Players Books

I found this book while researching my own book (The Cheater's Guide to Baseball) which includes a chapter on McGraw, and it entirely changed the way I went about writing it.

The figures of this era have been romanticized and turned into villains to the point where there are many contemporary accounts that are entirely wrong. They rely on myth, circulated rumor, and easily discredited accounts.

Rosenberg tells the story of baseball largely by using newspaper accounts from the time and using his discoveries to make larger conclusions about how the game was played, and how often players engaged in dirty play. He finds surprising and often-overlooked stories, and forces a reconsideration of popular myths. It's a huge eye-opener.

Read this book if
- you want to read a meticulously detailed account of how things really were, drawn from reliable sources
- you love coming across long-forgotten anecdotes that will amuse and enlighten you
- you're doing any kind of research on baseball in the 1890s

Don't read this book if
- you want a whimsical narrative
- you'd prefer to cherish myths about the era
- you're going to be annoyed about organization

A word on the last one - the book isn't something that you might pick up, starting at a point of time, and which then moves forward to end at another year, steadily progressing in an easy-to-follow way.

A limitation of the way it's written is that it's not strongly organized, and because it's part of a much larger series following Cap Anson's career and times, it doesn't have a strong narrative drive through each book in the way you might expect. Instead, it moves back and forth as Rosenberg discovers interesting things and traces a particular myth, or tracks the history of a rivalry forward. This can be hard to follow sometimes.

That said, even as casual reading, it has its merits - you can pick it up, read it for a while, finding interesting accounts of crazy things that went on, and return to it later.

And if you want a sense of how things really were, how it was to play in those times, this would be my first recommendation. It's clearly the product of long, hard research, and absolutely worth the time to read for any fan of baseball's history.

Impeccably researched, Mr. Rosenberg provides an invaluable overview of baseball as it was truly played in the 19th Century. As someone who has a more than casual interest in the "original" Baltimore Orioles, even my eyebrows were raised as I thumbed through the pages. The antics of John McGraw, Hughey Jennings and their cohorts are presented so that the reader has a clear understanding that winning was foremost in their minds and at almost any cost. Despite an unabashed bending of the rules, these characters developed the strategies that have shaped the way the game is played to this very day. I highly recommendd this book to anyone who has even the most casual interest in the history of baseball.

Rebeccasreads highly recommends this Visions in Poetry version of the beloved poem vividly & thrillingly illustrated by Joe Morse.

This time we see a youth, lean & tall, with earphones attached to his CD player, watching an urban baseball game & the fans as the poem, set in cartoon clouds, plays out, just as the game does.

This is for everyone who loves baseball & the poem, which will, in its turn, become a classic.

Canadians. Is there anything they can't do? The publishing house of Kids Can Press has given the world all sorts of interesting titles, but perhaps none so interesting as those from KCP Poetry, a small poetry-laden division. Reinterpreting classic poems like "The Lady of Shalott" and "The Highwayman", someone along the way must have suggested "Casey At the Bat". But not in an old-timey handlebar moustached way. More of an inner city struggle to leave the streets behind kind of way. It doesn't sound very good, does it? I personally found it a tepid idea at best. The crazy thing is, it works. Works like gangbusters. I never really realized it, but Thayer's poem is remarkably elastic, allowing it all kinds of interesting interpretations. Take into account the beautiful binding and you've got yourself a classic work of poetry that's been reinterpreted by artist Joe Morse into an entirely original beast.

Do I really have to summarize it? The story's exactly as we've always known it. Heck, my own father has it memorized. "The outlook wasn't brilliant for the Mudville Nine that day". Mudville is down and unless Casey can get to bat everything shall truly be lost. Fortunately Flynn and Jimmy Blake manage to get on base and Casey's up. He's up and he's hot. Heck, he even misses the first two balls for the fun of it. Then the moment comes, everyone's ready, and Casey swings like he's never swung before. "But there is no joy in Mudville - Mighty Casey has struck out". The last shot is of a dejected Casey, brought to his knees, the stands around him abandoned.

In my travels around New York, the Bronx, and Brooklyn I've never stumbled across an inner city baseball game. But in the conteest of this story, it works and I'm sure that there are some somewhere. Now the illustrations themselves are not my style, but this isn't to say that they aren't well done. First of all, you have to respect an artist who paints outside in a gas mask because his materials are so very very toxic. THAT is dedication, ladies and gentlemen. The oil and acrylic used on the paper gives Joe Morse's black a blueish tinge. Figures are exaggerated for the sake of the narrative. The pages are even occasionally split into comic book panels to sometimes allow the story the feel of a graphic novel. How well the poem adapted to its new setting is sometimes shocking. When we read that, "From the benches, black with people, there went up a muffled roar", we wonder how else it could be taken. Ditto the surreal moment when we learn that two other ballplayers, the much maligned Flynn and Jimmy Blake are, respectively, a hoodoo and a cake. The words "hoodoo" and "cake" are written in graffiti under their headshots, giving these once archaic terms a kind of contemporary cache.

