Jump to content

Official ruling


IlliniKrush

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 184
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 05:13 AM)
Hey Rex...just wanted to say.  Really appreciate your insight on the issue.  Same with you Krush...the two have you done a great job explaining both perspectives and each of your opinions.

 

Thanks... I don't completely disagree with Krush, I just think there is a bigger issue. Paul didn't see the "fist" plain and simple. He was tossing the ball back to the mound anyway. So to me, that is not an issue. The play goes the same way with or without it.

 

Just chalk it up to a weird play that went in our favor. Ozuna still had to steal 2B and Crede still had to hit the bad pitch from Escobar. If the Angels had not burned most of their bullpen already, maybe Escobar isn't in there to make that bad pitch?? Lots of what ifs....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing that threw me off is that i thought i heard Paul at one point say "i didn't hear him say no catch"...which leads me to believe he did that before? I could be wrong on what Paul said, i've been flipping channels a lot.

 

When they showed the replays i've been talking about, Eddings does the arm out, then fist, for easy strikeouts where the ball is for sure caught.

 

There was on they showed where Molina struck out on a ball that bounced. Eddings did the arm out motion, and then sat there. AJ then tagged him. Then Eddings did the fist.

 

This leads me to believe that the fist is his out call on a strike three swinging, and that he messed up the Angels by signaling 'out' when earlier he failed to do so and waited for a tag - on the Molina at bat.

 

I agree 100% that Paul should have done the safe thing and tagged him, and give credit to AJ for hustling, because that can never hurt.

 

And i know what you are saying about the field and the dirt. I still have no idea if it bounced in the mitt or on the dirt, but i know i've seen balls bounce in the mitt and appear like it has hit the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 12:13 AM)
Hey Rex...just wanted to say.  Really appreciate your insight on the issue.  Same with you Krush...the two have you done a great job explaining both perspectives and each of your opinions.

Well that's what soxtalk is for, good baseball talk. This is about umpiring, but still very interesting. I'm glad Rex jumped in on this.

 

One thing is for sure, this call will be debated forever across the nation, especially when the sox win this series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 12:18 AM)
Thanks... I don't completely disagree with Krush, I just think there is a bigger issue.  Paul didn't see the "fist" plain and simple.  He was tossing the ball back to the mound anyway.  So to me, that is not an issue.  The play goes the same way with or without it.

 

Just chalk it up to a weird play that went in our favor.  Ozuna still had to steal 2B and Crede still had to hit the bad pitch from Escobar.  If the Angels had not burned most of their bullpen already, maybe Escobar isn't in there to make that bad pitch??  Lots of what ifs....

This 'bigger issue' is a pretty good point you make. You're right, they could only argue that Escobar or someone else could have picked up the ball and threw it to first if they didn't think Eddings ruled him out already - which i think is a decent argument, because every Angel stopped. But Paul definitely wasn't thinking clearly.

 

Rex, have you heard - timeout - i just heard Paul say "when it's not caught they are in our ear yelling 'no catch no catch' - so i don't know what to take of this.

 

What i was going to ask is have you heard Eddings' comments in the press conference? Just wondering if you thought he sounded as terrible as i think he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard the press conference and no Eddings did not sound confident or well spoken. But then again, how often do you hear umpires giving a press conference? That is not their job, so I am sure there was apprehension there.

 

I did hear what Paul said about "no catch" and since I have never umpired professionally, I can't see he is right or wrong with 100% certainty. But I know in that situation I was always taught to acknowledge the swing/strike three, but be silent on the rest. Think of it this way...

 

Typically in a play like that, the catcher makes a quick tag of the hitter and all is said and done. Eddings had to be expecting that, so his delayed/confused reaction is not a total surprise. Let's say that AJ is walking back to the dugout thinking the ball was caught and the umpire says "no catch" as Paul was suggesting. Rather than waiting for the runner to head back toward 1B, Paul routinely flips the ball to 1B for the out. But instead, Paul throws the ball into RF and AJ, who is still standing between the plate and the 3B dugout runs and makes it to first safely.

