 who did such a great job on the interview of H.A. Hinch on the MLB network. Nice enough to join us now. Tom, it's Michael Donham. Peter, how are you? Great. Thanks for having me, Mike. You know, just, I watched that interview with much interest and I opened the show, Tom, with the answer that he gave when you asked about the buzzers. I mean, he could have said that's absolutely not true and he leaned on the Major League Baseball, you know, he investigated and found nothing. I think that to me, that tells me that there were buzzers involved. Is that the way you interpret it? No, I can see why people go there though because I thought he was very forthcoming otherwise and I think there was, you could see on his face and in his words how authentic he was. No, I mean, listen, the reason I say that is because MLB did investigate that. As you know, more than 60 people were interviewed, more than 40,000 emails and the players walked in there at what MLB does when they interview people in an investigation. They say, listen, the only way you're getting trouble here is if you're not honest and by all indications, they were honest with everything about that science-ceiling scandal in 17 and 18. So to believe that they were using buzzers would mean that all players, maybe more than 20 of them, went in there and either they lied or MLB covered it up. What I think happened here is AJ had a case of scandal fatigue. Remember, the whole thing started and was up and running for about two months before he even knew about it. So he wasn't part of the planning or he wasn't an active participant. He didn't get the memo from his general manager in September of 2017 putting every team on notice that from here on out, if you steal signs of the technology, you're going to be hit with harsh penalties. And in the same week last week, he finds out that Jevoluna the GM is running this program called Operation Code Breaker in which his back room guys are using technology in the scouting sense to get signs. He knew nothing about that. And then after thinking they've been cleared with the buzzers because MLB investigated, I asked him and it's like, come on, you know, I can't keep going down there. I don't know what I don't know. I do know we didn't do it, but I'm not going to go out on that limb. Now, if you want to make the leap and believe that there are buzzers used, that would mean that there's something horribly wrong with that investigation and that somehow the players either lied or have done an incredible job to cover that up. And I don't think he would have known, Michael, because clearly he broke two televisions to let them know in 17. He wasn't down with all this science dealing stuff that was going on. So why would they even tell him if in fact something like that was going on? I get everything you're saying. I hear what you're saying. But here's my thing. He was forthright in every other question. And this one, he leans on the Major League Baseball Investigator. He could have said, I have no knowledge whatsoever of using buzzers and he didn't go down that hallway. So I'm curious why he didn't go down there. Yeah, again, I think it's scandal for Jay. He doesn't know what's coming around the next corner to what comes out. Maybe somebody had a guy in a purple shirt in the right field stand. I don't know. He doesn't know. That's all I can read. But to say that he didn't like his answer and now you're going to make the leap that in 2019, when there were so many protocols in place, that somehow they were using buzzers and we didn't find out about that. I mean, that's an enormous leap. I just don't see the leap being that big. Tom, I just don't see the leap being that big. I mean, you don't find the Altuve post-game celebration thing to just be incredibly odd? No. Altuve is like Derek Jeter. He's one of these hitters. If you tell him what's coming, he's going to swing at it. He's the kind of guy over the years who's never won a tonight. If you're on second base and you can pick up signs that you all know about, he doesn't want the signs. That dude in Houston who broke down what, 8,000 different pitches, found that Altuve had pitches or supposedly had pitches at least out of anybody. So no, he had a home run earlier and his wife didn't like him taking the shirt off. I really believe it's nothing like that. Listen, I understand why all this stuff is in play. The Astros brought all of this on themselves. They have no right to complain if you or me or anybody says, well, I think there was more going on. But the problem, I guess I have. You've got to show me evidence. You know, that's it. Well, the second investigation, the reason that I'm kind of dubious on the whole thing is because even if he found impropriety, what could he do to the players? Players' association, will them do anything? So wouldn't it just be easier for him to say we found nothing rather than try to discipline Altuve and have the players' association say no? Well, you make a good point because clearly there's a precedent here that they are not going to discipline players. So in other words, the same thing could happen in 2020 that happened in 17 where they were banging out a trash can and the player knows he doesn't face any punishment. The responsibility is all on the front office and the manager. I mean, that's a whole different world. I can't why they did it. I mean, it's almost impossible to go player by player, pitch by pitch, find out who used sides, who didn't. A lot of them on other teams now, do you sit them down? I mean, it's really hard to parse it all out. It sounds like a good idea until you actually try to do it. But also, this whole technology came about because MLB put in this challenge-based replay system with real-time video down by the dugout in 2017. It's their system. So they put their stewards, their caretakers, the general managers and managers and coaches in charge of maintaining the culture. And that was true when he sent that memo out in 2017. That memo was not sent to the Players Association. So I understand why he did it. You can't go back and now say, all right, players, I didn't warn you, but now I'm going to suspend you. This is what we have going forward. I know this. If I'm a manager now, I get a really tough job. It's always been a tough job. But now in addition to actually running the game and who I've got in my bench, who the other teams got in the bullpen, et cetera, I have to know what all my backroom analysts are doing, what my players are doing, things they aren't telling me. I'm responsible