Knock yourselves out... discuss!
Thanks Steve.I wasn't sure.I also heard some mention of it,but never a yes or no until now.Steve615 said:26 live games are on tap throughout the regular season on MLB Network.
More info and a general overview of the channel at the following link.
http://mlb.mlb.com/network/about/
You like one Giants announcer and dislike another??? As a Dodger fan, I hate the Giants and I do not really care for Krukow and Kuiper, but I do have to admit that they are pretty funny at times.mganga said:btw, thumbs down on costas, berman, joe buck, krukow, and thumbs up to miller, mccarver, morgan
If you notice, they only do this on their classic footage. It is supposed to look like a projection screen over a brick wall, with the film being shot on the projection screen.DMG said:While it is creative, I don't care for the brick pillar bars. There are several problems.
One problem is that the side bars each have the station logo so there are three (yes three) logos on the screen. One is bad enough, three is ridiculous.
A second problem is that not having solid black or grey bars makes image retention more likely. While it would be great if there were only true 16x9 content for all broadcasts, the nature of the archival footage means there will be lots more of 4x3 content. I'm excited about the content, just not image retention from watching too much MLB Network programming.
My plasma has the ability to detect sidebands and automatically stretch content to remove the sidebars. But this mode does not work with the MLB Network sidebands because they aren't a solid black or grey color.
Please don't stretch content for broadcast but please do use standard sidebars since there is technology available to deal with that automatically.
While the brick sidebars seem like a creative idea, the turn out to have many downsides. I hope this gets changed to standard sidebars.
I realize there are those that like Costas and his knowledge of baseball is up there with just about anyone. I just think he comes across as a little arrogant. Even on Sunday Night Football, he seems to be the know it all. Although he is a million times better than Olberman.DMG said:I agree completely. I've always thought he was a great guy talking about sports, especially baseball.
I got even more impressed with him when he had his interview program "Later". He was probably the most well prepared interviewer I'd ever seen and he actually let his guest answer the questions. He had a wide range of guests, not just sports figures, including Paul McCartney for 3 consecutive nights. He was so good that my wife would watch him interview everyone, including sports figures, and she couldn't care less about sports.
I'm not trying to convince anyone that they should like him if they don't. I just want others to know that there are many people who think he's terrific.
+1commodore_dude said:I'm getting the edges of the ticker cut off, I just see "lb.com" in the bottom left corner. Is this just me? I don't have any overscan issues on other channels people commonly complain about like ESPN News...
I will take that over the distorted Stretch-O-Vision they use on History or A&E. As soon as I see Stretch-O-Vision, on any channel, it is time to find another one, without distorted video.DMG said:One problem is that the side bars each have the station logo so there are three (yes three) logos on the screen. One is bad enough, three is ridiculous.
If it hits the rubber & is untouched before going out of bounds the call is FOUL BALL. The first & third base bags are the on the field landmark.mystic7 said:A batter hits a line drive that strikes the pitching rubber on the fly and lands in foul territory. What's your call?
Myself, I don't care for Morganat all.mganga said:btw, thumbs down on costas, berman, joe buck, krukow, and thumbs up to miller, mccarver, morgan
I agree that their 4x3 content with the brick wall sidebands is better than Stretch-O-Vision. I just wish they'd do something more reasonable than put multiple logos on the screen.loudo said:I will take that over the distorted Stretch-O-Vision they use on History or A&E. As soon as I see Stretch-O-Vision, on any channel, it is time to find another one, without distorted video.
All that extra jibberish doesn't matter. If it settles on foul ground between home and first, before touched in fair territory, it's foul.Lord Vader said:Oh? Don't be so sure of yourself.
PLAY: High pop fly in the infield that comes down roughly at the edge of the infield grass near where the infield dirt begins and in front of the second baseman's position. The ball falls right in front of the second baseman, hits the grass, then untouched spins back toward the first base line, rolling across the line near where the 45-foot lane begins. The first baseman picks it up in foul territory. Is it fair or foul?