Rarely have I ever read a children's book that praised its own illustrator so highly at the story's end, by the way. Here's a bit of it: "More's images paint a compelling portrait of human nature, particularly the psychology of the hero and the crowd. Indeed, this interpretation of `Casey' transforms Thayer's caricatures into flesh-and-blood people with real hopes and dreams - and real vulnerability". The book goes on to describe how in this particular version we see Casey "ultimately confined by the batting cage and the concrete boxes of his surroundings, deserted by even his most ardent fans". Couldn't have said it better myself (and it looks as if I don't have to). Suddenly this isn't a story about a guy so full of himself that he causes his own downfall. It's about a kid who's pride gets the better of him and who ends up bitter and alone without any recourse or escape at the end of his day. Cheery.

One of the libraries in which I worked had low shelves for easy child access. At this branch I would continually display Christopher Bing's illustrated version of the Thayer poem standing on top of the shelves in the hope that someone would give it a glance. I must have put that puppy out for maybe five or six months and not ONCE did it ever get checked out. Holding Joe Morse's new version, I feel confident that if I put his book out for people to look at, it would disappear instantaneously. It's even beautifully bound. A lot of the smaller presses are favoring simple bindings without covers these days. The Vision In Poetry series, to which this book belongs, also has a lovely format with silver piped words along the spine. Classy city.

So let's sum up. You want to get your kids interested in some classic poetry but you don't know how? Hello, answer to your prayers! I may not have mentioned this before, but not a single word in this book has been changed to suit its new station. It's the classic poem in its original form and done in such a way that it reads like it was made yesterday. Poetry has never been better packaged for the kiddies. This is a poem that has a lot going for it. Even if you're not a fan of the art or the format, you have to respect its energy. An amazing idea and an even better result.

My oldest son loves to lay in his bed and read stories with Daddy just before lights out. I found this book for them when they'd just started their nighttime ritual and knew my husband would love it. He's always loved to play sports and is very excited about sharing that love with his sons. This version of Casey at the bat is so beautifully illustrated - it really takes you back in time. Turns out that I enjoy listening and looking at the pictures just as much as my two year old. It's the kind of book you know will be saved and handed down. My husband loves it so much that when we were recently invited to a birthday party he suggested it as our gift. You can't go wrong with this version, it's great.

When you can take a classic and apply it 100 years after it was written, then you know you've truly written a piece of art. This is by far one of the best illustrated books for this poem that I've ever seen. It's partially a cartoon, but partially real life so it really makes for a great story and not just a poem. I've read this over and over again and my little one wonders why on earth Casey let the first two balls get by without even trying. What an educational little poem for little ones and even adults. The illustrations alone are worth the cost of this book, especially when they show smoke coming from Casey's ears! Since it is a classic, I think this should be in every little one's library and what a great way to introduce some education without them even knowing it. I didn't study this poem until the 6th grade, but with publications such as this, little guys and gals can get ahold of it much earlier. If you have a little leaguer in your life, this book would be a fabulous gift. Even mighty Casey, talent and all can strike out! Highly recommend!

Joseph Addison's (1672-1719) Play "Cato: A Tragedy", first staged in 1713, inspired many enlightened thinkers in the 18th century with its portrayal of the Roman senator Cato the Younger's (95-46 B.C.E.) willingness to commit suicide rather than to live under the tyrannical rule of Julius Caesar. The play takes place during Cato's final hours of resistance to Caesar. George Washington remarked it was his favorite play and had it performed for his men in Valley Forge during the revolution. Washington found in the play a powerful statement on patriotism, liberty, virtue and honor. He quoted from it extensively in his writings. The most famous use of the play was when he met with disgruntled officers in Newburgh, New York right after the war. They had met to contemplate taking over the government by force because the Continental Congress hadn't paid them. Washington got their attention by taking out a pair of glasses to read a letter he had recently sent to congress. As he donned the glasses he quoted a line from the play, "I fear I have grown old in the service of my country." After this remark it is reported that there wasn't a dry eye in the room and after he read the letter the officers dispersed. Nathan Hale echoed another line from the play, right before he was to be hanged by the British as a spy; "I regret, but that I have only one life to give to my country."

