BaseBall Questions and Answers
Red Sox or Yankees? Why?
Question:I want to know which has more!
Answers:
This is probably the most debate question within sports...Yankees or Redsox.Truely, me being a die intricate redsox fan.yankees own more rings, and more hall of famers.but these two franchises shift much farther than that.Boston has a much more storied and heart touching franchise.the troop that could.for 86 years the redsox had a contest drought...the story behind it adjectives the same as intriguing...over 10 years surrounded by the early 1900's the redsox have more championships than most team...but 1918 would be there later for a long time.after the red sox owner sold babe ruth for 100,000 dollars to fund a brodway play...not knowing he just sold sour one of the best players to ever walk the facade of the earth...this started a86 year drought plauged by the most heart-wrenching defeat a fan could come through.1986 the ball through buckners legs.bucky friggen dent.aaron boone.but surrounded by 2004 the redsox would complete what would turn out to be the biggest comeback in baseball history...down 3-0 to the despicable "evil empire" as one redsox player has put it.2 outs not here and dave roberts steal one of the biggest bases surrounded by any game...and the rest is history...so you will find masses different opinions to this interrogate.but for this 13 year old die intricate red sox fan..The redsox are my, our...Redsox nation's #1 troop.
Red Sox. They have better colors, a better more historic stadium, and not as huge a payroll so you can relate to them a little bit more.
Red Sox cuz theyre not the yankees.
Yankees of Course look adjectives across america and the world for that matter you a integral lot more Yankees stuff then red sox! I enjoy been adjectives over the world and everywhere I go I can buy Yankees gear but, going on for half of them places if a quarter will have Red Sox gear!
they both suck
neither, thats the problem next to the national media (espn) and baseball. at hand are 31 teams within the majors, yet espn lead every baseball segment with any the red sox or yankees. if theres a game on espn, 90% of the time one of these team is playing.
the two teams contained by the world series were Detroit and St. Louis. St. Louis is struggling and Detroit is rotten to a good start. they're the champion of the two leagues. not boston and spanking new york.
new york yankees suck this year
its not even a rivalry the yankees other kicked there ***, besides for 2004 and this year.
what a prank!
I live 41 miles from the best park and team within baseball..
Red Sox. NY is a great team near a huge fan underpinning and tons of allstars, but that is freshly as much a problem they have. It is WAY too unproblematic to become a bandwagon fan, and seriously of NY fans are a moment ago that, bandwagon fans. I don't guess of it as much of an accomplishment when you spend $220m ($70m+ more than the next troop, which is the Red Sox) and you win games. That is an allstar team, they SHOULD rout most other teams.
Red sox. Best troop in baseball right very soon, better stadium, great players, the yankees spend so much on there troop, and so much to get the best of every player they can but they still suck. When the yankees get A-rod he was essentially the best SS in the league subsequent to Derek Jeter and they already have derek, that purely shows they have the best players but cant carry anything done, Red Sox is the way to shift.
I love the Red Sox, not just because they are righteous and won a championship but because of the tradition. And I grew up fondness the Red Sox. Everyone likes the Yankee's because they are the Yankee's.
Yankees own class. The owner wont let them hold anything less even if they are losing this year
red sox cuz the yankee executive makes them shave their curls on their head, and on their ball
neither go tigers!!
i can`t stand when people ask like peas in a pod question but yankee devotee enough said
Red Sox , I grew up surrounded by Massachusetts and still live here and have other loved my team!
Which foremost pictchers can pitch over 100 mph?
Answers:
Joel Zumaya (led majors in 2006 near a crazy 233 pitches over 100+MPH)
Billy Wagner (led majors in 100MPH+ pitches thrown impulsive in the decade)
Daniel Cabrera (led majors surrounded by 2005 for most 100MPH+ pitches thrown)
Notables (players who have hit 100MPH on the gun within the last couple of years that still play):
2003: Josh Beckett
2004: Randy Johnson, Francisco Cordero, Jorge Julio, Ben Sheets, Kyle Farnsworth, Eric Gagne
2005: AJ Burnett, Derrick Turnbow
There are a few more but do not know them at this time.
joel zumaya and randy johnson conceivably thats all i know right in a minute
Currently Verlander, Zumaya, Harden, Rodney, Jenks, and I heard this Linchcomb kid can to but am not sure, I know in that is a couple other guys to. Keep in mind they single reach speeds close to this on rare days when everything is flowing right.
