Yadier Molina got ejected for arguing with an ump as a play was going on

109 Comments

Bottom of the sixth, Cardinals have a 4-2 lead but the bases are full of Cubs. Miguel Montero at the plate. A borderline pitch was called a ball instead of a strike. The very next pitch, Montero hits a double to the gap. Cardinals catcher Yadier Molina is angry and argues, presumably about that last pitch.

Except he does it in the middle of the dang play while Cubs runners are circling the bases. Watch:

[mlbvideo id=”241967383″ width=”600″ height=”336″ /]

Seriously, the argument unfolds almost immediately, and is going on while Dexter Fowler, Anthony Rizzo and Jorge Soler all come in to score.

I presume Molina has enough sense of the field at this point to know that there likely wouldn’t be a play at the plate and probably was still watching it unfold out of the corner of his eye. Still, this is pretty inexcusable all the same. he’s distracting the ump, who could be called on to make a call, either at home if a runner doesn’t touch or to help out at third base. He’s possibly signaling to Soler that there is no play at the plate as well, erasing any doubts in his mind if he or his third base coach had any.

I mean look at this:

source:

Mostly, though, it’s just unprofessional. If you have a beef with the strike zone — and he may have had a longstanding one that built with the game, I have no idea as I didn’t watch it — take your beef up when there isn’t a play unfolding. Molina was ejected here, and I don’t have any problem with it whatsoever. Not because he’s arguing balls and strikes, but because he’s literally getting in the way of a play.

Max Scherzer: ‘There’s no reason to engage with MLB in any further compensation reductions’

Max Scherzer
Mark Brown/Getty Images
8 Comments

MLBPA player representative Max Scherzer sent out a short statement late Wednesday night regarding the ongoing negotiations between the owners and the union. On Tuesday, ownership proposed a “sliding scale” salary structure on top of the prorated pay cuts the players already agreed to back in March. The union rejected the proposal, with many worrying that it would drive a wedge in the union’s constituency.

Scherzer is one of eight players on the MLBPA executive subcommittee along with Andrew Miller, Daniel Murphy, Elvis Andrus, Cory Gearrin, Chris Iannetta, James Paxton, and Collin McHugh.

Scherzer’s statement:

After discussing the latest developments with the rest of the players there’s no reason to engage with MLB in any further compensation reductions. We have previously negotiated a pay cut in the version of prorated salaries, and there’s no justification to accept a 2nd pay cut based upon the current information the union has received. I’m glad to hear other players voicing the same viewpoint and believe MLB’s economic strategy would completely change if all documentation were to become public information.

Indeed, aside from the Braves, every other teams’ books are closed, so there has been no way to fact-check any of the owners’ claims. Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts, for example, recently said that 70 percent of the Cubs’ revenues come from “gameday operations” (ticket sales, concessions, etc.). But it went unsubstantiated because the Cubs’ books are closed. The league has only acknowledged some of the union’s many requests for documentation. Without supporting evidence, Ricketts’ claim, like countless others from team executives, can only be taken as an attempt to manipulate public sentiment.

Early Thursday morning, ESPN’s Jeff Passan reported that the MLBPA plans to offer a counter-proposal to MLB in which the union would suggest a season of more than 100 games and fully guaranteed prorated salaries. It seems like the two sides are quite far apart, so it may take longer than expected for them to reach an agreement.