a pivotal game seems odd...don't you think.
This sounds liek somethign he might try in the pre-season gaems.

Uhmm ...who said this was his first game trying it? ;)

He just so happened to have a plate-coat on last night. He could have been wearing it all summer and no one saw it .......yes?

abevillarreal
10-30-2009, 12:58 AM
Did anyone notice the initial call bye the 1B umpire. Safe with the off the bag for the pulled foot at about 7 seconds. This is before the discussion.

Great focus and making of the right call .

this brings up a question, and it may just be my inexperience but why did the 1B ump motion off the bag to the foul side? I've only had to make that call at 2nd and home and both times I did it in the direction the D was off the bag. If F5 is pulled off the bag toward the infield is it proper to motion to foul ground? thanks, Abe

AugieDonatelli
10-30-2009, 02:52 AM
this brings up a question, and it may just be my inexperience but why did the 1B ump motion off the bag to the foul side? I've only had to make that call at 2nd and home and both times I did it in the direction the D was off the bag. If F5 is pulled off the bag toward the infield is it proper to motion to foul ground? thanks, Abe

You are correct, he should signal "off the base" in the direction the fielder is pulled off the base. Just like you wouldn't sell a foul call by throwing your arms in toward fair territory.;)

shickenbottom
10-30-2009, 01:28 PM
this brings up a question, and it may just be my inexperience but why did the 1B ump motion off the bag to the foul side? I've only had to make that call at 2nd and home and both times I did it in the direction the D was off the bag. If F5 is pulled off the bag toward the infield is it proper to motion to foul ground? thanks, Abe

Auguie is correct, signal in the direction the fielder went. It indicates that you saw the direction the fielder went. There is an exception, If the fielder goes straight up in the air, you can go to either direction. The reason is bringing your arms up tends to simulate calling time. I know, we know the difference, however, the lay person in the stands doesn't know squat.

What I thought was well done was the fact that the umpire made the call independant of whether the ball was caught or not. Since this play took less than 2 seconds from the time the ball was touched by the SS, to the time the ball was gloved by F1, the umpire couldn't rely on what the 2nd base umpires call would have been. Then sticking with F1 and R1 to see the tag of R1. This is key. Make only calls in your area and independant of what another umpire call.s

dash_riprock
10-30-2009, 01:38 PM
What I thought was well done was the fact that the umpire made the call independant of whether the ball was caught or not. Since this play took less than 2 seconds from the time the ball was touched by the SS, to the time the ball was gloved by F1, the umpire couldn't rely on what the 2nd base umpires call would have been. Then sticking with F1 and R1 to see the tag of R1. This is key. Make only calls in your area and independant of what another umpire call.s

I don't think it was well done at all. U1 called Cano safe at 1st when he was already out on the catch. U1 didn't know the status of the ball, even though his partner's call was huge. It probably didn't affect the game, but it didn't look good.

shickenbottom
10-30-2009, 03:41 PM
I don't think it was well done at all. U1 called Cano safe at 1st when he was already out on the catch. U1 didn't know the status of the ball, even though his partner's call was huge. It probably didn't affect the game, but it didn't look good.

Dash, you're missing the point. Regardless of the status of the ball (catch or no-catch), U1 made his call and stuck with the runners near 1st base. Regardless of his mechanics for the pulled foot.

U1 could have made a non-call on the B/R at first, however, the SS did not know what U2 was going to call so he stepped on the bag and fired to 1st. This is a play or an attempted play on a runner and that still requires a call to be made.

Here's a what if: What if during the umpire discussion after the play, U3 saw the ball short hop into the glove and U2 changed his call based on this information? R1 is still out since the SS stepped on 2nd prior to throwing to 1st. Then the call over at 1st becomes pivotal, because the B/R is now safe on the back end of the DP attempt. U1 still needs to make this call.

thunderheads
11-04-2009, 07:43 PM
Guys, just heard from GDSports, Gerry Davis had on a Riddell Power, ...Mary at GDS called it a Wilson Power, but ...she said it was 15yrs old>

Anyhow, probably what Dana DeMuth had on too,..they did look similar

seth503
11-05-2009, 03:59 AM
Guys, just heard from GDSports, Gerry Davis had on a Riddell Power
Then Gerry's CP is special indeed. Veteran umpires speak of those like the holy grail.

heyblue26
11-05-2009, 08:56 AM
Yea that CP looked good too but I liked Joe West CP he wore behind the plate today in game 7. And who sell's that model that GD was wearing?

thunderheads
11-05-2009, 01:02 PM
Yea that CP looked good too but I liked Joe West CP he wore behind the plate today in game 7. And who sell's that model that GD was wearing?