In addition, Addison has a great reputation as an essayist admired by none other than Samuel Johnson and Benjamin Franklin. Tories and Whigs in the English Parliament admired him. Joseph Addison studied in Oxford in Latin and Greek Classics. He served as a member of parliament, and became widely known as an essayist, playwright, poet and statesman.

I recommend this book to anyone who is interested in political philosophy, and history of the founding era of the United States.

I've long been of a mind that the most interesting question in regard to Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is the one they never asked us in class : was it
right to kill him? As always in Shakespeare, it's possible to read the play in several ways, but the final verdict seems to be that the assassins were
not justified, not least because in replacing one tyranny they unleashed a worse. This message--the wisdom of erring on the side of
stability--would have been particularly resonant in Shakespeare's own day, when religious conflicts, foreign invasion, and wars of dynastic
succession were still recent memories and/or active concerns. Brutus, then, though in some ways a tragic hero, is ultimately too passive a character
to really command our loyalty and affection. And if Caesar and Marc Anthony don't fare much better, we are left to conclude that things would
have been better had the established order, even an imperfect order, been allowed to endure.

Spring ahead just a few decades from Shakespeare's time though, and the moral of the story becomes problematic. By the middle of the 17th
Century, we are entered upon the Age of Revolutions in the English-Speaking World, and intellectual justification must be found for the series of
events that would see Protestants and Parliaments and Colonists overthrow and even execute their kings. Little wonder then that Joseph Addison's
terrific, but largely forgotten, play Cato was such a favorite of the 18th Century and particularly of the Founding Fathers.

It too tells the story of a tragic hero's resistance to Caesar, but has none of the ambiguity of Shakespeare. Marcus Porcius Cato--variously styled
Cato of Utica or Cato the Younger--was a Stoic, renowned for his incorruptibility and his intractable devotion to republican principals, the very
principals that Caesar trampled upon when he set himself up as a dictator. Having long opposed Caesar's ambitions, and having alienated many by
his inflexibility, Cato was essentially exiled from Rome, along with Pompey. After Pompey's defeat at Pharsalus, Cato went to Africa where he
was allied with Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Scipio. After Caesar defeated Scipio at Thapsus, Cato killed himself, rather than submit to the
man he abhorred.

Where Shakespeare gave us a Brutus who was too ambivalent about his own actions and too much affected by events for us to take him to heart as
a hero, Joseph Addison rendered his Cato as an achingly noble and uncompromising character, one who may not appeal to modern tastes (of
course, we're all moderate in all things now, and a fanaticism, even for freedom, is distasteful in polite society), but who was seized upon as a
paragon of unyielding republican virtue by men like George Washington. In fact, when we consider the nobility of Washington's own action (for
example during the Newburgh conspiracy) and the emphasis he placed on preserving his own honor, it seems fair to speculate that the republic we
have inherited was handed down to us in some measure by Cato and Addison.

The play is filled with quotable lines, like :

A day, an hour, of virtuous liberty
Is worth a whole eternity in bondage.

In one passage we hear the foreshadowing of Nathan Hale :

What a pity is it
That we can die but once to save our country!

When Cato determines to kill himself he says :

Justice gives way to force: the conquered world
Is Caesar's: Cato has no business in it.

And Lucius, a Senate colleague pronounces upon Cato's death :

From hence, let fierce contending nations know
What dire effects from civil discord flow.
'Tis this that shakes our country with alarms,
And gives up Rome a prey to Roman arms,
Produces fraud, and cruelty, and strife,
And robs the guilty world of Cato's life.

Sure, it's old-fashioned, both in sentiment and language; how many statesmen still believe in honor at all, let alone in dying to preserve their own.
But it's immensely enjoyable and worth knowing if for no other reason than to understand one of the cultural influences that shaped Washington.
If we wish to comprehend how he, unlike so many other men in similar position, was able to resist the temptations of power and to instead remain
the guarantor of the republic, perhaps it is necessary for us to know Cato.

GRADE : A+

This book is simply outstanding, the most perceptive analysis I have read to date concerning the significance of Central Asia to geopolitical games in the 21st Century. It's not cheap. (I had my university library buy a copy so that I could read it.) It's not a fast read, there's a lot of detail on each of the 370 pages. But don't worry, you certainly get what you pay for. It is quite simply the best survey of contemporary Central Asian political dynamics that I have read to date. Müllerson's goes inside the Central Asian mind and soul, as well as outside to the explore the motivations of various state and non-state actors in the drama surrounding what Mackinder called the "pivot point" of the Eurasian landmass.

