06-17-2019, 12:32 AM
SAN DIEGO -- Tony Gwynns sweet swing was matched only by his incandescent smile. The Hall of Famer was saluted at Petco Park on Thursday night in a ceremony that would have made "Mr. Padre" light up. Though, that wasnt something Gwynn had trouble doing. "It was so engaging," former teammate Steve Garvey said of Gwynns grin. "There are a few guys in sports that have it. You always think of Magic (Johnson), and Tony was baseballs Magic as far as that smile was concerned." Gwynn, a Hall of Famer who spent his entire 20-year career with the Padres, died on June 16 from oral cancer, a disease he attributed to years of chewing tobacco. He was 54. The 15-time All Star averaged .338 over a career in which he had 3,141 hits and won eight NL batting titles. A two-sport star at San Diego State before getting selected by the Padres in the third round of the 1981 draft, he was beloved for his achievements on the field and his humility on and off it. Gwynn never hid his affection for San Diego, embracing his "Mr. Padre" nickname and declining to leave San Diego as a free agent on numerous occasions. After retiring from the Padres following the 2001 season, Gwynn became SDSUs baseball coach. Hall of Famer Reggie Jackson and ex-Padre Trevor Hoffman were among the speakers who addressed the crowd of about 20,000 from a stage erected in right field, just in front of the No. 19 carved into the outfield grass. A podium was placed between three No. 19 Gwynn jerseys, two from the Padres World Series appearances in 1984 and 1998 and one from San Diego State. The left-field scoreboard showed a collage of pictures that ranged from Gwynn tipping his hat to the crowd and to him clutching his Hall of Fame plaque. And, of course, one displaying that warm smile. "We all know Tony was a great player, a great Hall of Famer," Jackson said. "That is known when he got 97 per cent of the vote -- that puts him in the top four or five. ... "He was a genuine man, a quality man, a 100 per cent family man. A great son, a great husband, a great father, a great friend and a great teammate. He was an example of what we all want to live and emulate as a person." Thursdays tribute, which started when 19 white doves were released, was open to the public following the private service Gwynns family held Saturday at SDSU. Gwynns fans, many wearing his brown-and-yellow No. 19 jersey, were given a chance to pay their respects to someone they felt they knew. He was an anchor of not only the Padres two World Series teams, but in the community as well. After leaving the Padres, he coached at SDSU, was a member of the Padres broadcasting team and remained active in various charities. A stream of people walked past Gwynns statue in the adjacent Park at the Park, with a line snaking past memorabilia of his storied career. Gwynn, whose No. 19 is retired by the Padres, batted at least .300 in 19 straight seasons. In 1994, he was hitting .394 in August when the season ended prematurely because of the baseball strike; in 1995, he struck out only 15 times in 577 plate appearances. But it was the way Gwynn carried himself that endeared him to countless fans. And not just those in San Diego. Gwynn has been honoured around baseball since his death. Tony Gwynn Jr., his son, was given a standing ovation Tuesday in Philadelphia in his first at-bat with the Phillies since taking a leave following his fathers death. "Even though he was on the other team you still had to admire the way he went about his business," said Joe Torre, an executive vice-president for Major League Baseball and former Yankees manager. "Unfortunately we dont have many, maybe any -- maybe Derek Jeter -- that conduct themselves in a similar fashion. "Honestly, what you saw is what you got: he was a good hitter and never tried to show anybody up." Gwynn became and stayed a star in San Diego. He never thought it would shine brighter elsewhere. "Im a Padre, a San Diego Padre," Gwynn once said. "And Im proud of it." Near the end of the tribute Hoffman, in a halting voice, talked straight to Gwynn, his former Padres teammate. "Thank you for representing San Diego," Hoffman said, "with such class." Oakland Raiders Trayvon Mullen Jersey . "If we could score a six in every game, obviously I would be pretty excited," Jones said. "Its a long week but a short week. Its a pretty short round robin from what were used to so you dont want to get behind the eight ball early. Authentic Oakland Raiders Jerseys .K. Subban and Matt Duchene will be the two skaters sitting out the teams opening game. http://www.cheapraiders.com/182p-cheap-m...iders.html. MacIntyre stopped 49 shots and the Marlies defeated the Texas Stars 5-1 in Game 1 of the American Hockey Leagues Western Conference final. "I felt in control, so that was nice," MacIntyre said. Wholesale Oakland Raiders Jerseys .com) - Colorado Rockies shortstop Troy Tulowitzki was named the National League Player of the Month for April. Oakland Raiders Foster Moreau Jersey . Not only that, when Julian de Guzman first stepped on the pitch for Deportivo de la Coruna he became the very first Canadian to play in Spains top tier.Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca. Hello, I love reading your column. I have a question on the Bruins/Columbus game from Saturday. The puck clearly went out of play in the second period and play continued on as the on ice officials didnt see the puck go into the netting and Columbus ended up scoring. Why was this not reviewed and the time put back on the clock and the goal not disallowed? Thanks! Cristina I hope all is well! I was wondering if you could give a little explanation in to the call, or lack thereof, during the Bruins vs. Columbus game on Saturday 12/27? The puck clearly went out of play and hit the protective netting, as it was described by the announcers it should have been reviewed at the next whistle and the clock reset to the time the puck went out of play, the next whistle was a goal by Columbus, which they deserved, but the commentator made it seem that there was no way it would stand with the new rule the NHL implemented in the off season as a result of the Detroit vs. San Jose game last year. Later it was clarified by the NHL that the puck needed to go immediately in the net for that rule to be enforced, who was right in this situation? Sincerely, Jason in Boston Cristina and Jason: The Hockey Operations Department is the exclusive and final authority responsible for managing everything that takes place on the ice. As keepers of the game, Hockey Ops extensive range of authority includes, but is not limited to, conducting studies to improve the on-ice product, recommendation of rule changes, provide for player safety and to render all video review decisions under guidelines issued by the team General Managers and as approved by the rules committee. As the NHL puck bounces, we are all forced to accept their decisions. The expressed inability by the NHL Situation Room blog to review this play beyond the scoring of an immediate goal after the puck struck the struck the spectator netting is beyond just right or wrong. It exposes a communication and public relations problem too often created by the NHL that provides confusion and frustration as opposed to clarity for those that report the game and for fans. There have been times that a new rule was implemented in an attempt to manage a specific situation without due consideration as to how it might affect or impact other preexisting rules. The Referees usually pick up any contradictions at training camp as various scenarios are brought forward in new rule discussions. The horrible optics and negative impact on the outcome of the game in Detroit last season contributed to an expanded and broader discretionary capability for video review to determine the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g. to ensure they are good hockey goals). In that game, with L.A. leading by one goal in the dying seconds of regulation time, and the Wings net empty in favor of an extra attacker, the puck deflected high onto the spectator netting behind the Kings net and was undetected by the Officials. The puck then caroomed off the netting, struck Jonathan Quick on the back and rolled into the net for the tying goal. The Wings then went on to win the game in overtime thereby denying the Kings a point they desperately needed in the tight Western Conference playoff race. That was surely not a good hockey goal by any stretch of the imagination. I have to question whether the one in Columbus the other night was much better. During the summer months wording was incorporated into Rule 38.4 (viii) to allow video review to rule upon this specific situation with regard to (and I quote), pucks that hit the spectator netting prior to being directed into the goal. As per the wording in the rule book and as communicated to Bruins play-by-play man Jack Edwards and other NHL broadcasters that attended a pre-season advisory meeting in New York, there was never a reference to the word immediate or a defined lapse of time between the puck going out of play (onto the spectator netting) and a subsequent goal being scored.dddddddddddd. It would appear that a change in criteria or understanding was implemented at some point after the broadcasters September meeting in New York