There’s no excuse for Cole Hamels intentionally throwing at Bryce Harper

228 Comments

As we saw last night, Cole Hamels admitted that he threw at and hit Bryce Harper intentionally. Harper being young, brash and, in Hamels’ mind anyway, pampered was his motivation. “Old school baseball,” was his defense.  But no matter how he rationalizes it, it’s low rent and pathetic.

Hamels says that he wasn’t trying to injure Harper.  But it was a 92 mile per hour fastball, and I’m sorry, no matter what your intentions, a 92 mile per hour fastball has the potential to do serious damage to a person. Obviously he did not injure Harper, but he very easily could have, his intentions notwithstanding.

What if Harper turns a little late or a little early and it breaks his wrist? What if the ball gets away from Hamels ever so slightly and runs towards Harper’s head? It doesn’t matter that neither of those things happened. When a hard-throwing pitcher intentionally aims a baseball at batter, he is acting recklessly and, in my view, maliciously, and that has no place in baseball.

And spare me your “it has always been thus” arguments. Just because something is a tradition doesn’t make it right. People have had their careers ended by thrown baseballs before.  A couple have even been killed. We decry cheapshots and intentional efforts to harm opponents in every other sport. We should feel no differently about it in baseball. And I defy anyone to give me a justification for doing so that does not rest on the “it has always been this way” defense. A bad act is a bad act no matter how many people have perpetrated it in the past.

Hit batsmen are a part of the game, regrettably. But there is no excuse for intentionally hitting anyone. Even Bryce Harper.

Check out these Union Jack-themed caps for the London Series

Getty Images
5 Comments

UPDATE: Here is what, in my view anyway, constitutes a sad update. The Yankees and Red Sox will not, themselves, be wearing these cool Union Jack caps on the field during the London Series games. They will be wearing regular caps with a special patch.

The good news is that the Union Jack caps will still be available to purchase if you’re so inclined. They’re just not going to be official on-field replicas. Alas.

My verbiage about the propriety of wearing Union Jack baseball-themed merchandise below still stands.

12:45 PM: Patriots in Boston led the fight against Great Britain for an independent America. The popularization of the word “yankee” has its origins in an often derogatory term British military and political leaders used for people native to the American colonies. In light of that, with the possible exception of the Nationals — it’s hard to find two teams with a better regional and/or etymological claim on, well, not being British.

But, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. here are the caps Major League Baseball just revealed the Yankees and Red Sox will be wearing in London when they meet next month:

And check out the crown on the back:

My intro to this article aside, I have no problem with these at all. Indeed, they look pretty cool. I’ve seen some people being grumpy about it seriously, in contrast to my jokingly, citing the history of the colonies and the Revolution and all of that and calling them inappropriate, but c’mon. These are some boss caps.

Besides (a) the war ended 238 years ago; and (b) we probably stole baseball from them anyway. Let your freak flag– er, Jack, fly.