Texsox Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 12:36 PM) Not as such, No. What'd I get myself in to? Go back, this may be the best soxtalk discussion ever. Great points on bot sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AddisonStSox Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 11:40 AM) Go back, this may be the best soxtalk discussion ever. Great points on bot sides. Thanks, Tex, I'm going to go ahead and take a look. I really have to give it to the guys. There have been some fantastic baseball discussions going since we reached the playoffs. I have to be honest, I was expecting the polar opposite. Hats off, Soxtalk. It really is threads like this that make me appreciate this place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Controlled Chaos Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 I just want to give some props to AJ here too. It was a big time heads up play by AJ. He heard the umps strike out call 5 times during the game(4 Buehrle K's and 1K of his own) so when the 6th one came and he didn't hear 'You're Out', he ran. I think he is probably the only Sox player that would have noticed that. I guess it was just luck that he was the one in the batters box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 12:44 PM) Thanks, Tex, I'm going to go ahead and take a look. I really have to give it to the guys. There have been some fantastic baseball discussions going since we reached the playoffs. I have to be honest, I was expecting the polar opposite. Hats off, Soxtalk. It really is threads like this that make me appreciate this place. I have to read every thread, but cringe when I see 100 posts that fast, because usually someone is pissed. Instead my opinion of the call and confusion changed three times in the first 50 posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm676 Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Here are some highlights from the umpires post-game press conference. I don't have any significant to add other than this has been a great thread to read. Good job, Krush. Umpire Post-Game Conference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 03:15 PM) I heard Harold Reynolds say this morning the he uses that fist pump for strike one, strike two and strike three. That is his strike call, not an out call. What he should have done with Molina was pump for strike, then call or punch him out. He didn't do, but I don't know why. The point is that is his swinging STRIKE mechanism. I thought the tag of Molina was pretty quick, and there was always some delay between the arm out no-contact signal and the strike call, so it seems plausible that he was just calling the strike then, and verbally called him out. Okay, I have read the thread , and I understand that an umpire could use the fist for strikes one and two, but only for out on strike three -- but that would be a pretty confusing system. I guess we'll have a few video essays by this evening, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 At least the umpire didn't decide to replace AJ with great tasting, less filling Miller Lite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 I just watched the replay of the inning on MLB.TV Rowand struck out before AJ came to bat. He struck out on a ball in the dirt. Watch it if you can - the umpire does not pump his fist until JP tags out Rowand. Interesting that the same exact thing happened but the signals were different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted October 13, 2005 Author Share Posted October 13, 2005 This has certainly been a great thread, and it's been a lot of fun. I enjoy talking real baseball on here with great baseball minds and having intense debate. I thought this thread had to be started for obvious reasons. Thing is, i thought i might get flamed for making my opinion known because it showed zero bias towards the Sox. As an umpire, i'm trained to be unbiased. Furthermore, i've grown to absolutely despise those fans that think every call is out to get them and can't take their white sox sunglasses off before examining a play. If there's one thing i pride myself on it's being a fair, unbiased fan while watching a game. There are many times i'm at the Cell and i'll motion a fist for 'out' when a sox runner is called out and 40,000 people are just b****ing because it went against the sox, even though it's the right call. It's one thing to root for your team, it's another to look at every call from the aspect of 'does this help my team win' and they boo it or cheer it. It's just ignorant is all. I'm not going to put any words into anyone's mouths, but i'll leave you this to ponder. Throughout this thread, Rex and I (and a few others) have thrown around some great observations and reasons for our lines of thinking. Now - reverse the teams. This EXACT same thing happens to us, and we lose because of it. What do people honestly think? My posts would stay the exact same as would Rex's, and some others. I just hope people take one thing from this, and that it's ok to admit an ump blew a call**** if it actually helped your team. By the same token, it's ok to admit an ump got a call right if it went against your team (remember crede hbp in oakland earlier this year - that thread was long as well) ****This isn't in refrence to last night's play. This is just an overall observation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted October 13, 2005 Author Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 01:32 PM) I just watched the replay of the inning on MLB.TV Rowand struck out before AJ came to bat. He struck out on a ball in the dirt. Watch it if you can - the umpire does not pump his fist until JP tags out Rowand. Interesting that the same exact thing happened but the signals were different. Yeah this happened in a Molina at bat as well. Good observation, didn't remember the Rowand at bat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Krush, if I was an angel fan, I'd be pissed at the ump and be pissed at Josh Paul and Escobar and basically the whole team cause they seemed to have lost their cool after that play took place. Here's the thing with the ump, I do honestly believe that ball hit the ground, on the other hand I'm mad at the ump for being indecisive and not knowing what the hell was going on. The way ump reacted and looked at Paul I think in his mind he still thought the ball was live but he didn't even think that his strike call would make that look so much like he was calling aj out. The thing also is that Kelvim lost his cool and hung a splitter and bam, Josh was trying to make up for the play and couldn't even get the ball out of his glove. If I'm an angels fan I'm pissed off at everybody and every thing, that being said, I honestly believe that was still the correct call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted October 13, 2005 Author Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 02:37 PM) Krush, if I was an angel fan, I'd be pissed at the ump and be pissed at Josh Paul and Escobar and basically the whole team cause they seemed to have lost their cool after that play took place. Here's the thing with the ump, I do honestly believe that ball hit the ground, on the other hand I'm mad at the ump for being indecisive and not knowing what the hell was going on. The way ump reacted and looked at Paul I think in his mind he still thought the ball was live but he didn't even think that his strike call would make that look so much like he was calling aj out. The thing also is that Kelvim lost his cool and hung a splitter and bam, Josh was trying to make up for the play and couldn't even get the ball out of his glove. If I'm an angels fan I'm pissed off at everybody