Game 6 ....

Anyhow, ...see my post (#12) from yesterday....you can't get the Riddell Power anymore, however, Mary at Gerry Davis Sports did call it a "Wilson Power" but did say it was approx. 15 yrs old.

semper_fi_72
11-05-2009, 03:08 PM
Yea that CP looked good too but I liked Joe West CP he wore behind the plate today in game 7. And who sell's that model that GD was wearing?

It wan game 7 to John. He is a day ahead of us over there....lol

finnerty
12-04-2009, 06:24 PM
Then Gerry's CP is special indeed. Veteran umpires speak of those like the holy grail.

I stole this vintage Douglas CP (and Douglas shins) on ebay for use as a back-up or a loaner. I took it to a clinic last month, and these two NCAA instructor guys look at each other, and one says, "He doesn't know what he has there."

Then he told me he would pay four times what I paid for it. I think it's a nice, simple, low-profile, hard-as-a-rock protector, but let's get real. It's a 15-year-old, well-kept piece of gear, but the stuff that Wilson puts out today is better. There's a fascination with the vintage stuff, and to a degree, I have that fascination. But what's so great about a Riddell Power or a Douglas West Vest that we would pay more for it than a brand new Gold?

BrianC14
12-04-2009, 11:31 PM
I stole this vintage Douglas CP (and Douglas shins) on ebay for use as a back-up or a loaner. I took it to a clinic last month, and these two NCAA instructor guys look at each other, and one says, "He doesn't know what he has there."

Then he told me he would pay four times what I paid for it. I think it's a nice, simple, low-profile, hard-as-a-rock protector, but let's get real. It's a 15-year-old, well-kept piece of gear, but the stuff that Wilson puts out today is better. There's a fascination with the vintage stuff, and to a degree, I have that fascination. But what's so great about a Riddell Power or a Douglas West Vest that we would pay more for it than a brand new Gold?

Alright, then I'll offer you twice what you paid for the Douglas gear.
And the names and addresses of the two guys who offered you four times what you paid.... ;)

mazzamouth
12-05-2009, 04:44 AM
I stole this vintage Douglas CP (and Douglas shins) on ebay for use as a back-up or a loaner. I took it to a clinic last month, and these two NCAA instructor guys look at each other, and one says, "He doesn't know what he has there."

Then he told me he would pay four times what I paid for it. I think it's a nice, simple, low-profile, hard-as-a-rock protector, but let's get real. It's a 15-year-old, well-kept piece of gear, but the stuff that Wilson puts out today is better. There's a fascination with the vintage stuff, and to a degree, I have that fascination. But what's so great about a Riddell Power or a Douglas West Vest that we would pay more for it than a brand new Gold?

I have a douglass CP and its awesome... I also have a West Vest Gold and Once I got my Douglass I put the WV away... just so you know you can send that CP in and they will replace everything on there... It cost about 40 bucks.. but well worth it.

AugieDonatelli
12-05-2009, 07:32 AM
Same with the Riddell Power. It was a great protector, and fit under a shirt nicer than a Platinum or Gold.

finnerty
12-05-2009, 03:00 PM
I have a douglass CP and its awesome... I also have a West Vest Gold and Once I got my Douglass I put the WV away... just so you know you can send that CP in and they will replace everything on there... It cost about 40 bucks.. but well worth it.

Wow, thanks for that. I am trying to work it into the rotation, but with your endorsement, I may use it more freely. Like Augie referred to on the Riddell, it certainly has a leaner profile than the other hard shells.

mazzamouth
12-05-2009, 05:23 PM
Wow, thanks for that. I am trying to work it into the rotation, but with your endorsement, I may use it more freely. Like Augie referred to on the Riddell, it certainly has a leaner profile than the other hard shells.

I umpire alot of college ball, a little DI stuff and alot of DII....but those kids throw hard and I have been hit in the cp a bunch, and didnt feel anything... here is what mine look like...