Actually, that "gibberish" is crucial here to determine whether the ball is, in fact, fair or foul. (OBR here, btw.)pigskins said:All that extra jibberish doesn't matter. If it settles on foul ground between home and first, before touched in fair territory, it's foul.
I must not be picturing your scenario correctly. It seems to me if it lands untouched anywhere on the infield and rolls into foul territory before passing first or third, it's foul. Without looking at a picture of a baseball diamond, if what you say is true then the edge of the infield dirt must be in line with first base so if it hits anywhere on the infield dirt, it has passed the bag, right?Lord Vader said:Actually, that "gibberish" is crucial here to determine whether the ball is, in fact, fair or foul. (OBR here, btw.)
The correct answer here is that this is a FAIR ball.
yea i'm afraid i'm going to have to change my programing to an english package as well. not to mention D* is taking ESPN 2 away from me later this monthjluzbet69 said:WTF I had the spanish ultra max and I was not getting this channel I had to change to an english package to get it, now DTV if just getting 72.99 ++ from me instead of $104.99 ++... Unreal... now if I want the spanish programming again it will be $19.99 more, jeezzzz...
It never touched the dirt, and the edge of the infield grass is not beyond first base here.mystic7 said:I must not be picturing your scenario correctly. It seems to me if it lands untouched anywhere on the infield and rolls into foul territory before passing first or third, it's foul. Without looking at a picture of a baseball diamond, if what you say is true then the edge of the infield dirt must be in line with first base so if it hits anywhere on the infield dirt, it has passed the bag, right?
EDIT: OK, having checked a diamond diagram I can see that if the ball touches the infield dirt, it has gone past the bag.
No, my way of describing it is because it's difficult to get an accurate picture of where the ball fell without my describing it as such.pigskins said:Exactly my point - jibberish (or gibberish even).
The definition of a foul ball never changes. And I believe what Pepster said about using first and third bases as landmarks stands!
Your way of describing it might win a bar bet, or a pop in the nose.
I was noticing the same thing.Changed the setting on my TV to "Native"and it comes in OK now.commodore_dude said:I'm getting the edges of the ticker cut off, I just see "lb.com" in the bottom left corner. Is this just me? I don't have any overscan issues on other channels people commonly complain about like ESPN News...
I have it on DVD - almost the next best thing.Lord Vader said:On an unrelated note, I see that Ken Burns's highly-acclaimed Baseball will show on Tuesday evenings on the network! I have this series on VHS--gasp!--and would love this in HD!
I am assuming (not always a good thing to do) that infield would be an area defined by the four bases and a straight line drawn between them. If the ball lands in this area and spins foul it should be called foul. If the ball lands beyond this area and spins back into the infield before going foul it is still fair.Lord Vader said:Oh? Don't be so sure of yourself.
PLAY: High pop fly in the infield that comes down roughly at the edge of the infield grass near where the infield dirt begins and in front of the second baseman's position. The ball falls right in front of the second baseman, hits the grass, then untouched spins back toward the first base line, rolling across the line near where the 45-foot lane begins. The first baseman picks it up in foul territory. Is it fair or foul?
From rule 2.00:raoul5788 said:I MAY :eek2: be wrong here LV, but even if a fly ball lands in the outfield untouched, spins backwards and ends up crossing the foul line between first or third and home, I am calling it a foul ball.
Anything which lands in the outfield would be considered beyond first or third base. The question is what line is used to determine 'beyond' first or third. In the rule it specifies that a ball touching any of the bases, including second, is considered fair no matter where it goes from there. That is why I made the assumption that a ball falling just short of second and spinning back untouched into foul territory would be considered foul. LV mentions a diagonal between 1st and 3rd but that would make the mention of a ball touching 2nd base in the rule unnecessary.A FAIR BALL is a batted ball that settles on fair ground between home and first base, or between home and third base, or that is on or over fair territory when bounding to the outfield past first or third base, or that touches first, second or third base, or that first falls on fair territory on or beyond first base or third base, or that, while on or over fair territory touches the person of an umpire or player, or that, while over fair territory, passes out of the playing field in flight.