and every thing, that being said, I honestly believe that was still the correct call. Ok sorry...what i meant by that was my posts as far as what i saw/think stay the same. Therefore, i'd certainly be pissed off, but i would try to post in the same manner, and explaining in the same way. You know what i mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 01:40 PM) Ok sorry...what i meant by that was my posts as far as what i saw/think stay the same. Therefore, i'd certainly be pissed off, but i would try to post in the same manner, and explaining in the same way. You know what i mean? I know what you mean but I was just giving my interpretation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Hey Krush, I got another question for you. In game 1, Cabrera's take out slide of Tad when he basically stood up when Iguchi was releasing the ball, is that interference?? The actual slide was legal but because OC actually stood up when Tad was throwing the ball I wasn't sure if that's interference or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 If I were an Angel fan, I would want Josh Paul's blood. The ump was going to make some sort of call. The reality is that the ball was very close to the dirt, and may very well have hit the dirt. It was then entirely Josh Paul's job to tag the runner, just in case. I've seen catchers tag batters on balls that weren't nearly as close-run things as that pitch was, just because they don't want to risk giving up the base on something so stupid. You can agree with the ump's call or disagree. I look at it, like I've said several times, like a truly inconclusive catch in football...there's just nothing that shows it either way. But Josh Paul should have tagged the guy out. He does that and nothing matters. The Angels got really unlucky when about the only guy on the field, AJ, who would recognize that the ump was calling outs verbally, was the guy at the plate. But even with that, Josh Paul was the only guy who could have eliminated the whole problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted October 13, 2005 Author Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 02:44 PM) Hey Krush, I got another question for you. In game 1, Cabrera's take out slide of Tad when he basically stood up when Iguchi was releasing the ball, is that interference?? The actual slide was legal but because OC actually stood up when Tad was throwing the ball I wasn't sure if that's interference or not. To be honest i have to see the play again because i can hardly remember it. I know what you are speaking of, but after last night i can't remember details from game 1 well. I'll tell you this much though - interference is one of the toughest calls to make as an umpire, because it's not black and white. And umps usually hesitate to make it unless they are absolutely sure it's intereference. As far as standing up goes, it depends when in the slide he did it...if he was basically reaching the bag and doing a pop up slide because his foot had hit the bag already, i think he'd be fine there. But the general rule and what i've been tought by my association is that you have to slide (or just move out of the base line) so the throw can go through. You also can't throw your arms up, push him, etc. I'm not perfect on MLB rules, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Look at the top righthand picture and then look at the two middle ones. The ball would've had to defy the laws of gravity to end up that high in Josh Paul's glove... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted October 13, 2005 Author Share Posted October 13, 2005 We all know it bounced. We just don't know where. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(Iwritecode @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 02:02 PM) Look at the top righthand picture and then look at the two middle ones. The ball would've had to defy the laws of gravity to end up that high in Josh Paul's glove... At the very least, it's inconclusive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 01:09 PM) We all know it bounced. We just don't know where. Correct...it's entirley possible that it barely taped the webbing on his mit and bounced up due to the webbing being pressed against the ground. But there's not a chance anyone's going to take any images of that pitch and say for certain either way. IMO, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 03:00 PM) To add a thought to the "Josh Paul Couldn't See the Call" theory. In defense to an Illinois guy, he could see his teammate's reactions. If there had not been the fist pump call, he may have tossed to first, etc. He saw his first baseman heading to the dugout and reacted along the same lines. That could be the case if Josh wasn't already in the motion of tossing the ball to the pitcher's mound when said motion made. The Angels as a group made an assumption. One might even say his teammates reacted the way they did because of how they saw JP react. He shot out of his crouch and started to throw the ball back to the mound immediately. Deep down inside he knows he could have avoided this mess altogether. I'm not saying it was all his fault, but the end responsibility resides with the players playing out the play and not making assumptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted October 13, 2005 Author Share Posted October 13, 2005 They asked Ausmus about the play. Just an interesting tidbit... He thinks Paul rolled to the ball to the mound because he knew for sure it was caught. If he thought it may have hit the ground at all, regardless of the call, he would have checked the ball for a scuff mark immediately. He'd want that ball out of the game with the angels coming to the plate. Never thought about this, just adds some more to the whole thing. Kinda cool to here another catcher's take on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 10:57 PM) They asked Ausmus about the play. Just an interesting tidbit... He thinks Paul rolled to the ball to the mound because he knew for sure it was caught. If he thought it may have hit the ground at all, regardless of the call, he would have checked the ball for a scuff mark immediately. He'd want that ball out of the game with the angels coming to the plate. Never thought about this, just adds some more to the whole thing. Kinda cool to here another catcher's take on it. Ausmus is talking like a catcher who has had a night to think about it. The Angels (or so they thought) had just closed out the bottom of the 9th in a tie playoff game. He wasn't thinking about that. Josh jumped out of his crouch so fast it was like he couldn't wait to go grab a bat. His reaction was pure adrenaline and zero thought. Guess who would have been batting 3rd in the top of the 10th for the Angels. Chicago's own Josh Paul. It was a reaction pure and simple. He reacted, acted and then thought later. Basically, it was like a teenage guy seeing a hot naked woman for the first time. Instant wood and all thought leaves the premises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 I just can't understand how a guy like Kevin Kennedy can babble on national TV about how it definitely hit the web and remained in the glove the whole time.... How can you make any claims with any confidence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted October 14, 2005 Author Share Posted October 14, 2005 QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 06:10 PM) It was a reaction pure and simple. He reacted, acted and then thought later. Basically, it was like a teenage guy seeing a hot naked woman for the first time. Instant wood and all thought leaves the premises. That's awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.