Unlike some commentators who may indulge in emotionalism, name-calling, or blame-gaming, Mullerson takes a cool, calm and penetrating look at the ways Central Asians view their role in world affairs, and how other countries treat Central Asia. This book is deeply personal, filled with anecdotes and humane observations based on personal experience. No doubt his biography has made Müllerson uniquely qualified as a political analyst. Today, he is Professor and Chair of International Law at King's College, London (where he directs the MA Programme on International Peace and Security). Yet this is a book with heart. Müllerson understands the difficulties former Soviet republics have faced in adapting to change following the collapse of Communism. In 1991-92, he was First Deputy Foreign Minister of Estonia. And before that, Müllerson was Head of the International Law Department of the Institute of State and Law of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR and Adviser to President Gorbachev. No wonder he appears to know the Russian mentality more clearly than any American author I have read. (He may also understand the Chinese, as the first review I found on Google of this book was by Sienho Yee, in The Chinese Journal of International Law). Finally, he understands the concerns of the international community and NGOs. For, Müllerson spent 2004 as UN Regional Adviser for Central Asia, and his published works include International Law: Rights and Politics (Routledge, 1994); Human Rights Diplomacy (Routledge, 1997) and Ordering Anarchy: International Law in International Society (Kluwer Law International, 2000). Quite simply, there is no better guide to explore this landscape with than Müllerson.

Central Asia-A Chessboard and Player in the New Great Game is written in deeply personal tone, sometimes reading like diary entries, sometimes like an academic monograph, sometimes like a legal brief. His goal is to contextualize developments by providing explanatory background. Mullerson tries to describe, rather than prescribe. He relates Central Asian reality to the wider context of world politics. In this way, he tries to present alternative perspectives on such issues as:Difficulties of democratization of Central Asian societies;The role and place of religion, especially Islam, in Central Asia;Threats of religiously based or motivated terrorism;American-Russian, American-Chinese and Chinese-Russian rivalries and cooperation in the region.

Müllerson takes Central Asia as a microcosm of post-Soviet international relations, explicating tendencies that have to date stood in the way of the peaceful and harmonious world predicted by pundits such as Francis Fukuyama or Thomas Friedman. Lord Curzon once famously recommended that one should be neither a Russophile nor a Russophobe, but a realist about Russia. One might say that in this book, Müllerson has taken Curzon's advice to heart and presented a realistic and heartfelt guide to the issues at stake today along the Great Silk Road.

This book is a must-read for anyone who thinks seriously about Central Asia. Ask your library to buy a copy today...

This book gives great overview and knowledge about the political and economics relations in Central Asia and help understand how far/close the religion is to governments decisions. Book introduced history of the area and legacies of several different political structures. I learnt that author approach is eclectic , functional and accuracy is noteworthy. It is a good reading for people who interesting in economic, politic , terrorism , human rights and even philosophy.

It occurs to me that Chamique Holdsclaw might be the Dan Gable of her generation. When Gable was an All-American wrestler at the University of Iowa the only match he ever lost was the NCAA finals as a senior. True, Holdsclaw lost more than one game when she was an All-American basketball player at the University of Tennessee, but after winning NCAA championships her first three years the Lady Vols lost to Duke in the Regional Final her senior year. Add to that the four consecutive state championships and one national title she won at Christ the King High School in NYC and you have a most impressive record before she became a pro.

But if you have to look to one achievement that really stands out, it has to be the fact that Holdsclaw was the first women's collegiate basketball player to win the Sullivan Award as the nation's top amateur athlete; the only other men to do the same were Bill Bradley and Bill Walton, which is pretty good company. Kristi Nelson provides key stats from Holdsclaw's career, but the focus is more on her work ethic and how she grew as a basketball player. Young students will find it instructive that one of the greatest women ever to play basketball had problems to which they can relate. There is also a strong sense of Holdsclaw's family throughout the book. Consequently, you get a real sense of her as a person and not just as a superstar athlete.

This book is illustrated with mostly black & white photographs from throughout her playing career, including a full-color photo insert, all of Holdsclaw as a Washington Mystic in the WNBA. However, you will not find career stats total in the back of this excellent juvenile biography.

this book was one of the best books i have read in a long time. Even though it was only 80 pages it took me through Chamique's days playing at Christ The King High School, through her days playing in the WNBA for the Mystics. I love to watch her play and i recomend this book to everyone!

An outstanding book for any young reader. It sums up "Sir Charles" quirky personality -- gruff but lovable, silly but complex. The message of this book is a good one for youngsters -- dedication and perseverance pays off. It also offers a look at the importance of family in Mr. Barkley's life. Well done, a good read.

