Madri Excepcional At 33:35 in that 3rd video you posted, someone is holding one up right in front of the camera for a few seconds.
WE WON !! Crazy match! We led for almost the entire match 2-0. They tied it up 2 -2 before the end of reg. Went to extra time. We were awarded a pen about 5 minutes in the first part. Our golden boot winner, 13 goals this season, missed! We had to go to pens after that. My son missed his. lol. We ended up winning 6 - 5 on pens. Our keeper - NOT A REAL KEEPER MIND YOU - made two saves - MOTM ! He beat out the other teams keeper who PLAYED KEEPER IN COLLEGE. Crazy. 2nd time Isaac and I have won a title together. My 4th one overall.
Though it was a bit funnier the other way. ... and, frankly, those kits are a bit too Arsenally for my tastes.
You realize they are orange...? But I get your meaning. 3 of the kits these past two season had white sleeves. Orange, blue, black and the white shirt had black sleeves.
Well personally I don't see colorblind... Cause I'm politically correct and all... Yeah I know you are but I wasn't sure if red/orange was an issue... ANd I didn't want to offend @Myshoe because I believe the Millers also wear a kit similar to the gooners...
Congrats on winning, it must feel great to have done it with your son. Oh and don't worry I'm not a snowflake. Oh scratch that, I'm going to the police to report you for hate speech. Who needs free speech anyway?
8) Yeah, I gotta admit winning with him makes it even sweeter. When we won it a couple of years ago he had torn his ACL about 4 weeks into the season and didn't get to play as much. We won last summer but it was 8v8, of which I'm not a big fan, and he actually had a very pivotal role in his first season back. Even scored the game winner in the title match! This season he seemed to slow down a bit, especially on the offensive end, but defensively he was a brute! And that we came from being the worst team last fall to win 6 straight and the title... that's the cherry on top!
Good luck today although I'm fairly neutral if I'm honest as my grandad was from Barnsley. I saw this in the DM today: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/m...rows-away-championship-celebrating-early.html Pretty fascinating ending but it's a bit confusing, what does the dude mean that's yelling "there's two outs"? that there's two outfield runners? I take it from playing rounders as a kid that the backstop should have stepped on 4th base with the ball to stop them getting round? so why didn't they know this?
Harsh on Barnsley but no doubt Wednesday deserved to go up over the course of the season. I think you'll need to strengthen in the summer though, even with the man advantage it looked fairly even until Barnsley started to tire. I think you'll be competing with us for survival next season as things stand.
He's yelling 'there's two outs!' at the players, essentially meaning 'there are only two outs'. The non-batting team clearly thought that the player who had just had the third strike called against him had been the third (and game-ending) out. But the rule is that a batter who strikes out isn't technically out if the pitch is not caught. And since the catcher dropped the ball, he needed to either A) tag the runner out, or B) throw the ball to the first baseman, who will, by simply catching the ball while standing on first base, make the batter out, thereby (in this instance) ending the game.* But if you look at the catcher, you can see where it all goes wrong. When he drops the third strike, he realizes that he must tag the batter, but the batter is alert and starts running toward first base, and the catcher is unable to do so. No problem, then ... the catcher then merely needs to throw the ball to the first baseman, who touches the base with his foot (whilst holding the ball), and the batter will be out, and the game over. Easy-peazy. The catcher clearly knows this, as you can see him begin the process of throwing to first to record the final out. But one presumes (as it's offscreen) that the first-baseman has already began celebrating and is no longer around first base. The catcher sees all the premature celebrating, presumes the game over (why, one can only guess), and joins in the celebrating. And that's where it all goes horribly wrong, as the base-runners see that the field players have stopped playing, and simply begin running the bases without opposition. As to the question, "why didn't they know this?" ... well, they damn well should have. My guess is that some outfield players didn't realize that the pitched ball had not been caught cleanly, and presumed the game over (which it would have been, had the catcher caught the ball). That the catcher realized they still needed to retire (make 'out') the batter, and then suddenly thought, "nope, I guess it's already over" is what's unexplainable. That's a massive, massive eff-up. *the catcher could have, as suggested, just stepped on 4th base (home plate) and made the leading runner out, had he been 'forced', that is, had there been runners on all three bases. But there were not, and no runner is 'forced' if there isn't another runner(s) on each preceding base. So the runner on 3rd base, who is not forced, does not need to run. And if he chooses to run, he must be tagged with the ball to be put out, as opposed to merely stepping on the base (with the ball) to which he is running. No runner would have dared run to home plate had the catcher remained in his position, as they weren't forced and would have easily been tagged out. But the catcher has gone, as well as any other player who could have tagged any runner out at any base. And all of the base-runners score, because the opposition has simply stopped playing before the game is over. edit: looking back at it, the second-baseman clearly sees what's going on. He's trying to communicate it, but to no avail. Poor bastard.
So in baseball you need to get 3 batsman out to end the innings? is that right? so the dude was simply telling his teammates that the player wasn't actually out despite what they thought? I don't get this bit though, so if a runner is running between 3rd and 4th when he doesn't need to can they not just step on 4th base before he gets there and then throw it to 3rd to stop him going back? I didn't even know about the tagging thing, it sounds like it could lead to some pretty hilarious British Bulldog type situations between the runner and those in the middle trying to tag him? Pretty much all films that involve baseball just show runners trying to make bases with the base men trying to catch them out as they slide to reach it, not tagging them between bases. Yeah I think he was looking for the ball but the backstop had put it into his pocket, I assume he wanted to keep the ball for himself as a trophy.
