Talk:Pine Tar Incident

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jordanvogel12.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Change name of article to "Pine Tar Game"[edit]

I've been a baseball fan for 30 years and never heard anyone call this the "Pine Tar Incident." Everyone, or nearly everyone, calls it the "Pine Tar Game." I suggest renaming this article "Pine Tar Game" and making "Pine Tar Incident" redirect to it.

Any dissent? CoramVobis 00:47, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I support this. Five years later. Electricbassguy (talk) 06:46, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am against it. I've been a baseball fan my whole life and I've only ever heard it called the "Pine Tar Incident," never have I heard it called the "Pine Tar Game." TuckerResearch (talk) 05:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard both, but lean towards Game, as it is more prevalent. Two kinds of pork (talk) 04:47, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I lived and worked in the NYC suburbs at the time, and personally turned this game on [TV] before retiring for the night. [Most all Yankee games where then broadcast by WPIX, I believe, channel 11, on the old analog system.] Anyway... yeah... wow... I happened to turn to the Yankee game, relaxing after dinner, and happened to switch to it immediately after Brett's home run, and when the discussion had commenced between Billy Martin and the Umpires. Manager Martin was known for his idiosyncratic approach to baseball, and could be temperamental on some issues, so ... he was up to his typical stuff. (No surprise there.) But when the Umpire looked into the Royals dugout for George Brett, and called him out, Brett shot out of there not unlike a gun barrel bullet, and a whole scene erupted. I have never seen a protest as vociferous as that. But the whole matter with the bat, and the protest to League Office, I always witnessed and experienced then, as separate from the literal game itself. And so, yes, I agree with the naming of it "The Pine Tar Incident", not the "Pine Tar Game". It may be said that this was the game in which noted incident happened, though. I agree with present terminology. ... Btw. as a small note, Man. Billy Martin's presence in the game, and contributing to "the Incident" should not be underestimated. (John G. Lewis (talk) 11:22, 18 August 2015 (UTC))[reply]

What?[edit]

it said that earlier in the season it happed to thurman munson ,but munson died in '79 and this happed in '83 please correct.

What is pine tar for[edit]

The article should state why a player puts pine tar on a bat. Itsmeiam (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the article I am going to add what pine tar is used for. I'm surprised that the article doesn't state one of the main points of the pine tar game. (User:Jordan Vogel} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordanvogel12 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?[edit]

If the Royals were trailing 4-3, how could Rich "Goose" Gossage connect off the Yankee reliever with two runs to make the score 5-4? P.S. i have never heard the term "connect off" in my life! —Preceding unsigned comment added by QASIMARA (talk • contribs) 04:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


First Southpaw Second Baseman in 10 Years[edit]

This statement is wrong:

...Mattingly, a lefty, became the majors' first southpaw second baseman since Oakland's Gonzalo Márquez [1] a decade earlier; no left-hander has played second base or shortstop in a big-league game since (as of 2009)...

Márquez was listed as a starting second basemen in the lineup on two occasions but never took the field for defense. The baseball-reference.com link used here shows this. I will remove all references to the Marquez being a southpaw second baseman, and change the text to this:

...Mattingly, a lefty, became a rare Major League southpaw second baseman; no left-hander has played second base or shortstop in a big-league game since (as of 2009)...

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/marqugo01.shtml

Jonathancjudd (talk) 17:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that lefty pitcher Sam McDowell of Cleveland played a partial inning at second base circa 1965. This was a stunt to keep him in the game while a righthander came in to pitch to Frank Howard. McDowell actually made a putout on a force play. WHPratt (talk) 20:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


  • WHPratt, good catch! The actual date of the game you are referring to is Monday July 6, 1970, and McDowell did indeed have a putout at second base. http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1970/B07060CLE1970.htm. Maybe this section can be worded as Mattingly was the first lefty second baseman since Sam McDowell? The way the text is written is also accurate, just the reference to Marquez was incorrect. Jonathancjudd —Preceding undated comment added 19:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Symbolic Protest?[edit]

"A still furious Martin symbolically protested the continuation of the game by putting pitcher Ron Guidry in center field and first baseman Don Mattingly at second base."

