What we’re arguing is semantics. At the end of the day, cheating is cheating. That’s what I meant when I said “The intended purpose is the same in both instances — give the batter an advantage. The only difference lies in the means by which you accomplish it.” Stael signs, peek in the glove, relay signals using telegraph, check video and walkie it in — essentially all the same shit we’re talking here.

Just because one way of cheating is more socially accepted in some baseball circles than another doesn’t necessarily make it different or a better brand of cheating. It’s still cheating. Kinda like how manslaughter is a degree of murder with a lighter penalty, but still it’s fucking murder, right?

And cheating has always been a MAJOR part of baseball, people just don’t readily accept that as fact. Think of the ways players have accomplished it in the last 100 years: corked bats, doctored balls, gambling, stolen signs, PEDs, the list goes on. You can’t really pick and choose which one is okay and which one isn’t despite our best efforts. Cheating is cheating, it’s that cut and dry.

But if the clip is posted on a blog as evidence of cheating in baseball and to stir a debate over the “rightness” or “wrongness” of it, then I think that is a non-story, and I think, just in this one case, an analyst w/ playing experience (on any level) would be able to make that distinction.

I did not feel either Deadspin nor RAB gave a clear indication that Mauer’s sign stealing is beyond reproach, but that doesn’t mean they intended to debate the morality of it. I assumed they did and have been shown (repeatedly) where I was mistaken.

It’s quite easy to see how a too-quick glance at the gamelog could lead to that mistake. If you can’t see that, well, then you’ve lost all credibility and my respect.