Why can't baseball players just.........accept things? (unspoken rules)

Sure I’d want to. But if I’m a defensive back in the NFL and an opposing receiver roasts me for a TD and does a salsa dance followed by a Lambeau Leap I might want to punch him in the face too. And yet most DBs don’t.

These pitchers are grown men being paid millions of dollars, taking some bruised ego should be totally acceptable.

But it still boils down to the fact that the person is being an asshole. Stealing a base with a big lead is giving a finger to the other team. Bunting with a big lead is the same. Bunting to break up a no hitter is to deny someone a place in the record books because you are unable to hit anything cleanly. What’s the point other than trying to be an asshole? Would not doing it have any effect on the result of the game?

Swinging at a 3-0 with a big lead is less of an issue. Batters used to be given the OK to swing away in that situation, but it’s rarer in modern baseball. It still comes off as being a dick.

The issue doesn’t come up with walkoff home runs; it’s understandable that people want to celebrate. And the situation has to be put into account. But, in general, the unwritten rule is the same as the rule on any Bulletin Board: Don’t be a dick.

Just to take one example from your litany of stupid arguments:

If you’re down 2-0 late in the game, then using a bunt to get on base means that you bring the tying run to the plate, and get someone one base closer to scoring. If it’s the ninth inning, a single (bunted or otherwise) is basically exactly as good as a home run. And this is true whether the other pitcher has a no-hitter going or not. If you don’t understand how baseball scoring works, feel free to ask; I’m sure someone here will be happy to explain it.

And yet somehow football and basketball players manage not to kill their opponents when they celebrate a big play…

That’s only true if doing everything you can to win a game is considered being an asshole. If the other team promises they won’t win the game if you refrain from doing whatever, that would be fine. If they won’t, then you should play to win.

Will the other team promise not to score a bunch of runs and win? If not, go ahead and steal or bunt if it improves your chances.

The object of bunting is to advance the runner. If it improves the chances to win the game, then go ahead. You are aware that pitchers have thrown no-hitters, and still lost the game?

Don’t play the game, you might hurt a pitcher’s feelings! And his only recourse (instead of playing better or being an adult) is to attempt to injure someone.

A bat flip says that was easy and man, you suck. It’s aggressive, and is intended as disrespect towards the pitcher. Fist pumps, pointing to one’s own dugout, pointing to the sky, jumping up and down, smiling etc. …all of those celebrations are just that. There is no message besides joy. So should a pitcher throw at hitter who does a bat flip? Absolutely not. Make him do a little dance or bail out of the box? Well…
In-game celebrations are stupid, anyway. You do your lilttle bat flip and your little dance, but you don’t get the win, who are you? The asshole who celebrated himself in a loss.

This is nonsense. It’s not intended to be anything - it’s pure enthusiasm. Disrespect would be pointing or yelling at the pitcher - things that actually happen as intentional disrespect.

Sure, but - professional players in football, soccer, basketball, hockey, etc. all have to put up with that, too. Pro sports is full of Type-A, perfectionist, testosterone-filled, pedal-to-the-metal personalities. And yet baseball players seem to, for some mysterious reason, have a thinner skin than those in any other sport, and I’m wondering why.

Someone had a good answer upthread, where he said baseball was initially about culture and gentlemanship and whatnot, and that may be it.

That’s a different situation. But if you’re behind by five runs and with two outs and you bunt, then you’re being an asshole.

If you don’t know what “sportsmanship” means, feel free to ask, though evidently I haven’t been able to explain the concept to you.

That isn’t being an asshole, that’s being a moron. A bunt is normally a sacrifice play. Who the hell bunts with two out?

If you’re a good bunter, and a speedster, and capable of bunting for a hit, then there’s no more reason not to bunt than there is not to try to hit a single.

Oh? How about Jeter shouting “I’ve got it” when running the bases to confuse the fielder? How about taking steroids before they were banned? How about deliberately spiking a fielder? How about a pitcher “accidentally” throwing behind the batter.

If the other team is down by a lot, especially in the late innings, it’s preposterous to claim they might score enough runs to make a difference.

Yes, but there’s usually no runner in a no hitter. If no one is on, it’s done solely to deny the pitcher a no hitter for no other reason then you can do it. That’s being an asshole.

You can come up with all the rationalizations you want, but ultimately, it’s just being a jerk and lamely coming up with the flimsiest of justifications.

If you knew baseball at all, you’d know that it is eminently possible to get on base with a bunt, which is what they need to do to break up a no hitter. And this is only objected to when someone who never bunts for a hit tries to do it to catch the defense off guard.

And I agree – who the hell bunts with two outs with two outs in a no hitter. The answer is an asshole.

I think it comes down to keeping baseball a place for aggressive whiteness.

The fielders should be alert for that. The hidden ball trick and its ilk has always been a part of the game.

How about taking bennies and other stimulants like lots of players did for decades before steroids became available?

I’m not talking about rule violations or things that deliberately cause injury. I’m talking about things that are within the rules.

Yes, the Dodgers scoring 11 runs in an inning just the other day was preposterous.

Unless it’s also a perfect game, there are always some runners in a no-hitter. There are walks, errors, and hit-by-pitch.

Trying your best to win the game is the best justification of all.

You didn’t make that qualification originally. Now you’re moving the goalposts. You’re admitting that in certain circumstances it might be OK to bunt in the case of a no hitter.

That’s the dumbest thing I’ve seen posted about baseball on this board, with the possible exception of “Baseball’s current “right way to play” debate has its roots in American imperialism”.

Some of baseball’s “unwritten rules” seem moronic to me, like not being allowed an aggressive at-bat when your team is comfortably leading or being castigated for stealing or bunting when it’s “inappropriate”. Your team’s up 3-0 in the fifth inning and you bunt for a base hit? That’s “showing up the pitcher”. Yeah, right.

It’s not as though other sports are not afflicted with similar niceties. Football players are discouraged from playing hard when it results in “running up the score” - a situation where hurt coaches’ feelings are paramount. Example: a freshman Ohio State running back scored a rushing touchdown late in a blowout and his head coach (Tressel) was miffed at the “disrespect” supposedly showed the other coach, I mean team. Apparently the runner should have laid down when he got near the goal line.

However, one nice thing about baseball is it’s not full of look-at-me-look-at-me-pay-attention-to-me jackasses preening like mad when they happen to do something noteworthy. The day MLB games feature organized dance numbers around home plate when someone scores is the day I stop watching.

But that’s because I’m an imperialist who misses the good old days of slavery.

That was A-Rod.

I’m surprised you don’t understand something so basic to the game. Why do you think pitchers take offense?

Thanks. I should have realized RealityChuck got that wrong as well.