Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Chris House, the Red Sox "fan" who apparently was trying to remove a schmear of mustard from Gary Sheffield's face when Sheffield went into the corner for a ball Friday night, seems to have trouble dealing with anger in general.
According to this article in MIT's "The Tech", House was an assistant coach with the MIT football team, the Beavers, and had some trouble with a linesman in a 2001 game:
MIT's hopes did not die without some controversy, however, as Curry [College] took a delay of game penalty when they had possession with about 3 and a half minutes left. The game's officials allowed the clock to run even after the penalty had been called. Assistant coach Chris House ran on the field, and grabbed the linesman to alert him. Startled, he assessed a 15-yard penalty against MIT (thereby granting Curry a first down). As the linesman walked away, House called him a "fat boy" and another 15-yard penalty was assessed.
House "ran on the field", "grabbed the linesman", and "called him a 'fat boy'" after the call did not go his way. It's interesting that after each outburst, his side was assessed further penalties. The Red Sox are, to their credit, looking into stripping House of his season tickets. It seems like it won't do much to teach House a lesson, but at least opposing right fielders won't have to worry about his presence when they go into the corner to retrieve a ball.
I wonder if the guy's fiancé, who was sitting next to him at the game, is still defending him.
[Thanks to Alex for the link.]
You're absolutely right. Judging by you, he's just an average Red Sox fan.
INTERFERENCE Defintion
(d) Spectator interference occurs when a spectator reaches out of the stands, or goes on the playing field, and touches a live ball. On any interference the ball is dead.
Rule 3.16
When there is spectator interference with any thrown or batted ball, the ball shall be dead at the moment of interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference. APPROVED RULING: If spectator interference clearly prevents a fielder from catching a fly ball, the umpire shall declare the batter out. There is a difference between a ball which has been thrown or batted into the stands, touching a spectator thereby being out of play even though it rebounds onto the field and a spectator going onto the field or reaching over, under or through a barrier and touching a ball in play or touching or otherwise interfering with a player. In the latter case it is clearly intentional and shall be dealt with as intentional interference as in Rule 3.15. Batter and runners shall be placed where in the umpire's judgment they would have been had the interference not occurred. No interference shall be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk. However, should a spectator reach out on the playing field side of such fence, railing or rope, and plainly prevent the fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectator's interference. Example: Runner on third base, one out and a batter hits a fly ball deep to the outfield (fair or foul). Spectator clearly interferes with the outfielder attempting to catch the fly ball. Umpire calls the batter out for spectator interference. Ball is dead at the time of the call. Umpire decides that because of the distance the ball was hit, the runner on third base would have scored after the catch if the fielder had caught the ball which was interfered with, therefore, the runner is permitted to score. This might not be the case if such fly ball was interfered with a short distance from home plate.
YOU should get YOUR facts straight before you admonish people.
House's fiance WAS at the game, and was escorted out of Fenway.
If you're interested, you can read this article from the Boston Herald, in which she contradicts herself, first saying that ``He just said he was going for the ball,'' Ingerbritson said in defense of House."
Later in the article, she goes on to say that ``He's been a season ticket-holder for a lot of years and he's always careful not to interfere with the ball,'' she said.
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/sportsNews/view.bg?articleid=95995
House is an idiot, and not a typical Red Sox fan.
By the way, the Sox haven't lost since the incident.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2040064
Also, by " his fiancé, who was sitting next to him at the game", I meant the football game in 2001. Do you have an article that disproves this?
You need to check your facts in order to have a credible site. As for my thought process, why are you posting a story and incorrect facts alleging that a 15 yard penalty in a football game four years ago justifies some anger problem?
Go away.
When you write and post nonsense, you deserve to be pestered. Take this incorrect and unintelligent story off the site, and I'll go away.
Come on. The spectator is an American hero. Get your facts straight. In fact, this may just be a setup by Gary Sheffield to get back and make Boston fans look back, since they already have a great reputation.
Sure, that's why Chris House has catapulted the Red Sox into this great win streak. Wait, I'm still trying to be credible.
You missed the point. Which sounds dumber?
1. There is a connection between a 15 yard penalty received while coaching football 2001 and a confrontation with Sheffield (the faker) four years later. According to Mike Caminati, this means the individual has an anger problem.
0r,
2. There is a connection between a fan incident and a Red Sox mini win streak.
Answer:
They are identical in stupidity, both ridiculously attempt to link two totally unrelated events.
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.