Any hitter can hit a fastball at any time, no business how fast it may be. Unless you can go and get that ball to move, it doesn't issue how hard you throw.
Besides, the hardest thrower (and the point is that he be a thrower and never learned to be a pitcher) be Steve Dalkowski.
Tim Lincecum! that guy's going to be a stud
joel zumaya
bobby jenks at times
those are about the one and only 2 that can do it with consistency
Zumaya, Verlander, Jenks, Lincecum, Wagner...and probably a handful of others. Zumaya probably throws the hardest of the bunch, but we'll see if he can still throw that sturdy when he comes off the DL. Wagner doesn't hit triple digits they process he did early within his career, but he is still talented of it.
Zumaya, Verlander, Wagner. and plenty others
Bunting rules?
Question:In Little league, if a batter assumes the bunting stance and if a pitch is delivered illustrious,an obvious orb, and the batter does not move or "offer" at the pitch, is it a strike, or does the batter have to verbs back his bat?
Answers:
A strike by definition is "a pitch specifically struck at by the batter and is missed." It is purely a judgment made by the umpire as to whether the batter "struck at" the pitch. Breaking the wrists or the bat moving beyond the front of the plate or the batter's body, are factor that the umpire may use to make the taste. Factors is all they are. They are not definition.
It is not automatically a strike when a batter holds the bat over the plate preparing to bunt and does not pull it support when the pitch goes by. The same ruling applies. Did the batter "strike at" the pitch?
So going by the definition of a strike, if a batter assumes the bunting stance and if a pitch is delivered dignified, an obvious bubble, and the batter does not move or "offer" at the pitch, then it is purely a shrewdness made by the umpire as to whether the batter "struck at" the pitch.
Since you're talking something like Little League, and the umpires are not of professional talent (not even formally trained in some areas) and are not aware of adjectives the small technicalities of each rule, I'm going to guess and enunciate that the pitch in this indubitable situation will sometimes be called a strike since they did not verbs their bat back, although the ring would be wrong.
If I were at bat, I would other try to pull the butt back during a pitch that I own no intentions in attempting to bunt.
He have to pull final his bat. If he squares around to bunt and does not bunt it fair, it is a strike.
A batter that have squared around to bunt needs to bring the bat hindmost if he/she does not intend on bunting the pitch. If he/she fails to verbs the bat back later yes it will or should be called a strike.
As long as the batter does not "offer" at the pitch, he have not "swung." He need not verbs the bat back. It is a myth that if the batter fail to do so he is to be charged with a strike for swinging.
Simply holding the bat over the plate is not a strike. Some sort of management must define the swing. Ironically if a pitch touches a bat at any time it is considered a bat ball.
the batter have to pull subsidise. if u go forward it is a strike
This is a tricky one surrounded by fastpitch softball you do not have to verbs your bat back,and it not considered a strike unless the batter attempted to bunt the bubble.
Now in baseball most if all the umpire consider putting your bat over the plate an attempt to bunt the ball and will telephone a strike if you don't pull it wager on.The best thing to do is ask the umps at the pregame conference in the region of this,and how it will be called
What is the primary league baseball curfew?
Answers:
10 o clock
1 or 2 am
There isn't one anymore. There used to be and it was at 1:00am local time - intent no inning could start before that time. That is no longer the defence. Suspending a game until the subsequent day is presently at the umpire's discretion.
In the NL, if a game is call for weather delay after 12:50 am local time, it automatically become a suspended game regardless of rack up provided the game have reached offcial length.
In the AL, No inning at adjectives may begin after 12:50 am lower than any circumstances. This also would be a suspended game.
These are found contained by the league manuals furnished to the umpire before the start of respectively season.
The new rule individual pertains to tie games.
Resolved Questions