Unless Martin stated that his intention was to stage some farce, he should be given the benefit of the doubt here. He had to replace in the field some players who were no longer with the team, and still keep his bench stocked with hitters for a possible rally in his half of the ninth.

The disadvantage of a lefthanded secondbaseman is mitigated with two out, as he certainly won't have to be a pivot man on a double play.WHPratt (talk) 20:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see that the text now acknowledges this as clever manuevering in an extraordinary situation, but as such it seems to contradict the "symbolically protested" statement. I think that notion should be deleted. WHPratt (talk) 13:08, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pine Tar Incident vs Pine tar incident OR Pine tar Incident[edit]

If someone more familiar with the WP Naming conventions could explain why this is named "Pine Tar Incident" instead of "Pine tar Incident" or (the one which I think would be more appropriate) "Pine tar incident" (note the capitalization in both) (→Zachary) 03:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw this now. I agree this is named incorrectly. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article is Wrong About Rules in Effect At The Time[edit]

The section in this article about the rules in effect at the time, and McClelland's invocation of the "Umpire's Perogative" is completely wrong. At the time, such a hit was defined in the rules as an illegally batted ball, the penalty for which is that the batter is declared out according to Rule 6.06. Nonetheless, at the time, the out call was challenged and overruled, and the game was resumed on August 6, starting after the now-upheld home run. Rules 1.10 and 6.06 were later changed to reflect the intent of Major League Baseball, as exemplified by the Commissioner's ruling. Unless anyone can defend this article as written, I will change it to reflect the accurate summary of the rules in effect at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.220.120.82 (talk) 20:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC) Given there were no objections, I have corrected the text to reflect accurately the rules in effect at the time unambiguously supported the umpires' on-field ruling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.220.120.82 (talk) 15:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 11:21, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Pine Tar Incident → Pine tar incident – Per naming conventions, this page should be at Pine tar incident, as "tar" and "incident" are not proper nouns. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:25, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose – Although "tar" and "incident" are not proper nouns, the "Pine Tar Incident" is the name of one particular incident, so the phrase is a proper noun phrase. The WP:CAPS policy says "For multiword page titles, one should leave the second and subsequent words in lowercase unless the title phrase is a proper noun that would always occur capitalized, even in the middle of a sentence" (emphasis added). The names of particular events are considered proper nouns. For example, the Franco-Prussian War and the Whiskey Rebellion are capitalized, although "war" and "rebellion" ordinarily would not be. The USS Liberty incident uses a lowercase "incident", so I'm not completely sure – perhaps it is that article's name that should change. Basically, I think this is about one particular incident, not about incidents involving pine tar in general, so I think the phrase is a proper noun and should be capitalized. –BarrelProof (talk) 02:43, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Yes, it's a proper noun. Andrewa (talk) 10:25, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Tonight show[edit]

Under "Media References" can someone add the incident on the Tonight Show, soon after this game, in which Doc Severinsen's band's drummer knocked one out of the park, taking the tempo through the roof until all the other players gave up and let him solo for an extended period, before an umpire (or Carson) demanded to inspect the drumsticks, found the pine-tar coating on them to be excessive, and either called "out" or actually ejected the drummer (perhaps for the rest of the show)?76.8.67.2 (talk) 04:10, 27 May 2013 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson76.8.67.2 (talk) 04:11, 27 May 2013 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pine Tar Incident. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pine Tar Incident. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:19, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

article implies rules have since changed or been removed, but doesn't state it[edit]

I am adding George Brett's reaction and what he thought of the pine tar game because it doesn't really talk much about what went through his head while it was happening or after the fact. User Talk: Jordanvogel12 —Preceding undated comment added 20:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply] 

== Not once does the article talk about Louisville slugger ==

I am going to add information about the brand and the baseball bat they make and how it associated to the incident and other things involving it. user talk: Jordanvogel12

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pine_Tar_Incident&oldid=1204713659"