I would recommend this child's book and all by Mr. Macnow to anyone who has a young child that is interested in reading about some athletes.

I thought this was a great read! Here is an article I found about the book from the August Gannetteer:

"Indy staffer bares basketball player's 'sole'"

Probably the only thing you know about Chuck Taylor is that his name appears on a shoe. Abe Aamidor wants you to know why.

The Indianapolis Star reporter has penned "Chuck Taylor, All Star"(Indiana University Press), a biography of the man whose name became synonymous with the Converse basketball shoe that bears his signature.

"I learned that Chuck Taylor was the most famous name in sports no one knew anything about," Aamidor says. "There had been no biographies written about him, and some people thought the name was fake, like Betty Crocker or Juan Valdez. I felt there had to be a story to tell."

Aamidor was granted access to Converse's corporate archives and Taylor's stepson gave him permission to visit the Port Charlotte, Fla., home and estate of Taylor's second wife to collect materials. He discovered correspondence between Taylor and legendary University of North Carolina coach Dean Smith, as well as UCLA's John Wooden. Smith wrote the foreword for Aamidor's book and Wooden "was by far my best living source."

The three-year project also took Aamidor to the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in Springfield, Mass., Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio - Taylor was coach of the Wright Field Army Air Force "Air-Tecs" basketball team during World War II - and the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

The book, Aamidor's third, has brought him national attention, with interviews on ESPN2's "Cold Pizza" and syndicated radio shows "Sports Byline USA" and "The Bob and Tom Show." Aamidor has also penned two college-level journalism texts, "Real Feature Writing" and "Real Sports Reporting."

by Ryan Corazza
Indiana Daily Student
Published Wednesday, March 22, 2006


His signature resides on the ankle patch of perhaps the most popular shoe in American history. He's a member of the Basketball Hall of Fame and mingled with such basketball legends as John Wooden, Red Auerbach and Dean Smith. But up until now, nobody knew the true story of Chuck Taylor.

Enter Abe Aamidor.

The former IU adjunct professor and current feature writer at The Indianapolis Star spent three years digging up the facts and filtering out the myth of Chuck Taylor's life to write the first-ever biography on the Columbus, Ind., native.

"I was excited to learn there was never a book written about him," Aamidor said. "It was kind of like finding a gold coin in the street and nobody's around -- you just pick it up."

Because Taylor played in the pre-modern era of basketball that newspapers did not cover much and Converse misled the public about which pro teams Taylor played for, there was a lot for Aamidor to discover.

"Part of the mission was to debunk the mythology," Aamidor said. "There was a lot of junk in the standard brief stuff on Chuck's life, but there was also a lot that wasn't talked about."

Taylor was born in 1901 and spent most of his early years in Azalia, Ind., and Columbus, Ind.

He never played college basketball, which before World War II was the most watched and publicized level of the game. Instead, Taylor became involved with industrial league hoops, more prominent during the 1920s than professional basketball.

Taylor was also a great basketball coach -- a part of his life that is often overlooked, Aamidor said. He coached the Wright Field (Ohio) Army Air Force "Air-Tecs" of the U.S. Army's Special Service Division. The team toured the country playing college and other military teams and is regarded by some as the best service basketball team in history, winning more than 90 percent of its contests during the 1944-45 season.

"All the good players from colleges that were already playing pro ball were drafted (for military service)," Aamidor said. "In those days, you didn't get a deferment from the draft because you were a great ball player."

Instead of being well-known for his coaching abilities, Taylor became most famous for his relationship with Converse and its "All-Star" shoe. Although stories range on just how Chuck became involved with the company, he most likely became a salesman for Converse in 1921 and after proving to be a valuable asset to the company, his name was added to the All-Star patch in 1932.

One way Taylor marketed the shoe was through the "Fundamentals of Basketball" clinics he put on throughout the country. These clinics were put on at high schools and small colleges and on average drew about 300 to 400 guests.

"Before World War II, football and baseball were the big sports," Aamidor said. "So, in the clinics, he explained the game to a lot of people who weren't familiar with it."

Taylor promoted the shoe in a variety of other ways, ranging from traveling with the Converse All-Stars basketball squad to personally contacting and visiting owners of small-town sporting goods stores.

"In a way, his dealings were a bit shady, but he was ultimately honest and likeable," Aamidor said. "Nowadays, every photograph is airbrushed and any statement made is through a spokesman and interviews have to be granted. While Chuck's ways weren't perfect, they were much more honest."

