Odor deserves 8 games if just for that beard!

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/18/2016 6:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 5/17/2016 11:59:00 PM (view original):
debate over

This.

Are you always right?

I guess I rest my case if proving that somebody isn't infallible automatically makes them wrong.

Nope. But if my argument is "I was right that other time so I must be right this time", it's a fail.

That's the argument you made. Dumbass.

Posted by dahsdebater on 5/17/2016 8:19:00 PM (view original):
Apparently MLB thinks Odor was most in the wrong. Somebody should explain the rules to them.

This.

Dumbass.

It's a reasonable place to appeal to authority. MLB is usually right about baseball. They make the rules, so they are de facto always right about the rules.

Your argument here is basically analogous to climate change deniers or x-year earth age creationists listing times in history when science has been wrong about things to justify ignoring overwhelming scientific evidence.

My argument is that MLB uses an exhibition game to determine who hosts the most WS games. This is dumb. Possibly the dumbest thing in sports because the championship game advantage may be decided by an exhibition game in July. Therefore, MLB does not always come up with the right decision. Hence, the suspension length maybe just be a dumb decision.

Re-making the same stupid argument, which is exactly as I characterized it, doesn't make it any stronger.

Scientists have been wrong about some things. But if a scientific question comes down to a scientist with expertise vs. John Doe off the street who disagrees with him, I'm going to believe that the scientist is right until proven otherwise. And I'll be right to do so the vast majority of the time.

Similarly, if a baseball question comes down to MLB vs. some trucker named Mike T., I'm going to believe MLB. And be right the vast majority of the time.

Being a dick doesn't make you right.

MLB is wrong in how they determine the home team for Game 7 of their World Series. Their decision-making process is not impeccable. If your argument is "Odor was suspended because he connected with a punch", fair enough. That does not make you a scientist. It means you, and MLB, understand that punching people in the face is not baseball. If your argument is "MLB suspended Odor for more games so he's obviously more at fault", well, as stated many, many times, you're a dumbass.

Being a dick doesn't make you right.

I'm going to quote this back at you forever. Unless I forget. Which I will. But it was a good idea.

At the end of the day, whether you like it or not, the people who make the rules are right about the rules. The rules are what they say they are. That's an empirical fact. "MLB is right about the rules of baseball" is a far more rational argument than "MLB has been wrong about one thing that I can come up with, so they're probably wrong about everything else."

****...

I gotta side with mike on this one.

It's a fact that MLB makes the rules and what they say goes. But that fact doesn't mean they made the correct decision (though I do agree with their decision in this case).

No, again, if you believe MLB is right about the Odor suspension just because they're MLB and they make said decisions, you're an idiot. MLB makes the rules. MLB makes mistakes. It's not any more, or any less, complicated than that. Therefore, one can't just say "See? Odor was the most in the wrong because MLB said!!!!"

That's just retarded. I wish I could remember BL's quote about "submitting to authority" or some dumb **** when tec basically said what you're saying.

It wasn't even supposed to be an argument in the first place.

I was just calling out all the dumbfucks who have been supporting Odor so aggressively the whole time. You'll note I had already been arguing for pages that Odor was the one out of line because punching a guy in the face is not a baseball activity.

This whole thing comes down to a massive lack of objectivity among the fans. If Albert Pujols or Miguel Cabrera, somebody fans like, got punched in the face for a hard takeout slide to break up a double play - successfully, it may be worth pointing out - then the same fans who are cheering Odor would be incensed. But because they don't like the guy who got punched, the guy who hit him is a hero. In the real world it doesn't work that way. The action itself, and not the actor, is what defines the ethics of the action.

Of course, there are those who believe that vigilante justice should still be acceptable. So maybe for them, this isn't true. But for the rest of us, the point is valid.

Posted by dahsdebater on 5/17/2016 3:10:00 PM (view original):
I'm going to bow out of this conversation because there's such a rampant lack of objectivity and rationality.

But go watch that video again and then tell me you honestly believe Bautista was going to punch Odor. He wasn't. He had an open hand until the instant before he got hit.

You seem to think you know what everyone is thinking. That would be incorrect. Unless, of course, MLB has confirmed it.

Bautista approached an angry man. That is a bad idea. He was not issuing bro-hugs.

FWIW, fighters have open hands up until the moment they punch. It's easier to defend oneself with an open hand.

You know who doesn't make mistakes? Robert ******* Goodell! He'd NEVER suspend Rougned Odor. NEVER!!!! OLD TIME BASEBALL!!!!!!

Posted by sjpoker on 5/18/2016 5:13:00 PM (view original):
You know who doesn't make mistakes? Robert ******* Goodell! He'd NEVER suspend Rougned Odor. NEVER!!!! OLD TIME BASEBALL!!!!!!

I think it Roger Goodell, fucknuts.