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c21/mazzamouth/ChestProtector001.jpg

heyblue26
12-06-2009, 03:24 AM
That CP looks like it gives you the protection that you need. Hows about the collarbone area does it give you that protection like the WV or the gold CP?

mazzamouth
12-06-2009, 08:12 AM
That CP looks like it gives you the protection that you need. Hows about the collarbone area does it give you that protection like the WV or the gold CP?

I have another pic.. but it wraps over the collar bone...

thunderheads
12-07-2009, 01:44 PM
my only thing w/ the Douglas is the collarbone/shoulder gap....

mazzamouth
12-07-2009, 07:20 PM
my only thing w/ the Douglas is the collarbone/shoulder gap....

Dont even need to worry about it.. when they are on the gap is very , very very small...

mazzamouth
12-07-2009, 07:22 PM
That CP looks like it gives you the protection that you need. Hows about the collarbone area does it give you that protection like the WV or the gold CP?

here is the pic sideways of the CP...

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c21/mazzamouth/ChestProtector004.jpg

semper_fi_72
12-07-2009, 07:35 PM
here is the pic sideways of the CP...

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c21/mazzamouth/ChestProtector004.jpg

Nice pic of your DirecTV remote ;)

heyblue26
12-08-2009, 02:10 AM
What he didn't tell us is that remote helps you fasten the straps in place. Thanks for the side shot of CP I would say that it gives you the protection that I asked about.
Just kidding about the remote.

mazzamouth
12-08-2009, 03:25 AM
What he didn't tell us is that remote helps you fasten the straps in place. Thanks for the side shot of CP I woulkd say that it gives you the protection that I asked about.
Just kidding about the remote.

the remote joke is not gonna bother me... come on after being on thsi web site with, Tim C and Augie... you better have some thick skin.

BrianC14
12-08-2009, 04:47 AM
the remote joke is not gonna bother me... come on after being on thsi web site with, Tim C and Augie... you better have some thick skin.

I thought it was your new, fancy-shmancy electronic click-im-a-indimicator. :razz:

finnerty
12-08-2009, 03:40 PM
That's the exact model of protector that I acquired. (15 years-old?)

If the gap isn't a problem, I think it's because the pads are so damned thick that a blow to it doesn't cave the plate into your bone like the ones with thinner pads.

I'm going to give it a try with the big boys throwing. I don't do regular-season D-I, but I do fall and winter ball at a couple of major schools, and a few of those boys can air it out well into the 90s. I'm normally wearing a Gold at that level of ball, but I may try the Douglas just to give it the D-I test.

Its low profile is something that you definitely must get used to, because it seems too small at first. But it has some thick plates and pads.

I found this thing on ebay, and I wound up getting the shins at the same time from this southern gentleman who's retiring from umpiring. My son's a JUCO pitcher, and his coach makes his pitchers umpire intrasquad games and home scrimmages. He believes it gives them a better idea of what an umpire goes through to call a game and also believes that it elevates their respect level for umpires.

Before his first assignment, he came to me and told me that he was umpiring the next day's game and he doesn't want to sport the supplied balloon protector and strap the back-up catcher's leg guards over his uniform like the other guys. "I want to look like an umpire," he said. After I stopped weeping, I fixed him up with a Honig's polo blue (his choice) and a pair of those ultimate plate slacks and a pair of Honig's ball bags. His protective gear comprised all my main stuff: Wilson Gold CP and shins, titanium mask and New Balance 450s. (Can you see me making him gear up and giving him a crash-course clinic right there in the living room until early the next morning? :) )

Well, when that big son-of-a-gun walked out there to call his game all decked out, his coaches just beamed and lauded him for making the effort to look like a pro (his pitching coach is an umpire and his bench coach was one). Not one of his teammates razzed him; they were uniformly complimentary. I watched his game and he did great---especially with taking charge and being a true game manager (he's easy to obey, because he's a huge guy ;) ).

When he came away from it, he was hooked on umpiring. So I immediately went up on ebay and started looking for some used gear, and that's when I found this southern gentleman who was leaving the vocation, and wanted to part with his vintage Douglas gear. He listed it in the wrong category, and it had only one bid when I found it. So I swooped in and made a winning bid and won out.

For an umpiring gear junkie, it's a cool story. For others, it's like sitting through somebody showing you his stamp collection.

