Retaliation in Baseball

An odd situation occurred recently in the Chicago White Sox clubhouse. Chicago's star catcher A.J. Pierzynski was hit twice in a game against Texas, so when the Rangers' Hank Blalock came to bat in the 7th, Chicago head coach Ozzie Guillen brought a pitcher in to retaliate and bean Blalock.

Rookie Sean Tracey was Guillen's pick for the job. Tracey threw two pitches inside and then got Blalock to ground out. Usually, players and managers would be content with an out, especially against a hitter the caliber of Blalock, right? Wrong. Guillen was furious and lost it in the dugout.

What's happened since then? Tracey is being demoted to Triple-A. Because of the incident? That's hard to say, but some are suggesting that it is due to this incident.

Some like to say that the beanball retaliation is just a part of the game. But, why? What's the big deal? Why give the opposing team a free runner on base? Especially if the game is close? That never made sense to me. If it's 5-4, in the 7th or 8th inning, retaliation is more important to some than winning the game. With the bases empty, the worst that can happen is a solo shot for a 5-5 tie. With the retaliating beanball, that puts the tying runner on base and the go-ahead (potential winning) run at the plate. With one swing of the bat, the team that was just up 5-4 could be trailing 6-5, just because they had to retaliate. I do not see the point, never have and probably never will. Retaliation gets players hurt, tempers flaring, players ejected, coaches ejected, dugouts brawling, fines going all around, players and coaches unfocused, and games lost. I'm sorry, but to make all those potential sacrifices for getting back at a team for beaning one of your players is simply not worth it.

Links:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2485365