for all of that in the course of a three-and-a-half-four-hour game. That's a huge responsibility of managers. And the players know that they cannot be punished. Now, I've heard from somebody, let's say, in the know, Tom, that the reason that Hinch didn't stop it in 2017 was that Cora was such an incredibly overwhelming presence. And the players just, like, worshiped at his altar that that was a fight that Hinch couldn't win. Does that ring true to you? I would agree with the first part. I mean, Alex Cora was hired, in part, because, you know, he has a lot of cachet with players. I mean, there's no question about that. He's the kind of coach that walks in, not from, you know, class A ball or some guru at a college, but with a really good major league resume and name recognition. And a lot of those players actually knew him personally before he was hired. So I think you're right on with his influence with players. But, you know, listen, I don't... It's not only AJ Hinch and Alex Cora went way back. You know, if AJ Hinch... I don't think that was the reason he didn't step in. I really don't. I think you're onto something with the cachet he had with players, but I don't think AJ Hinch sat down and said, you know, I'd love to do something, but I'd have to cross Alex Cora to do that. I think it's more about the clubhouse in general. Remember, AJ lost his job in Arizona first time around, first job even coaching, never mind managing, and really never really got the clubhouse in Arizona. You know, Bob Melman was the manager before that. The players liked him. And the veterans there just didn't take AJ Hinch. And I think, remember, he's not a world championship manager, summer of 17. And I think he missed an opportunity to really put the hammer down. We talk a lot now about managing. It's about connecting with players, right? I think he didn't want to risk his own personal connection with his clubhouse, especially vis-à-vis his experience in Arizona. Now, he claims if it happened in 19, you know, he's been through a lot more, that he would do that. That's conjectured, but certainly in 17, he wasn't up to it. Now, I understand that Manfred's hands are tied to dealing with the Players Association, especially so close to the expiration of the CBA. But could he have gone to Tony Clark and said, listen, you've got a lot of your constituents who are upset about this. You've got to let us go after the players. The few have to fall for the many. You know, since nothing really happened to the players, we've seen a lot of players very upset. Now, we're coming from a bias perspective here in New York, because a lot of people are up in arms. I'm not sure if they're talking about it all through Major League Baseball. But just like they did with the PEDs, working out a deal with the Players Association, could Manfred have tried to do that, at least open the door for him to discipline the players? Yeah, I don't think so. Well, I shouldn't say he couldn't have. He could have, I think, would be extremely difficult. First of all, you know, you can't really get full cooperation and investigation unless you gave the players immunity. I don't think they'd go in there and start singing if they knew they themselves were subject and incriminate themselves to what was going on there. That's one thing. Yes, the union also has the right to file a grievance. Now, listen, if something happens with a player, you don't discipline him because you're afraid of going to a grievance procedure. I mean, you do it because you think it's needed. But again, I mean, going back, how do you prove to what degree each individual player was a participant in this? It's a really, really hard thing to do. So again, I think in theory it sounds great. It does bother me that the players have done something and did not face punishment and will not face punishment going forward if they do the same thing. But I'm not sure I know the answer to how we could have gone about doing it in a very fair way. This is the first time we've talked to you since he handed down these punishments and what a lot of our callers, our listeners, and even us, that we don't understand why not vacate the title. Don't give it to the Dodgers. Why not just say they can't be rewarded for cheating? Now, I can't discipline the players, but I can take away the fact that they can't call themselves world champions. Why didn't he do that? Well, I mean, nothing like that, as you know, Michael, has ever been done in baseball. You took an eraser to history and undid something. So, I mean, first of all, there was no precedent for it. There was no precedent for suspending anybody for sign stealing. I mean, this, I thought, was a harsher penalty than I think a lot of people expected going in, only because, throughout history, it's been treated with a wink and a nod. But I think because it is technology and everybody's afraid at least in baseball, what the future is going to be like as technology continues to get even better, he needed to come down hard. So, you know, listen, the way I look at it, Michael, is the 1951 Giants, they sold signs from Centerfield with a telescope and a buzzer. You know, we still talk about that team and remember what they did. That's tainted. That's never, ever going... 70 years from now, we'll be talking about the 2017 Astros, that their championship was tainted because they sold signs. That's a huge punishment. I mean, I get how a lot of people, especially if you're on a losing end, Yankees, Dodgers, I get it. You'd want to officially take it away, but baseball never having gone there and I think the penalty and the loss of reputation in and of itself is huge. Yeah, just it worries me, Tom, because we can't be arrogant enough to believe that life isn't going to go on beyond our years, right? So, yeah, we're going to be talking about it. Our kids will be talking about it, but will their kids be talking about it? Will their kids' kids be talking about it? As long as that title stands there, the history can get blurred. If you take it away, then it can't get blurred. You'll have to investigate. Like the World Series that was taken away because of the influenza epidemic, you know, or the 1919 scandal, you know, that resonated, but does that remember 100 years ago, the way it was remembered by us when we were kids? I want to know 150 years from now, whatever way that our children's children will look things up, it could still get lost in history. Yeah, it's reverberating now, but a bunch of years from now, it's still going to say, Astros won the 