 

It could be argued then that the umpire created the situation because he told the players what to do even though AJ was in essence giving himself up. In situations like this, the players are responsible to know what is going on. It is not up to the umpire to tell them how to play.

 

Paul did not see the umpire make the fist motion, so I can't accept the argument the Angels are making. If they say, "Hey, Escobar could have thrown the guy out", then we could argue. But Paul created his own confusion. That was his fault, not Eddings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the thing about Eddings' comments (and the other guys) is that they started talking about how they had looked at replay and started try to convince the media that it was inconclusive or had obviously bounced or what not. I thought that was a huge mistake. And overall Eddings just sounded like he was trying to talk his way out of a ticket or something. I realize it's not their job, though.

 

I agree with your assessment of the "no call" on a third strike that hit the dirt. I just found what Paul said interesting.

 

And the replays speak volumes about Eddings' mechanics over the courst of the game.

 

The Angels argument holds up if MLB umpires (and i don't know this either) are supposed to say 'no catch'. Paul says they always do this. I can only think that since Paul didn't hear anything, he assumed the umpire ruled catch.

 

I've been taught, like you, to say strike three, and just wait for something to happen. I always make sure to say strike three, batter's out quickly if i'm ruling him out on a close play in the dirt that i'm ruling is a catch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The press conference with the umpires tonight is a prime example of why it is so rare to see one. They aren't public speakers. They aren't trained debators. They aren't used to being grilled.

 

And for what it is worth, the press asked stupid questions. Better questions might have been:

 

1. Doug, tell us exactly what you did and said as the play developed.

 

2. Doug, explain to us the signals you made and what they mean. You initially raised your right arm out like half a safe call and then made what looked like an out gesture shortly after that. What exactly is the function of those signals and how do they go with what you say verbally?

 

3. To the umpires supervisor: What is the taught protocol for such situations? What are the umpires instructed to do? Did Doug do exactly that tonight?

 

4. Doug, the Angels in the field seemed confused by the perceived out call you made as Josh Paul was rolling the ball back to the mound. Do you think it is fair for those such as the pitcher who may be too far away to hear you, to assume that you are calling the hitter out at that point? Do you not think that Escobar could not have gotten to the ball and thrown the runner out if the signaling were not more clear?

 

5. Doug, how sure were you when you made the call and how sure are you now that the ball skipped into the catcher's glove? There appeared to be some indecision on your part from what I saw. Were you convinced the ball hit the ground?

 

6. Doug, did you signal out and then realize as AJ was simultaneously taking off toward 1B that the ball may have hit the ground? Did you make a signal you shouldn't have, but let the play go on?

 

Just a few off the top of my head..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am off to bed, but I'll add one more thing....

 

Typically in that situation, if there is any uncertainty over whether the ball hit the ground, the umpire will allow the players reactions to dictate the call or look to the 1B or 3B umpire.

 

That is a VERY difficult call for the home plate umpire to make. They didn't have cameras on the 1B or 3B umpires, but a trick umpires often use is if they see it, and the home plate umpire does not call it right away, they will point toward the ground or show a fist so the home plate umpire can get help. It is not an official appeal, just a signal to help the plate umpire. I'd like to see how they reacted initially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 08:24 PM)
Blackjack McDowell just made a great f***ing point, one that I meant to make this afternoon.  Everyone will b**** about the call tonight, but Cabrera got away with an illegal slide to break up that DP last night that gave the Angels the 3rd run.  Cabrera came out of his slide and rolled into Iguchi.  That's an illegal slide, and theoretically, it should have been a DP.

 

 

OMG why did i have to know that....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got tired of reading thru this thread, so I may repeat something here. Here's my take on it. First, when FOX zoomed in and showed the play in very slow motion, you can distinctly see the ball change direction upward.

 

As for the fist pump, ESPN showed a call earlier in the game where the ump first indicated the batter swung thru the ball by extending his right arm, then followed with the same fist pump motion, which in this particular case indicated strike TWO. Whether or not that pump was percieved to be an out signal, that particular umpire used that motion to indicate a strike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 01:17 AM)
I am off to bed, but I'll add one more thing....

