PDA

View Full Version : MLB authentication error or bad wording?



mjpritchett
03-09-2007, 05:27 PM
Hi,
I have a Rocco Baldelli turn back the clock jersey and pants from 2005. It is MLB authenticated as "game used" but rocco was on the DL the entire 2005 season. I didnt realize it wasnt truly game used , but actually dugout worn until after i bought it. Should i be pissed or should i just appreciate it because its the only one in the world.

scans at www.freewebs.com/roccob

allstarsplus
03-09-2007, 08:14 PM
This comes up here all the time. MLB has defined game used to include players that don't get into the game. They call Coaches/Managers game used too.

That's why you always want to check the boxscores for any of these games to see if your player actually "played" and then bid accordingly.

Andrew

Sincityson
03-10-2007, 03:14 PM
I've wondered this myself.. Are there any clear definitions, or standards as to what defines 'Game Worn' ?

eg: If a player is called up, yet never gets into a game, but sits in the dugout or bullpen in uniform.. From what I have read, most do consider this game worn. The same applies to coaches, etc.. again from what I've read.

There was an instance of a Texas Rangers jersey on ebay a couple weeks back, where it was listed as game worn, however the player, never played that season, he was injured. I am guessing he was on the 40-man roster, and sat with the players for a fews games, while still on the injured list. Would this count as game worn?

If so, does a player have to be on the 40-man roster, even if he sits in uniform (injured and not playing) to be considered game worn? What if he's not on the 40 man? Either way, the definition at times can seem a bit cloudy.. Anyone have some futher thoughts?

SC

Sincityson
03-10-2007, 03:26 PM
Good question.. I've heard of some instances where people have purchased jerseys from the MLB clubs as 'Game Worn' only to find out after through the authentication site that they were 'Game Issued' and never worn at all. In cases like these, I'd suspect the buyer would have every right to either get some sort of partial refund, or compensation back, it only seems fair.

In your case, I suppose it would have to go by the definition. But as I mentioned in my previous post, the definition is a bit loose. If he wasn't on the DL & just stayed in the dugout, not playing that game, I would say, yes it should be classified as 'Game Worn'. That seems to be an accepted thought of Game Worn. The fact that he was on the DL, throws a bit of a twist to the situation. I'm assuming he was on the 40 man roster, but where is the line drawn.. That's the question.

I personally don't like the fact that a player on a DL sitting in the dugout would have his jerseys/uniform considered game worn, but that's my opinion, I'm sure others would disagree..

SC