Ryan Corazza
Published Wednesday, March 22, 2006

This is a great book for any Cleveland Indians fan! I just Wish Lindy Powers would do more books on other sports teams as well! Would love to see some hockey teams do a book like this. Really awesome shots of the players and their families.

This is a great addition to any baseball fans library. Just wish there were more teams that would put out a book like this.

I must admit to approaching this book with some apprehension. I thought it would revolve around justifications for bean balls and steroids. Instead it is a thoughtful and very interesting insight into how baseball players view the game and how it should properly be played. The book really does cover it all. It provides a subject by subject overview of what the code more or less is. Granted, we can not treat this like a text book as the code is well not very codified.

The examples given by former ballplayers are intriguing as are all of the historical examples going back to the start of the game. As you might imagine former players do not believe current players have proper respect for the code, but I see that as more generational then anything else. In fact I believe that is something the players themselves note in the book. I also liked the section on cheating and what is OK (stealing signs by observation) and what is not (steroids and using equipment to steal signs). The views of relationships with fans is also very interesting to see.

All in all this is a must read for serious minded baseball fans who would like to broaden their knowledge of the game. My only hope is that the author follows this book up with one about football, basketball and hockey!

Like hockey, baseball too has its own sacred code of honor. While it differs somewhat in scope from its icy brethren, the baseball code, like hockey, is also all about respect and disrespect. Baseball is a game steeped in tradition with rules dating back to the game's inception more than 150 years ago. Yet, while the code has been around since the early days of the game, it still remains a very taboo subject shrouded in a veil of secrecy. In fact, most players are downright uncomfortable talking about it on the record. You see, if they did, then that would be acknowledging that a code actually exists at all. Ross Bernstein, the author of 40 sports books, brings it all to life with the help of some 100 current and former Major Leaguers who he interviewed for the project.
The game of baseball is governed not only by an official rulebook, but also, and maybe more importantly, by an unwritten rulebook which is otherwise known as the code. It's the game within the game. So, just what is the baseball code? It is a system of intimidation, retribution and retaliation between pitchers and hitters; all in an effort to keep the game on an even playing field. Fear, and the fear of excruciating pain, plays a huge role in baseball. It takes a brave man to stand in front of a 95 mph fastball and not be intimidated when it comes flying straight towards his face. That fear, of being hit and injured, is what keeps the players honest. It is the basis for the code.
The wheels of the code are sent into motion when any number of certain situations occur on the field. For instance, when a teammate gets plunked, retaliation of some sort is required -- typically a retaliatory plunking of a similar caliber player on the opposing team. This of course changes if the game is a National League game, where pitchers are required to bat and there are no designated hitters. Pitchers in the NL understand that they are fair game if they so choose to drill a batter. These nuances between the American and National Leagues are all a part of the intricacies of the code.
With regards to the actual act of plunking the batter, there are many messages and meanings to consider. For starters, it is generally understood that when retaliating, it is a no-no to throw above the shoulders. There is a fine line between "chin music," and a rising fast ball to the head which leaves the batter no chance to duck out of the way. One is a nonverbal threat, a warning shot over the bow, so to speak. The other, meanwhile, is extremely serious and can permanently injure or even kill the batter.
Other innuendos which may require retaliation include such things as a hard slide to break up a double play at second base; or a batter celebrating too much after hitting the ball out of the park and then taking his sweet time to trot around the bases. This is considered very disrespectful to the pitcher and will be dealt with the next time the batter comes to the plate. Nobody likes to be showed up in baseball, and that is a lesson that sometimes must be learned the hard way. It is just understood that when you hit a homer, you had better get on your horse and start running. If you want to smile and gaze at the ball with love and affection as it clears the fence, then you better not think about digging in the next time you come to bat... because you will more than likely get nailed.
Exceptions to this rule might include a guy like Sammy Sosa, who jumps like a ballerina as he tosses his bat and then blows his trademark kiss as he is about to round first. Pitchers know that this is just Sammy being Sammy, no disrespect. Other guys like Barry Bonds, who stands there and watches the ball land in the outfield seats from home plate, they are detested. Bonds is also despised because he wears hockey-like elbow pads which allow him to crowd the inside part of the plate with no fear of being plunked. On the other hand, pitchers know that the code frowns upon plunking future Hall of Famers. So it goes both ways.
