Bad Call at Angels Sox game

[KelliV]

I have been a umpire for 6 years now and that call was 100% correct. Living near Chicago I saw it over and over again on the News and after carefully watching the video the ball bounced out of the glove and touched the ground. Drop 3rd, he was on the base. Sox win.
FYI to anyone trying to go to Chicago it is CRAZY!!! There are so many people in that city.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by KelliV

I have been a umpire for 6 years now and that call was 100% correct. Living near Chicago I saw it over and over again on the News and after carefully watching the video the ball bounced out of the glove and touched the ground. Drop 3rd, he was on the base. Sox win.
FYI to anyone trying to go to Chicago it is CRAZY!!! There are so many people in that city.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

The call may have been correct, but there's absolutely no way to know, even with instant replay. You just can't definitvely tell from the video they have. To make an analogy, if it were football, and it was being reviewed whether or not the receiver made a catch without scooping it off the ground (ball hitting ground, then going into glove), there wouldn't have been any 'conclusive evidence' to overturn the play.

At any rate, if the correct call was made, it was by accident, since the home plate ump couldn't possibly have seen whether it hit the ground, and the 3rd base ump wasn't paying attention.

[Jack Jones]

Bill Klem, who became one of the game's most famous umpires because of his wit, once said; "It ain't nothin' till I call it."

The pitch was strike three because the ump called it strike three. The batter wasn't out because the ump didn't call him out. The catcher should have had his head in the game enough to know the difference - the batter sure did.

[EricH]

I'm going to use an analogy here: In soccer, there is a rule. The rule is, "If the ref didn't see it, it didn't happen." Application (if baseball has a similar rule): If the ump did not see the ball touch the ground, then it did not touch the ground, and the batter is out. If he saw the ball touch the ground, then it touched the ground, and the batter is out on a swinging strike anyway (unless the catcher dropped it, and the ump saw that.)

Meanwhile, it's water over the dam, spilled milk, etc. Let's drop the subject and get on with life. I am seeing people warming up their lawyerism, which is not a good thing when we are coming up on build season.

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by EricH

...In soccer, there is a rule. The rule is, "If the ref didn't see it, it didn't happen." ...

Wow! That's a curious rule. If you were on a bus and sombody in the back opened a can of sardines, would you not know it because you didn't see it? Or what if someone fired a gun on the other side of the ridge, would you say it didn't happen?

A major league umpire calls over 200 pitches per game and well over 100 games per year. He knows when a pitch scrapes the ground before hitting the mitt, or is trapped instead of caught clean. With hundres of thousands of pitches worth of experience, he's seen, heard, and felt it all.

There's no doubt in my mind that Eddings knows he got it right. It turned out bad for the Angles, but it was their bad, not his.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

Wow! That's a curious rule. If you were on a bus and sombody in the back opened a can of sardines, would you not know it because you didn't see it? Or what if someone fired a gun on the other side of the ridge, would you say it didn't happen?

Actually, in soccer it applies to just what happens to/around the ball. If you hit the ball with your hand, but the ref doesn't see it (which is unlikely), you're safe, even if the other team yells at the ref for it. Another example: I once did a legal slide tackle (from the front or side) on an opponent, but the ref saw it as the opponent tripping me (a foul). Ref didn't see the slide, so it was not a slide. And in a soccer game, the ref can see about the whole field if he needs to, so he will likely see something if it happens.

It would not necessarily apply outside the sports area though. I mean, it's not like I could say that you didn't build a robot because I didn't see you do it or anything like that...

And the other thing about soccer: you can't get the ref to change his mind. You can try, but it's probably a waste of time. Kind of like FIRST. Maybe baseball should adopt something like this?

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

Wow! That's a curious rule. If you were on a bus and sombody in the back opened a can of sardines, would you not know it because you didn't see it? Or what if someone fired a gun on the other side of the ridge, would you say it didn't happen?

A major league umpire calls over 200 pitches per game and well over 100 games per year. He knows when a pitch scrapes the ground before hitting the mitt, or is trapped instead of caught clean. With hundres of thousands of pitches worth of experience, he's seen, heard, and felt it all.

There's no doubt in my mind that Eddings knows he got it right. It turned out bad for the Angles, but it was their bad, not his.

As it applies to sports, the analogy is 100% true.

