So then why keep police records or personnel files? If someone is late to work 25 times over a couple of months then each one should be reviewed seperately? Right, that's exactly how it works in the real world.

 

That's comparing apples to Piano's:lol:

Dude, the ump turned his hat bill into Bradley's and thats Bradley's fault? Get real, that'd be like saying because of his past, if the ump chest bumps Bradley, then Bradley would be the at fault party.

 

Cub's fans have more excuses than an excuse book! Are you sure the bill wasn't longer than you're average hat bill? Or that the umpire's didn't mess with Milton's contacts secretly before the game to ruin his depth perception and cause him to bump him?

I don't see anyone crying, if the Reds were in contention and the rolls reversed I'm sure you'd be saying, "yea Votto deserves 2 games":lol:

If he bumped an umpire then yeah he deserves as much as the next guy.

Cub's fans have more excuses than an excuse book! Are you sure the bill wasn't longer than you're average hat bill? Or that the umpire's didn't mess with Milton's contacts secretly before the game to ruin his depth perception and cause him to bump him?

 

Well you're clearly grasping now,thanks:thumb:

I'm not mad at all, but so many people are just blind haters they can't look at it objectively. I said I have no problem with the ejection, even though I've seen other "meat heads" go far more further blatantly bumping chest or throwing a much larger fit and not get tossed. The Ump turns his head and bumped bills of hats and now Bradley is the monster again when he didn't initiate the contact.

 

More of seeing them throw much larger fits having to be held back by teammates or coaches and not getting tossed, and you know I'm right about that. Bradley's reaction was no where near over board and you know it.

 

That wasn't how I meant, it, meant it like I've seen blatant chest bumps, then I was trying to make the point that I've seen bigger blow ups with no ejection, "period".

 

 

No, it was clear what you meant and now that you can't give an example you're trying to back off it some. You chest bump an umpire you're gone, end of story. The ejection and suspension were well earned. I wouldn't try and defend Bradley is he were playing for the Sox. Beckett got suspended for a play he didn't even get ejected for and I don't have a problem with that--he knew what he was doing and deserved it. I may root for some players I don't particularly like is one of my teams sign them but that doesn't mean I'll defend them when they screw up. I've never been able to stand JD Drew either and while I hope he does great for the Sox you'll never see me defend him.

Grasping or proving my point that no matter what you will have some nonsense comment?

[/u][/b]

If he bumped an umpire then yeah he deserves as much as the next guy.

 

Yea if Bradley bumped, him then sure, but Bradley didn't bump him. The ump turned his head and there bills accidently touched. Heck if Bradley shot the guy, then he'd deserve to go to prison, but he didn't shoot him, nor did he "bump" him. Man, discuss what happened, not hypotheticals if you want to keep this going:idunno:

Grasping or proving my point that no matter what you will have some nonsense comment?

 

I'm pretty sure you haven't proved anything other than you don't like Bradley or the Cubs by basically just stating hypotheticals:lol:

Um, who brounght up the if Votto blah blah blah?

 

 

O yeah that was you! Talk about hypotheticals!

That's comparing apples to Piano's:lol:

 

 

How do you figure? Being late to work is breaking a rule. Arguing with and bumping an umpire is breaking a rule. Baseball is Bradley's job. He has a history of blowing up on umpires--they aren't going to give him any leeway. Its the same thing as any job, if you do things agains the rules over and over you invite more scrutiny and increasing penalties.

No, it was clear what you meant and now that you can't give an example you're trying to back off it some. You chest bump an umpire you're gone, end of story. The ejection and suspension were well earned. I wouldn't try and defend Bradley is he were playing for the Sox. Beckett got suspended for a play he didn't even get ejected for and I don't have a problem with that--he knew what he was doing and deserved it. I may root for some players I don't particularly like is one of my teams sign them but that doesn't mean I'll defend them when they screw up. I've never been able to stand JD Drew either and while I hope he does great for the Sox you'll never see me defend him.

 

I'm not trying to back off anything, I know what I meant to say, and I think you know that I'm more than just some casual baseball fan. And I've said over and over, I have no problem with the ejection, but the suspension is garbage. The ump turned his head and bills hit, IF there was in any contact at all, and I firmly believe the appeal will over turn it. If the Cubs or Bradley didn't feel they had a strong case they'd go ahead and let him serve the suspension since he's hurt any way, but its a matter principal, period.

Um, who brounght up the if Votto blah blah blah?

 

 

O yeah that was you! Talk about hypotheticals!

I was just showing that the only reason you are even in this thread is because you are a Reds fan/Cubs hater, you've yet to contribute to this thread other than blind hatred. At least Avg Joe has backing and substance to his post, yours are nothing but talking about a bump that didn't even happen.:sssh:

Have you never read any of the quotes from former managers or teammates regarding Bradley?

 

Unlike Milton, most people in baseball have enough tact and class not to trash a player in the media. The fact that, in spite of having a ton of ability, Milton Bradley has been with 7 teams in his 10 year career tells me all I need to know about his character. But hey, I'm glad he's the Cubbies problem instead of the Red Sox. Enjoy the Milton Bradley era in Chicago.

How do you figure? Being late to work is breaking a rule. Arguing with and bumping an umpire is breaking a rule. Baseball is Bradley's job. He has a history of blowing up on umpires--they aren't going to give him any leeway. Its the same thing as any job, if you do things agains the rules over and over you invite more scrutiny and increasing penalties.

 

I'd agree, but did Bradley bump the ump?

Was there cantact? Whether you want to call it a bump or not was there contact?