Further innuendos may include a pitcher trying his damndest to prevent back-to-back-to-back homers in an inning. The third guy up is going to get nailed because no pitcher wants to give up a hat-trick, or he will find himself on the bench pretty quickly. Even jumping on the first pitch with aspirations of hitting if out of the park may warrant a pitcher taking offense. It just depends on the situation. It is also OK to bowl over the catcher when trying to score at home plate, but not if the catcher has left a lane for the runner to slide by safely. It is also a no-no for a middle infielder to pretend to catch a ball to trick the runner or hitter. The same is true for a base runner who tries to trick the infielder by yelling or lunging at him to get him to drop a fly ball. Those things will get you drilled. Baseball players have memories like elephants and will get even, even if that means waiting weeks, months or into the next season.
And here is another thing: If a batter gets nailed with a 95 mph fastball on the fleshy part of his thigh, he had better not act like a baby and start rubbing it. No way. He should suck it up and be a man by simply "walking it off" on his way to first base. Period. A batter can never let a pitcher know that he hurt him with a pitch, that would be a psychological advantage and a clear sign of weakness. The code forbids it unless he is knocked unconscious or bleeding bad enough to warrant some medical attention.
Another innuendo which may require retaliation occurs when either the batter or a base-runner sneaks a peek at the catcher's signs to the pitcher. If a batter is caught doing so, he will be nailed. If the base-runner is caught doing so, when he is on second base and has a clear view of the catcher's hand signals, and then relays what the upcoming pitch or pitch location is to the batter, then he too will be dealt with accordingly. In addition, stealing the third base coach's hand signal signs for communicating orders such as base-stealing, bunting or to hit-and-run, are also part of the code, and may warrant retribution. Sign stealing plays a big part of the code. Doing it with your eyes to figure out the poker-tells is kosher; using electronics or technology is outright cheating. Both have been a part of the game for more than a 100 years.
Plunkings are just a part of the game and players understand this. The pitchers do too, which is why it is oftentimes tough for them to have to plunk an innocent bystander who may even be a personal friend outside of the white lines. The batters know the situations and usually know when it is coming, and they accept it. They also know the history of bad blood between certain players or between certain teams. Maybe there were words spoken after a game; or in the media; or even a blow-out game that was deemed as disrespectful -- all or any of those things may warrant a plunking. Or, perhaps a flame-thrower such as Pedro Martinez is simply carrying a grudge. Needless to say, there are many reasons as to why retaliation strikes may occur.
Pitchers are so accurate, to within millimeters, that they can place the ball with pinpoint precision exactly where they want it. If a player gets hit in a certain spot, and the situation is ripe for payback, then there is no doubt as to whether or not a bean ball is just that, versus a mis-thrown wild pitch. That's the ballplayer's intuition, or sixth sense, taking over.
The unwritten rules of baseball are not just about payback and retribution. In fact, there are many, many more fascinating aspects and innuendos to it. Situations such as what a hitter should do on a 3-0 count in a blowout game are a part of the code too. If he is swinging for the fences in that situation, then the opposing team will have reason for retaliation on grounds of disrespect by both the hitter as well as the manager who gave him the green light in that situation. Run up the score on a team and payback will be certain, that much is for sure.
It is also understood that you don't try to steal a base or bunt with a five or six-run lead in the last three innings of a game either -- that is considered rubbing it in and may warrant retaliation as well. Furthermore, a hitter shouldn't try to embarrass the pitcher off whom he just homered, and conversely, the pitcher shouldn't try to mock the hitter that he just struck out. The code goes both ways.
Other idiosyncrasies which may warrant a pitcher taking issue may include something as nonchalant as a batter trying to gauge the rhythm and speed of a pitcher while he is in the on-deck circle. This is deemed as unfair and disrespectful to the pitcher and he may take offense as soon as the batter steps into the batter's box. There are just certain things that you don't do on the ball field, and that is one of them. These unwritten rules of the code oftentimes are learned the hard way by trial and error and baptism by fire. It usually only takes one 95 mph fastball to the ribs to figure it out.
Sometimes the pitcher will just toss what's called a brush-back pitch, to get the batter to back off the plate a little bit. Nowadays it's called "throwing inside." Pitchers want the batter to be a little bit scared and to back off a bit, so that they can have the outside of the plate to their advantage with the umpire. Sometimes, however, the batter will not budge. That may warrant a plunking, depending on the situation. Other times, the batter may take offense, claiming that real estate next to the plate to be his, and his alone. When this happens, bench clearing brawls are oftentimes the end result of two alpha males barking loudly and holding their ground. When emotions take over, it's on, and the fans love it.
When a bench-clearer ensues, usually the batter will charge the mound. The catcher will try to tackle him from behind, but it all happens very quickly. Punches are thrown and serious injuries can occur in the ensuing melee. Pitchers have to stand their ground, but don't want to risk breaking a knuckle on their throwing hand by doing something foolish. It is a dangerous few seconds to be sure.
