I gave this some thought on my way into Seattle today, and here’s what I think happens from here:
1) MLB looks into it, talks to various players (or waits a day)
2) MLB announces that after a thorough investigation, there’s insufficient evidence to take action
Now, unannounced, we may have MLB call the Angels up and say “Come onnnnn” and the Angels say “What?” and MLB says “Come onnnnnnnn” and the Angels say “Fine” and K-Rod stops showing up with strange stuff under his hat brim.
The least likely is that MLB watches the footage from the opening game, sees how blatantly he worked the thumb in there, sees the movement, and takes any kind of action.
And here’s why: even though Rule 8.02 (a)(4) says you can’t put any substance on a ball, no matter and get wacky movement is not a criteria. But 8.02 (e) states
The umpire shall be sole judge on whether any portion of this rule has been violated.
Plus, as I discuss in the book (and Orel just echoed on ESPN) generally speaking, using something to get a better grip on the ball is winked at. However, Orel’s argument – that it’s okay to use something in order to get the same kind of grip as you would in normal conditions – doesn’t seem to apply here, since Opening Day it was in the mid-60s in Anaheim when the game started. This wasn’t a night game in Detroit in late fall.
But I digress. There’s a huge barrier to taking action on the doctoring-the-ball part of this, for those reasons.
Which brings us to those who argue that it’s rosin and therefore no foul. There’s actually a rule on this:
(b)Have on his person, or in his possession, any foreign substance. For infraction of this section (b) the penalty shall be immediate ejection from the game. In addition, the pitcher shall be suspended automatically. In National Association Leagues, the automatic suspension shall be for 10 games.
Rosin is a foreign substance, same as pine tar. Now, players have pine tar on their helmets and uniforms, and that goes unenforced. But this is where they might take action: it’s clear that there was something on his cap, whether they find evidence that it was applied to the ball at any point. But it seems like it’s a lot more likely that the most dramatic action they’d take is a warning.
Part of this is political: if the league takes action on something that’s perceived as coming from the internet, MLB might see it as opening the floodgates for every fan to start making rules complaints, and there’s no way they want that.