AugieDonatelli
12-08-2009, 04:20 PM
Stuff like this is why I don't relish the idea of buying a West Vest and lining Joe's pockets:

June 19, 2009
Judge Denies Wilson Sporting goods in Patent Case

A federal judge has denied summary judgment to Wilson Sporting Goods and other sporting goods manufacturers, which were sued for patent infringement by a smaller company.

In so ruling, the court extended the life of a lawsuit brought by Everything Baseball, which claims that a chest protector that the defendants produced and marketed infringed upon a chest protector that it had invented.

The defendants had moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the plaintiff’s 226 patent is invalid as anticipated by three prior art references: U.S. Patent No. 5,530,966 (the '966 patent) issued to Joseph West; a chest protector manufactured and sold by Douglas, which embodies the '966 patent; and the “hang tag” attached to a chest protector manufactured and sold by Wilson under the trade name West Vest, which also embodies the '966 patent.

“The parties agree that to anticipate the '226 patent, at least one of the West references must demonstrate all of the following limitations: ‘a flexible main pad having…an abdomen portion’; ‘a flexible shoulder guard’ that extends ‘over the shoulder of a wearer’; and ‘adjustable straps attached at one end to the abdomen portion of the main pad.’ The parties also generally agree on the structure of the West references. Nevertheless, the parties’ positions on whether these references disclose the aforementioned limitations are diametrically opposed: [the] defendants assert that each West reference demonstrates all of the limitations, while [the] plaintiff argues that none of the references contains any of them. I need not examine all of these disputes, however, because even a single material dispute relating to each of the references is sufficient to deny summary judgment.”

Addressing the Douglas chest protector first, the court was “not persuaded that this reference indisputably contains ‘an abdomen portion’ as required by the '226 patent. When worn in what appears to be the proper position (as I assume was the case in the photographs defendants submitted in support of their motion), the Douglas chest protector comes down to just below the sternum, i.e., several inches above the navel, leaving a large portion of the abdomen exposed. I am thus baffled by [the] defendants' contention that it is ‘self-evident from just looking at’ this reference that it has an abdomen portion. At the very least, whether the Douglas chest protector contains an abdomen portion is a question of fact for the jury. Accordingly, the Douglas chest protector does not anticipate the patent-in-suit as a matter of law.”

The court also was dubious about whether the '966 patent contains “a flexible main pad.” While the “defendants conceded that the '966 patent discloses a protective garment with an outer shell layer of plastic plates”, “they argue that the invention is nevertheless ‘flexible’ because 1) the inner portion of the garment is flexible, which satisfies the requirement that the reference contain a ‘flexible main pad,’ and 2) the assembly taken together is flexible because the plastic plates of the outer shell are themselves flexible and, in any event, are hingedly linked so as to be capable of folding when disassembled from the inner portion.”

The court, however, shared the plaintiff's “skepticism that the term ‘main pad’ can be construed as referring to the ‘inner pad’ (rather than to the assembly of the inner and outer portions), which is how the phrase would have to be interpreted for defendants’ argument to win the day.”

The court went on to state that the defendants’ argument “fails because even assuming the presence of flexible hinges means the exterior shell cannot accurately be characterized as ‘rigid,’ reasonable minds can differ as to whether the ability of the stiff plastic plates to be ‘displaced’ about their axes--but not in any other direction--satisfies the requirement that the main pad be ‘flexible’ as that term is used in the patent-in-suit. A reasonable interpretation of ‘flexible’ as used in the '226 patent is that the main pad must be flexible in various directions, not merely among a particular axis or axes. Indeed, such an interpretation would support the patent-in-suit's stated object of protecting a catcher ‘without restricting the catcher's mobility’ which presumably is not limited to movement along the axes formed by the interconnected plates. In other words, the hinged movement among the stiff plastic plates disclosed in the '966 patent may render the invention non-rigid without rendering it ‘flexible’ as that term is used in the '226 patent. For at least these reasons, the '966 patent does not anticipate the patent-in-suit as a matter of law.”

The final reference upon which defendants relied was the Wilson “hang tag,” which is the tag attached to the product when it is sold commercially to consumers. “This reference depicts images of the product from the front, back and side, and identifies its ‘individual parts,’” wrote the court. “These drawings and descriptions are insufficient to demonstrate anticipation of the patent-in-suit as a matter of law.

