Off-Topic Forum

What do you think? 

https://amp.freep.com/amp/1157970001

Agreed a bit of a fence sitter question.  Overall, I don't think I have any issue with the fan holding on to it.  

I can see MLB standpoint that they don't want to just start verifying/authenticating every ball into the stands as a "historic" ball - that sounds like a never ending can of worms.  However, what happens if 3 weeks from now, the fan decides to turn it over or sell it back or....  I don't know enough about game baseball markings or identifiers, can they still authentic it is the same ball at that point?

Interesting quandry.

Once the fan retrieved the ball, it was his to keep or do with it as he wished.  For security or anyone else to try to pressure him into giving up the ball and then saying they won't authenticate it is wrong.  The fan could have done the authentication on his own with pictures as the ball is surely scuffed up.

If I were the fan, it would take a lot for anyone to pry the ball out of my possession.

Kinda crappy MLB wouldn't authenticate it.  At the least they should have done that and made a deal with him IF he decided to sell it at some point, THEY or Pujols would get first shot at buying it.

What I'm a bit confused about though is why he was just getting to the game.  I've only been to a couple games, and I like to see as much as possible getting there when gates open.  I understand not everybody does, or traffic is an issue and you miss the start of the game, but it was already 5-0 when Pujols hit the homer and the top of the third.  The crowd didn't look that heavy so I'm not sure why he was just getting to his seat.  Maybe I'm overthinking it.  As he says, he just wanted a beer and to watch the game.  Then again, if that's all he wanted, I'm sure he could have scored tickets to the rest of the year and probably some beer as well for the ball.

I think Pujols came out of this looking great, I'm sure he wanted the ball, but he said all the right things.  I've always liked him, I might have been torn myself if I got the ball, but I think I would have gave it to him.

I'm surprised MLB hasn't made a rule that any ball hit into the stands is still property of MLB and they have the right to confiscate it.  It would be stupid to do, but then again, so is toying with the idea of pitching clocks and a lot of the other changes they've made in recent years.

What I take from this is that Pujols as an A1 top shelf classy guy. Now I need more of his cards.

Honestly, if that was me who got the ball, as long as I got to hand it to Albert (or whoever's milestone it was) personally, I'd hand it over them. That would be my only condition. *I* hand it to him. After that, whatever the team(s) wanted to give me, I'd certainly take and enjoy. At the end of the day, that ball would mean a lot more to Pujols than it would to me. No need to keep it.

I'll go ahead and say it...that guy is a d*#@!?bag!!  He doesn't give two s#*!s about the game.  Like ravenfaith77 said, Pujols is a great ballplayer and a class act, I would have most definitely given the ball to him.  Especially since the article said there were generous offers from both the Tigers and the Angels.  To me, he is just as bad as a guy who takes a ball from a little kid.

I was watching the game when it all went down. It was really strange, the local fox sports channel kept going back to showing the kid and you could see him surrounded by mlb and Tiger staff. They interviewed him and then the local sports radio network interviewed him twice and ultimately hung up on him for speaking too agressively toward the host, calling MLB workers douchebags, and accusing everyone of losing "the romanticism of baseball" (insert eye roll). Here is my opinion on what really happened:

The guy that got the ball lives with a chip on his shoulder. The mlb authenticator instantly asked for the ball and did not hug and kiss the millenial for a job well done (picking up a ball) and he thought he should be congratulated and honored. He felt offended. He then felt power in holding the ball and let the baseball people make offers to him that he then could deny. Things he said:

He is a law student with a baby on the way. "I was offered both $5000 and $10,000 on the way out of the park." If MLB would have made the "soft sell" first and not told him he had to get the ball instantly authenticated or they would not authenticate it at all he would have but they weren't nice enough about it. I tried to do the right thing. I don't care about the ball, its the principle of how they treated me. 

Utlimately, it is an rbi ball, right? I don't see why it was treated like a record breaking home run ball from the Barry Bonds era. A lot of miscommunication led to a lot of unhappy people. 

I’m straddling that fence too since I wasn’t there. I’m mostly on team mlb’s side for some reason. As a fan I’d give up the ball for whatever they offered most likely unless they were being dbags. And if they said they wouldn’t authenticate it if he didn’t hand it over right there that’s wrong also. A lot of nonsense over an RBI ball in my opinion.

I dont see why it needs authenticated.  If the dude is keeping it, who cares?  Not sure why he thinks he has the right to them turning the ball into a collector's item.  He got what he paid for with his ticket, which was a baseball game.