2017 World Series. History may not remember the scandal the way we do. I mean, that's a good point, but time is the ultimate healer, right? And I see that now at Hall of Fame voting, where people who were in middle school when the steroid era was raging are voting people in the Hall of Fame like it was no big deal. What was the big deal about it? Well, it was a big deal, but you weren't there, but we're so far removed from it now that it doesn't seem as big as it was at the time. So you make a good point, but again, without precedent, I mean, that's a limb that Manfred... There's no way he was going out there. What would it take for baseball to say you won the World Series, but we're officially taking it away? But this is not it. It just bothers me, Tom. It really does. I really feel as a baseball fan like something's going on, and maybe... Listen, you're closer to it than I am, but I'm a fan looking out there, and I just think they got away with it. In every way, shape, or form, they got away with it. $5 million. Give me a break. This is one of the largest scandals in the history of sports, and it feels like they got away with it. It bothers me a lot, too. You know, listen, if you go to a ball game and you're not sure if it's being played on an even playing field, I mean, there's nothing worse. You lose the integrity of the sport if there's doubt in your mind. And beyond doubt, obviously, we have proof that it happened, but you got to remember, too, when you're banging on a trash can, the Red Sox are stealing signs with an Apple Watch and the monitor. Are you telling me that summer when there was a camera in center field for all 30 teams, live feed for, quote, unquote, training purposes with monitors by the dugout, those are the only two teams doing it? I have a hard time believing that. Now, if you get beyond September of 17, when everybody's worn, that's a different story. In other words, the Astros could have stopped and faced nothing. It's essentially what the Red Sox faced. The fact that they continued after that is where this thing really got off the tracks. But that's why I'm saying I'm worried about the game going forward because we don't know where technology is going, right? I don't want games decided by which team has the better cybersecurity department. Games are being played in the last few years with people in back room scouring over video and trying to figure out where the advantage lies. I don't want games decided by that. I want American League, American Legion baseball. When the game starts, unplug, play on your own merits. Don't go back and look at the video room. You take an SAT test. You can't bring your laptop in there to look stuff up. You prepare for that test and then you take the test. You know, I think baseball's got to be really careful here because what you said I totally agree. It bothers me, Don, and I want to make sure there's more protocols out there that this can happen again. I'll tell you about the video room. It's an easily solvable thing, and I've been saying this for a couple of years, Tom. Challenge in real time. Enough about the best guy in there that could find the best angles. If your guy says he's safe, then challenge. You believe your guy, then challenge because that's what the umpire has to make his decision because once you have that room so close to the dugout, it's so tempting to cheat. It's a great point. Why don't you put it in the press box like it is in the NSL? Call upstairs and let those dudes up there call down whether you should challenge or not, and that's it. Why do you have people who can be in uniform who can be even near that monitor? So that's another thing that definitely needs to be addressed. Listen, this whole thing came about because it came up with a replay system. You know, it just proved too tempting to players. It's the law of unintended consequences that needs to be resolved. Now, Manfred promises there's going to be a close between now and opening day. He agrees. There's too much real-time video down there. It probably includes, you know, broadcasts of games that are in the clubhouse. He realizes this is big. And I think the lessons of the steroid era might really apply here as well. MLB was late to the party with addressing the steroid issue. When they did, they got there incrementally. So I think Manfred here is trying to be as responsive as quickly as he can and not get the penalties incrementally. I believe, and one final thing before we let you go, I believe that Hinch and Cora will manage again in the big leagues. Are you? Well, I'll take Hinch first. I do think he's going to be somebody who will be in play after the World Series. I think he is, there's no question he'll have served his penalty. He's one of the better managers in the game. He was not an active participant. He has shown public contrition for it. All those are in his favor. I see what his suspension is. I'd be surprised if it wasn't more than one season because he was an active participant. I think in that case he may have to, there may have to be a transition period where he comes back as a coach instructor, assistant GM or something and work his way back to a leadership position to jump back into that position after his first time in the dugout, which is what it was, his first job in the dugout. He was on the phone in the replay room in his first month of that season getting signs from the replay guys. That would scare me to just give him the keys to the car right away coming back. But I do think he's a good baseball guy, he's a good person and he's young enough that I wouldn't rule out someday him coming back as well. And I don't think Lunal gets another job. Probably true, Mike. As you know, he's kind of an iconic last and does things his own way. He's not one of these guys who has a circle of tight friends around the game landing spots to work his way back in the good graces. So you're probably right. Again, I go back that the worst thing for me in that report is when the commissioner sent his memo out and it went to the front offices and according to the report Lunal did not circulate the memo nor did he go downstairs and say to his coaches and manager, guys, are we in compliance of this? Because we better be. If either one of those things happened we're not here today. I mean, that's a fireable offense and I'm not sure if you're looking for someone in any kind of a leadership position that you can even look past that for a second chance. Alright, Tom, thanks so much. We'll see you at the park. You got it, man. Thanks.