I watched the whole game as someone posted a link to it, saw someone get tagged mid-base, also the 4th baseman tagged someone sliding towards their base I'm guessing that's a lot more common. There was also a funny moment where a runner was heading to 3rd base but then he started to run back to second just so he could flail his arms around in front of a catcher to try and put him off catching a batsman out, that's not very sportsmanlike lol. I still don't really get what's classed as a strike or a wide ball etc and sometime the batsman just gets to walk to 1st base. I already knew a batsman has to hit it between the V shaped lines though. How come the game finished 5-6? they were 5-4 down with runners on 1st and 2nd along with the batsman, so if 3 people reached 4th base shouldn't it have finished 5-7?
A lot of questions, there. More than I've got time to address right now. But if we are going to continue with a dialogue on baseball (and why not? footy's not in season), we need to get some terminology clear. First off, there is no 'fourth base'. It is 'home plate'. Ergo, there is no '4th baseman'. That position is called the 'catcher'. And each side has only one of them on the field. So the fella who was getting arms flailed before him was likely the 2nd baseman (or the shortstop, but more on that later), but almost surely not the catcher, who would've likely been closer to home plate. Furthermore on that, the reason the runner would've been returning to second base (from near third) was not to interfere with the fielder. Deliberately interfering with a fielder when the ball is in play would result in the umpire calling that baserunner out (and possibly the batter, as well). He was most likely returning to second base because the ball had been hit in the air and was likely to be caught (before hitting the ground). In that situation, the runner cannot advance from his base until after the ball is caught. And if the ball is returned to the base from which he started before the runner returns to said base, that runner will be called out. But I digress. Anyway, yes, a team is allotted three 'outs' before it's 'half' of the inning is over. Each team gets three outs per inning to score as many 'runs' as they can. A game is nine innings long* (unless the score is tied at the end of nine innings, in which case they play 'extra innings', until the tie is broken (at the end of a full inning - meaning both teams get to bat). The reason the game didn't end 5-7 is because the team that won was the home team, and the home team bats last in every inning. And since that was the last inning (or perhaps it was in extra innings), once the second runner scored, making it 5-6, the game was then over, so even if the batter (or any subsequent runner) ran all the way home, that is of no significance to the score. Had this happened in the top half of the inning - that is, had it been the visiting team batting - then play would have continued and all runs would have counted. The visiting team would have continued batting until three outs were recorded (scoring as many more runs as they could), because the home team would have then had their half of the inning to try to come back to level, or exceed, the visitors' score. And this scenario could have happened that way, because if the home team is leading when the visitors are retired (three outs made) in the top half of the last inning (or in extra innings), the home team does not bat (there's no need, as they've already won). *in professional baseball, and all high levels of the game. In most high schools, though, they only play seven innings.
Lastly, before I move on. It's important to be conceptually clear about how to retire (make 'out') any batter/baserunner. No base can be occupied by more than one runner. Ergo, a runner is 'forced' any time a ball has been hit and there is no empty base behind him. So a runner on first(base) is always forced. A runner on second is only forced if there is also a runner on first. A runner on third is only forced if there are runners on both first and second. Make sense? If there are runners on first and third, the runner on first is forced, but the runner on third is not (since there's no runner on second). So a runner who is not forced does not have to run when a ball is hit, because there is at least one base for the batter and any runner behind him to advance to, without putting two runners on one base. Now, this is important because a forced runner can be put out much more easily than one who is not forced. Any forced runner can be retired by simply holding the ball and touching the base to which he is forced. This includes first base for the batter. However, if a runner is not forced, he may only be retired (put out) by tagging him with the ball (or just the glove with the ball in it) whilst he is not on a base. The reason you see the dramatic scenes of runners sliding to reach a base (or home plate) and not just in between the bases is because a runner will have erred quite badly to find himself confronted by a fielder with the ball while so far from a base. A smart runner will not try to advance unless he feels certain he can reach base safely unless he is forced. And if he is forced, the fielder will seldom tag the runner out, because it is generally easier to force him out (that is, just touch the base while holding the ball). But these situations do occur, and occasionally runner will get caught in what is called a 'rundown', which is what I think you are referring to as a 'British bulldog' situation. If you go to youtube and enter 'baseball rundown', you can see examples of how these look.
Yeah it was a rundown and only 7 innings, being forced to run is the same in rounders (and run outs in cricket) it's just the rundown thing is not something I've seen before, in rounders even if a runner wasn't forced to run but chose to you just basically touched the bases with the ball before they got there which then prevented the runner from going there (unless I'm mistaken or we played with weird rules as we only played it in junior and infant school to be fair). I might try and watch a few more games if I can find any.
Wednesday's retained list has been posted: The Owls can confirm our player retained list following the conclusion of the 2022/23 season. Dennis Adeniran, Jaden Brown, Sam Durrant, Ryan Galvin, Ben Heneghan, Jack Hunt and David Stockdale will be released upon expiry of their current contracts. Wednesday have exercised options to retain Barry Bannan, George Byers, Lee Gregory, Dominic Iorfa, Liam Palmer and Josh Windass. New contract offers have been made to Fisayo Dele-Bashiru, Marvin Johnson and Callum Paterson. Aden Flint and Reece James leave Hillsborough following their respective loans. The Owls would like to thank all departing players for their services following a memorable campaign and we wish them the very best for the future. No real shocks there, to my thinking anyway. I'd read somewhere that Reece James would consider staying on, and that the club might pursue that. Hopefully that's the case. Obviously the list would be phrased the same way whether he's being pursued or not. But I rate him and certainly hope that he can be obtained.