“First of all, other than identifying what appears to be the inner layer of the garment as the ‘soft underpad,’ there is no evidence that any or all of the portion of the West Vest corresponding to the ‘main pad’ of the '226 patent is ‘flexible.’ The front view drawing depicts and identifies the following parts: collar plates; collar roll; shoulder cup; bicep pad; side chest plates; breast plate; sternum plate; soft underpad; ‘T’ hooks; and ‘T’ hook slots. It is not clear from the picture whether certain of these parts are overlapping or adjacent. I cannot discern, for example, whether the portion identified as the ‘breast plate’ overlaps with the parts identified as ‘side chest plates,’ or whether one of these plate ends where the other begins. Moreover, nothing tells me the extent to which the ‘plate’ components are themselves flexible or stiff, or how they are connected to one another, if at all. For at least these reasons, I cannot conclude as a matter of law that the Wilson ‘hang tag’ anticipates the patent-in-suit.

Everything Baseball v. Wilson Sporting Goods Company et al.; N. D. Ill.; No. 08 C 3840, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37244; 5/4/09

Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiff) Lee F. Grossman, LEAD ATTORNEY, Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro, Chicago, IL; Mark M. Grossman, Grossman Law Offices, Chicago, IL. (for defendant) Louis S. Chronowski , Jr., Michael R. Levinson, Seyfarth Shaw LLP, Chicago, IL. John P. Fredrickson, LEAD ATTORNEY, PRO HAC VICE, Michael T. Griggs, Boyle Fredrickson S.C., Milwaukee, WI; Allison Michelle Corder, Valauskas & Pine, Chicago, IL; Jeffrey A Pine, Valauskas & Pine LLC, Chicago, IL.

BrianC14
12-08-2009, 06:22 PM
That's a lot of words ^^^ but I doubt (like in many court cases) the whole story has been told.

As for me, I buy what works best for me. As with any product, someone's pockets are going to get lined. I don't begrudge a man with an idea and effort behind that idea getting paid for his efforts. :neutral:

finnerty
12-09-2009, 04:38 AM
I just make sure that I never buy any of Cowboy Joe's hoaky CDs.

jomatiky
12-12-2009, 02:06 PM
What does Cowboy Joe's hoaky CDs have to do with Game 1 of the world series

finnerty
12-12-2009, 03:19 PM
So you agree that they're hoaky.

jomatiky
12-12-2009, 04:18 PM
I think we are both hoaky. It comes with age. LOL

finnerty
12-12-2009, 05:15 PM
:D ... that's the truth.

Oh, how I try not to be, but I'm afraid that it's only a matter of time before I try to leave the house in Bermuda shorts with black crew socks.

jomatiky
12-12-2009, 05:26 PM
Are you in this picture

heyblue26
12-13-2009, 07:39 AM
I don't think so I never wear black socks with Bremuda Shorts. Their team must of been the Chicago Black Sox. But they look like their having some fun and thats all that counts.

finnerty
12-13-2009, 05:31 PM
Are you in this picture

No.

I would never wear a blazer with plaid Bermuda shorts. I don't care how old and clueless I get.

jomatiky
12-13-2009, 08:38 PM
They look like "The Millionaire's Club"

finnerty
12-14-2009, 04:48 PM
They look like "The Millionaire's Club"

Well, every man has his price.

Make me a millionaire, and I'd even wear a blue blazer with brown shoes like the clown on the left.

http://www.umpire.org/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=98&d=1260638746

thunderheads
12-16-2009, 03:26 PM
Well, every man has his price.

Make me a millionaire, and I'd even wear a blue blazer with brown shoes like the clown on the left.

http://www.umpire.org/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=98&d=1260638746

Looks more like the 'douchebag club' :D

BrianC14
12-16-2009, 04:09 PM
Looks more like the 'douchebag club' :D


ROFL

A new reality show? "Middle Aged Douchebags"
:D

seth503
12-17-2009, 10:42 PM
Looks more like the 'douchebag club' :D

:D
Throw in an attractive female or two and you have the makings of a successful website:

http://www.hotchickswithdouchebags.com/
:p

finnerty
12-18-2009, 12:19 AM
Douchebag's almost too elegant a term for some of those guys ... sheesh!

And attractive is too elegant a term for a couple of those gals, too.