Players wear long metal spikes and foreign objects such as bats, gloves and catcher's masks oftentimes end up as part of the fray. Opposing players from both sides sprint in from their positions on the field and are joined by the reserves from both dug-outs, as well as the players from the outfield bullpens. Everybody pairs up and tries to make sure there are no unfair two-on-one scenarios. The umpires try to keep order, but things can get ugly in a hurry. The code says that if a guy charges the mound, then the rest of the team had better follow... or else. There is no room for cowards on a baseball team, so players know that they better "show up," or else they may find themselves sent down to the minors, or worse yet, traded or even released.
Other rules of charging the mound include the batter never bringing the bat with him. Back in the old days of baseball there are many a story about batters getting revenge on pitchers who nailed them with their 44 oz. hunks of lumber. Stories of players getting maimed are legendary, and are an ugly sidebar to the history of the game.
Most big league managers want their players to police the game themselves, rather than the umpires. Legendary manager Tony La Russa, of the St. Louis Cardinals, acknowledged in his book that he has ordered pitchers to retaliate and drill guys in certain situations. Probably every manager has done so, but few admit it publicly. A manager can't just yell out to his pitcher from the dug-out to plunk a batter, so he must have other creative ways of communicating to him about what he wants done. Those nonverbal innuendos are all part of the code. It might be a look or it might be a sign called in to the third base coach which is then relayed to the catcher. If justice needs to be served, then the pitcher must react and do as he is instructed -- or he too will be breaking the code.
The code has changed in recent years though, for better and for worse. Major League Baseball has gone through more than its fair share of heartache and controversy as of late and it has been forced to tighten its belt so to speak. The commissioner's office put a greater onus on umpires to reduce the number of benches-clearing brawls these days, and as a result a warning system was put into place back in 2001. Now, when an ump has reason to believe that a batter is being thrown at, he warns both teams instantly that the next hit batter, intentional or not, will result in the pitcher and manager both getting ejected from the game. A fine and suspension may ensue as well. This has changed the landscape of the code, forcing the players to change and evolve their tactics to conform to the new rules.
The code also deals with other random subtle issues on and off the field as well. Issues such as "what happens in the locker-room, stays in the locker-room..." are a big part of the player's code of honor. "Perks" that veteran ballplayers receive, such as the prime locker location in the clubhouse, may also be a part of the code. Other intricacies include: the media not talking to the starting pitcher until after he is done pitching. In fact, some managers don't even want their own players talking to the starting pitcher before or during a game, as to not mess with his mental preparation or perhaps for superstitious reasons. And a player knows never, ever to remind a pitcher at any point during a game that he has a no-hitter going. That can jinx it all in a nanosecond. Consider things like this to be "subchapters of the code."
Lastly, there is an entire section of the code that deals with the relationships between the players and managers, and the umpires. Just exactly what can be said and not said to an ump without getting tossed is an art form all to itself. It is just understood that players do not talk about the ump's mother, or he will be given a one-way pass to the club house. Knowing what to say, how to say it and when to say it are all a part of the code, and it can get pretty humorous for sure. Stories here are plentiful. Beyond that, it is generally understood that if a batter disrespects an ump or tries to show him up, then he will not be getting any special favoritism, or "good calls" in the future. Cross the line with an ump and he will make you pay one way or another. Some claim that there is a code within the code when dealing with the umpires.
The bottom line with baseball's unwritten rules is that it all comes down to one word: respect: respect of the game, respect of the past history of the game, and a respect of the opposition. The code, in a nutshell, is about players sacrificing individual glory for the good of the team. Professional baseball players make millions of dollars on the field, and for many, millions more off of it through endorsement deals. Players want to be individuals and stand out in the crowd. They have big egos and big personalities, which put a big "I" in team. But, they have to know that if they choose to showboat and act disrespectful towards an opposing pitcher or opposing team, then there is a price to pay for that type of selfish behavior. The code makes sure of that. That is why the game polices itself at this level.
The book will delve into many taboo subjects surrounding the code, including bench clearing brawls, the abolishment of the designated hitter, and even the issue of drugs and steroids in the "juiced ball era." Yes, the code is about respect, but it is also about how the game polices itself; accountability; and even about how players build team camaraderie amongst one another through intimidation and retaliation. It is amazing what standing up for a teammate can do for team morale. Boys will always be boys, and when a teammate gets nailed, intimidated or disrespected, then the wheels of retaliation are set into motion. It could be bad blood between two players or teams, or a heat of the moment incident -- either way, baseball players will always find a way to even the score. Welcome to the baseball code. Play ball!