and following the publishing of the 2014-15 NHL Rule Book, to only allow a review if a goal was scored immediately after hitting the spectator netting and going out of play. It would also appear that someone forgot to send a memo to everyone that was affected by this dramatic change in policy? The next most obvious question is how immediate must the puck be directed into the net for video review to disallow the goal and reset the clock? Aside from the puck deflecting into the net off the goalie (as was the case with Jonathan Quick) or any other player for that matter, is a puck off the netting onto a stick and shot allowable? What about an attacker gaining puck possession in the corner who subsequently makes a pass into the slot for a one-timer? Is two or more multiple passes allowed or is sustained pressure in the end zone by the attacking team before the puck is directed into the net? These are way too many variables that create inconsistency through subjective decisions. Are any of these scenarios more or less a good hockey goal from each other once it is determined the puck has exited the playing surface by striking the spectator netting? The new and specific wording in 38.4 (viii) contradicts preexisting rule 85.1 (play shall be stopped when the puck hits the spectator netting unless it goes unnoticed by the on-ice officials, in which case play shall continue as normal and resulting play with the puck shall be deemed a legitimate play. I would suggest that through a common sense application the new and expanded authority granted to video review in this very specific situation should take precedent and override 85.1 since it results in the scoring of a goal and not just a normal stoppage at some point and time. My recommendation would be to amend the existing rule by adding, …in which case play shall continue as normal and resulting play with the puck shall be deemed a legitimate play unless the next stoppage of play is created by the scoring of a goal in which case video review shall disallow the goal and reset the clock to the time the puck exited the playing surface by hitting the spectator netting. An application of this nature would be consistent with rule 78.6 when a team scores an apparent goal that is not seen by the on-ice officials and play continues, the play shall be reviewed by the Video Goal Judge at the next stoppage of play. If the goal is confirmed by video review, the clock (including penalty time clocks, if applicable) is re-set to the time the goal was scored. Any potential goal requiring video review must be reviewed prior to or during the next stoppage of play. No goal may be awarded (or disallowed) as a result of video review once the puck has been dropped and play has resumed. Video review is provided much broader discretion in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals. They even recently extended the authority granted to them within the above rule by placing a play under review following a puck drop and resumption of play after Carey Price had made a goal line save. The decision to add the terminology to their criteria, puck directed into the goal as an immediate result of hitting the spectator netting would appear to be another extension of this broad discretion and authority. It might be prudent for the NHL Public Relations Department to communicate these changes to the hockey world before they take effect. It is only reasonable to expect that everyone, especially the hockey broadcasters, would like to clearly understand what defines a good hockey goal? Cheap Buffalo Sabres Gear Wholesale Calgary Flames Jerseys Cheap Adidas Colorado Avalanche Jerseys Montreal Canadiens Outlet Store Wholesale New Jersey Devils Jerseys Adidas Arizona Coyotes Jerseys Cheap Adidas Boston Bruins Jerseys Cheap Adidas Carolina Hurricanes Jerseys Chicago Blackhawks Shop Free Shipping Wholesale Columbus Blue Jackets Jerseys Dallas Stars Shop Free Shipping Cheap Adidas Detroit Red Wings Jerseys Anaheim Ducks Jerseys China Wholesale Edmonton Oilers Jerseys Florida Panthers Shop Free Shipping Wholesale Los Angeles Kings Jerseys Minnesota Wild Outlet Store Cheap Adidas Nashville Predators Jerseys Cheap Adidas New York Islanders Jerseys New York Rangers Winter Classic Jerseys Cheap Adidas Ottawa Senators Jerseys Cheap Adidas Philadelphia Flyers Jerseys Wholesale Pittsburgh Penguins Jerseys Cheap Adidas San Jose Sharks Jerseys St. Louis Blues Winter Classic Jerseys Wholesale Tampa Bay Lightning Jerseys Toronto Maple Leafs Outlet Store Vancouver Canucks Outlet Store Cheap Adidas Vegas Golden Knights Jerseys Cheap Adidas Washington Capitals Jerseys Cheap Adidas Winnipeg Jets Jerseys ' ' '