You're absolutely positvely sure he got it right, the next person is absolutely positively sure he got it wrong... blah blah blah.

There's one thing I'm sure about--and that's that we're all wrong. There's no way anyone knows what the call should have been. It's too close.

[Denman]

you should have seen the rugby game i just watched
the first half took about 55 minutes (instead of 40) due to injury time etc( they stop the clock)
In the last 5 minutes of the first , there was 2 sin bins (one on each team), then about a minute later there was a fight broke out, and the camera caught it , red card for both, 3 injuries in that time too
secondh alf , the conversion was flagged as in by the linesmen but on camera replay was out
bad call
but you have to live by it
it meant the game was a draw

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by Cory

There's no way anyone knows what the call should have been. It's too close.

Reminds me of the situation at the end of the last match of the 2003 Los Angeles regional. I know there's a few of us out there who still remember it.

[CourtneyB]

Ok here i go haha... The call was a drop third strike people..so If you were a catcher wouldnt you kno to automatically tag the batter to for sure know that he is out. Im sorry but the ball hit the ground before it hit the mit. It barely skimmed the dirt and jsut enough to get in the glove. It was a strike and the ump made a good call saying its strike 3....BUT he DID NOT say that the batter was out. Every stike 3 the ump pumps his fist. As a softball player for 14 years ive always been taught that if you get strike 3 run anways untill the unmpire calls you OUT...oviously the ump did not call him out so Pierzynski ran. then thats whent he controversy started. any good baseball player would run on strike 3 unless the ump called him OUT. and Pierzynski is a great example of a good baseball player and a runner. he knows what hes doing.

[sanddrag]

I'm not too big into baseball or the rules of it so I'm confused on something. Any time I get three strikes then decide to immediately run to first base, as long as the opponent team gets caught up in the confusion and doesn't throw the ball to someone to touch the base or tag me, then I'm safe?

Hrrm, getting on base by striking out; I bet'd work a couple times if you did it right, then they would catch on and know you were going to do it and have the ball ready to beat you to the base.

[kpugh]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

I'm not too big into baseball or the rules of it so I'm confused on something. Any time I get three strikes then decide to immediately run to first base, as long as the opponent team gets caught up in the confusion and doesn't throw the ball to someone to touch the base or tag me, then I'm safe?

Hrrm, getting on base by striking out; I bet'd work a couple times if you did it right, then they would catch on and know you were going to do it and have the ball ready to beat you to the base.

You can only run if the catcher fails to catch that third strike. Since the batter has no way of knowing this it is a good idea to run until the ump calls you out, just in case the catcher dropped the ball. I believe this is where much of the controversy lies, whether the ball hit the ground before it hit the catcher's glove.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by CourtneyB

Ok here i go haha... The call was a drop third strike people..so If you were a catcher wouldnt you kno to automatically tag the batter to for sure know that he is out. Im sorry but the ball hit the ground before it hit the mit

Really, anymore debate about what happened is useless.

Nobody can prove it did hit the ground.

Nobody can prove it didn't.

[KenWittlief]

brings up an interesting question though: if they did decide to 'instrument' the field so refs can review a call, then what would it take?

High speed video cameras that can capture a thousand frames per second (slow motion video)?

sensors in the ground that can detect the ball hitting the plate, or the dirt?

stereoscopic (3D) video that would give the reviewer good depth perception?

Lasers everywhere, like alarm systems in museums, that will detect when a ball has crossed a line?

Im sure the ball flight path could be tracked with millimeter accuracy. How would you like that contract at your company?

[Denman]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

brings up an interesting question though: if they did decide to 'instrument' the field so refs can review a call, then what would it take?

High speed video cameras that can capture a thousand frames per second (slow motion video)?

sensors in the ground that can detect the ball hitting the plate, or the dirt?

stereoscopic (3D) video that would give the reviewer good depth perception?

Lasers everywhere, like alarm systems in museums, that will detect when a ball has crossed a line?

Im sure the ball flight path could be tracked with millimeter accuracy. How would you like that contract at your company?

sonar etc
here in england for the cricket they have this system called Hawkeye. It works out the speed and diretion of the ball. It helps them tell if a ball on the pads was going to hit the wicket or not
also i believe it is used in tennis too
Link