 

Typically in that situation, if there is any uncertainty over whether the ball hit the ground, the umpire will allow the players reactions to dictate the call or look to the 1B or 3B umpire.

 

That is a VERY difficult call for the home plate umpire to make. They didn't have cameras on the 1B or 3B umpires, but a trick umpires often use is if they see it, and the home plate umpire does not call it right away, they will point toward the ground or show a fist so the home plate umpire can get help. It is not an official appeal, just a signal to help the plate umpire. I'd like to see how they reacted initially.

Yeah, i've been taught as a base umpire to do a fist for a catch and an open hand for no catch. They all have their tricks. If he was unsure at all, he should have waited/looked for help. As i mentioned above, i think he made the out call without thinking, then realized it was closer than he may have thought (ball hitting the dirt) so he let the play go on.

 

What's ironic is that he could have asked for help, but what would that have done? We've all seen this on a blown up replay 50 times tonight, and we still can't say definitively what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 01:33 AM)
I got tired of reading thru this thread, so I may repeat something here.  Here's my take on it.  First, when FOX zoomed in and showed the play in very slow motion, you can distinctly see the ball change direction upward.

 

As for the fist pump, ESPN showed a call earlier in the game where the ump first indicated the batter swung thru the ball by extending his right arm, then followed with the same fist pump motion, which in this particular case indicated strike TWO.  Whether or not that pump was percieved to be an out signal, that particular umpire used that motion to indicate a strike.

The ball changing direction upwards doesn't mean a whole lot, as it could have occured inside the mitt.

 

ESPN also showed quite a few replays on strike three calls where he did the arm and the fist pump. When Molina struck out and the ball hit the dirt, he did the arm...then nothing. AJ then tagged Molina, and then he did the fist.

 

Based on the precedent he set over the course of the game, he used the wrong mechanics during the AJ at bat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basically after all this time we know absolutely nothing and unless we can somehow get a clear view I'm pretty sure that's the way it's going to stay. It was a controversial call but it's so close and Escobar hung his splitty and it got nailed. Like has been said that call didn't cost them a run but Pablo stealing 2nd and Joe nailing the hanger did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 01:44 AM)
So basically after all this time we know absolutely nothing and unless we can somehow get a clear view I'm pretty sure that's the way it's going to stay.  It was a controversial call but it's so close and Escobar hung his splitty and it got nailed.  Like has been said that call didn't cost them a run but Pablo stealing 2nd and Joe nailing the hanger did.

Hey don't ruin our fun :bang

 

We aren't even really debating whether the ball hit the dirt or not, we're debating the umpire's mechanics and throught process throughout the play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 12:46 AM)
Hey don't ruin our fun  :bang

 

We aren't even really debating whether the ball hit the dirt or not, we're debating the umpire's mechanics and throught process throughout the play.

Ha, I gotcha Krush. Keep debating, you're not hurting anyone. :P It's just funny that with all these replays we've got and seen that nobody can be sure whether the ball hit the ground or not. I just can't wait for friday now, time to get back on the field and forget about that play. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 01:40 AM)
The ball changing direction upwards doesn't mean a whole lot, as it could have occured inside the mitt.

 

ESPN also showed quite a few replays on strike three calls where he did the arm and the fist pump. When Molina struck out and the ball hit the dirt, he did the arm...then nothing. AJ then tagged Molina, and then he did the fist.

 

Based on the precedent he set over the course of the game, he used the wrong mechanics during the AJ at bat.

 

Still, he made the same sequence of motions on a strike two call, which by definition means it was not an out signal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 12:52 AM)
But we'll have to listen to the controversy on TV for an entire off day, so that'll be fun...

Tell me about it. I keep getting im's from people just saying "BULLs***" like 20 times over and again. Whatever, I just want Friday to get here, tomorrow is going to be a long day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 01:54 AM)
Tell me about it.  I keep getting im's from people just saying "BULLs***" like 20 times over and again.  Whatever, I just want Friday to get here, tomorrow is going to be a long day.

Yeah, i've received a few of these from cub land:

 

SOX CAN'T WIN WITHOUT THE HELP OF THE UMPS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...