As this article details, MLB is in the midst of dealing with a sign stealing ‘scandal’ involving the Astros.
In the article, it states “decoding (signs) with the naked eye is allowed”. Is there any more in-depth definition what is or isn’t allowed, or is that it? The full quote suggests there’s more (i.e. “While decoding with the naked eye is allowed, MLB has enacted increasingly stringent prohibitions in recent years against the use of electronics to spy on opponents”).
Thanks,
It basically means that if the man on 2nd sees the catcher flash the “Curve” sign, and the runner can relay this info to the man at bat (by signaling with body position most likely) then they are free to do so. That’s why you see catchers go through a completely different set of signs if there is a man on base.
No, I get that, thanks. What I was after was if there were any more explicit/detailed “official” rules. Or is truly just as simple as “decoding (signs) with the naked eye is allowed”
No use of electronic or mechanical devices are allowed. So, no binoculars, spotting scopes, radios, cell phones, etc.
Cora is about to be kicked out of baseball for a long time. As a Red Sox fan, I can’t say I’m sorry.
I don’t think MLB went down hard enough on the Astros. Every single player on the team who took part should get a one-year suspension. The manager should get a lifetime ban as should the GM. If Houston has to put major league uniforms on its AAA players for a year, so be it. Let them suck.
Does this mean that a person sitting in center field seats with excellent eyesight is allowed to steal signs? Suppose he is wearing glasses? I always thought that stealing signs was totally limited to players on the field, essentially only runners on second.
Curiously according to the account I read they did it only when there actually was a base runner on second. I suppose the results would have been too obvious otherwise.
How could they have expected to keep it secret? The first time a player was traded (or moved as a free agent), he would tell his teammates and the story would get out. As indeed it did in exactly that way.
It didn’t do them much good against the Nats did it? Imagine a seven game series without a single home win.
Wouldn’t that be fan interference?
I have to agree, and suspect it’s because they just couldn’t firmly sort out which players were more responsible than others.
AJ Hinch is probably done; I don’t think he will ever manage in the big leagues again, even after his suspension. Managers are a dime a dozen these days. Luhnow will get another job. Taubman, who was suspended for a different reason, will never work in MLB again in any capacity.
It’s not enough to steal the signs, you then have to relay them to the batter fast enough that he can react before the next pitch in a way that can’t be detected. And no matter how good your eyesight is, you can’t pick up the difference between 2 and 3 fingers at 350’.
More importantly, how does MLB prevent this in the future? I think each team puts a person in the press box, well away from the dugout. When he sees a play he thinks should be challenged, he hits a button that turns on a light in the dugout. No other form of communication should be allowed. You just can’t have the replay screens in close proximity to the dugout or clubhouse.
I don’t think they can. The individual teams are just going to have to come up with ways to counter it, as they have done in the past.
I suspect this has been happening all over baseball, for some time now. Perhaps some instances more egregious than others, but a team that doesn’t do everything possible to win doesn’t want to win. The reason for rules is not to prohibit conduct, but rather to provide a consistent set of remedies when the offenders are caught.
Breaking (bending?) the rules is part of the game. Spitballs, scuffballs, corked bats, the list goes on. The only “Thou shall not” that will get you banned is gambling, for good reason. Banning players, managers, or owners for cheating better than another team cheats ends with only those without sin being worthy enough to play the game.
Pitcher and batter get headsets like in football. Then there are no signs to steal.
It ultimately doesn’t get prevented. As mentioned above, teams have been bending/breaking the rules with the tacit acknowledgement they’d at best get a slap on the wrist.
It appears Manfred wanted to make this a story about the Astros as a rogue team. He’s
[quoted]
(Whitewash: Rob Manfred says he doesn't think sign stealing extends beyond the Astros - MLB | NBC Sports) as saying “I have no reason to believe it extends beyond the Astros at this point in time” even after the Red Sox had been caught in 2017 (before Cora was even manager). And it made no sense even at the time as some of the people involved had reportedly brought elements of the scheme from other teams and it wasn’t limited to one team even by the evidence presented at the time. He is also
[quoted]
(https://www.si.com/mlb/2020/01/08/red-sox-cheating-sign-stealing) as telling John Henry (the owner of the Red Sox) “I’ve got no choice here” regarding extending the investigation to the Red Sox, which isn’t exactly what you tell him if you want an impartial and complete investigation.
And while there have not been investigations, some active players have accused the Brewers, Dodgers, Rangers, and Yankees of also violating the policy. It’s not unreasonable to suppose several other teams have done so as well. That last one is telling - the player (not an Astro) basically considers it another tool in the box but also believes all teams should be equally punished if one is.
The commissioner’s office has decided somebody is going to have to take the brunt of it because of the public outcry but still wants to protect the other teams. It’s not unlike the PEDs scandal. They’re hoping by offering up one team the whole thing will blow over.
Until someone hires a lip-reader with a telescope to watch the catcher’s mouth. Or gets a parabolic microphone to listen. Or hacks into the radio signal (for instance, even if the transmission is encoded, you might be able to get useful information by noting how long the catcher is transmitting (it would vary by catcher, but you might realize that "split finger fastball’ takes longer than ‘curve’)).
How does the catcher say what pitch he wants without the batter hearing?
The best short term solution is just severe punishment. Luhnow and Hinch got what they deserved; Alex Cora should be banned for life, and well may be. But the investigation should have dug deeper and crucified a few players as well. There’s already stories coming out that people IN BASEBALL think the Astros got off easy. The Dodgers’ press release was, well, read it for yourself:
So to translate from corporatespeak: “We got fucking ripped off and the thieves got away with it.”
The argument will go “you can’t punish all of them.” No, realistically, you can’t, but you can sure as shit put the fear of God in them.
I am no fan of Rob Manfred but must clarify that this may have been the best he could do. Manfred works for the owners and so is in an immensely hard position; he is in effect punishing one of his 30 bosses. There was no easy response here. I don’t envy his job at all.
You replace the finger signs with verbalized numbers.
It could work with the pitcher calling the game, and the catcher only hearing and being able to shake off a pitch. But that’s a pretty significant change to the way things are done now.
Is there a reason teams don’t just use a more robust code?
Most pitchers have 3 or 4 pitches. Any code that’s easy to use for 100+ pitches in a game is going to be relatively simple. They have to be quick, simple, and difficult to mess up. When runners are on base they do change them up.
You don’t speak clearly, you speak in code just like in football when they call plays (Omaha, Philly Special, Yellow Weasel). So you’d have to somehow intercept the message then decode it.
I’ve never heard of even the Patriots hacking into the headsets in the NFL. I think it’s a lot harder than you’re assuming.