PDA

View Full Version : Official Rule on Arod play, Ump Botch!


GiveMeSox
08-08-2005, 09:27 PM
Here is the official rule from MLB.com regarding Arod being hit by JD's throw into 1st when attempting to double up the runner (Shef).

(f) Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate; If the batter or a runner continues to advance after he has been put out, he shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering or impeding the fielders.

There it is folks there should be no fine line, no gray area. I dont see what the problem is with Wendelsted and his crew getting the rules blatently WRONG multiple times against us. Those umps should be penealized.

soxwon
08-08-2005, 09:42 PM
i missed it- what exactly happened?

sthbndsox
08-08-2005, 09:53 PM
I hate this umpiring crew.

BarbG
08-08-2005, 09:58 PM
...no fine line, no gray area...

EXACTLY!!!

It really doesn't matter that A-Clod was standing totally still in the basepath to interfere with the play. There are those who still argue that he was "getting out of the way."

He could have been doing the merengue out there - THE RUNNER IS STILL OUT!

Nobody stops and asks whether a runner between first and second hit by a batted ball "tried to get out of the way."

No gray area - they're OUT.

Wendelstedt makes me ill. He doesn't know the rules so he shouldn't be there. No gray area there either.

NSSoxFan
08-08-2005, 09:58 PM
It didn't end up costing us anything, but the stupidity of this crew is amazing. Common sense is to know how to do your job. If not, hell, I'll take the salary of an MLB umpire and be just as effective as anyone on this crew. ANYONE.

Brian26
08-08-2005, 10:02 PM
It didn't end up costing us anything, but the stupidity of this crew is amazing.

Just because it didn't cost us anything, that doesn't take these umps off the hook. The play was RIGHT IN FRONT of Wendlestedt. He was literally 15' from the play, and he botched it. That's unacceptable.

downstairs
08-08-2005, 10:04 PM
Yep! Heck, I don't know the in's and out's of the rules like an ump should... and I knew that.

It just makes logical sense. And if you don't know the rules, you gotta go with common sense.

If you're out, you're expected to be in the dugout immediately. If you touch the ball, its no different than someone touching the ball that is sitting in the dugout.

34rancher
08-08-2005, 10:05 PM
I am sorry, you will have to clarify. I turned off the game when I saw the umpiring crew for this series. I'll turn it back on in Boston.

DickAllen72
08-08-2005, 10:13 PM
Just because it didn't cost us anything, that doesn't take these umps off the hook. The play was RIGHT IN FRONT of Wendlestedt. He was literally 15' from the play, and he botched it. That's unacceptable.
Wendlestedt knew exactly what he was doing. This crew is determined to screw the Sox any chance they get.

Stroker Ace
08-08-2005, 10:15 PM
The umps blowing a call that should have been made that ends up helping the team playing the Sox? Shocking!

Vernam
08-08-2005, 10:15 PM
Just because it didn't cost us anything, that doesn't take these umps off the hook. The play was RIGHT IN FRONT of Wendlestedt. He was literally 15' from the play, and he botched it. That's unacceptable.I agree -- Wendlestedt should be reprimanded and fined. Hawk and DJ weren't exactly on top of things, either, because they seemed to think A-Rod's intent mattered.

That being said, it was a brilliant play by Rodriguez. He could see Sheffield wasn't going to get back in time, so there wasn't much to lose in trying to deflect the throw. They can only call him out once.

VC

Ol' No. 2
08-08-2005, 10:16 PM
Here is the official rule from MLB.com regarding Arod being hit by JD's throw into 1st when attempting to double up the runner (Shef).

(f) Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate; If the batter or a runner continues to advance after he has been put out, he shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering or impeding the fielders.

There it is folks there should be no fine line, no gray area. I dont see what the problem is with Wendelsted and his crew getting the rules blatently WRONG multiple times against us. Those umps should be penealized.Actually, there is a gray area. It's basically no-harm-no-foul. If the umpire judges that the play could not have been made, there's no interference. They all know the rule, so that's the only possible interpretation. Unless you think that the entire crew has it in for the Sox to the extent they'd sacrifice their jobs by deliberately blowing an obvious call.

cheeses_h_rice
08-08-2005, 10:17 PM
A-rod hit a long fly ball to the wall in RF with Sheffield on first base. Jermaine leaped up and caught it, and was going to double Sheffield off of first base. A-rod turned the corner at first, and was watching Dye's throw coming in to PK, and at the last second he turned his head and let the ball hit him in the leg, helping Sheffield get back to first safe. If A-rod doesn't interfere with the ball, Sheffield would have been out, probably.

****ing blind bat or idiot Wendelstadt saw the whole play in front of him and didn't call it. Riggoddamndiculous.

34rancher
08-08-2005, 10:20 PM
Is there anyway to see what our record is with this crew?

Sorry if I sound like sour grapes, but every stat I have seen has us well over .500. I would bet the ranch that we are well below .500 with this crew...

As long as these guys are umpiring I will not watch a game.

mmmmmbeeer
08-08-2005, 10:27 PM
Actually, there is a gray area. It's basically no-harm-no-foul. If the umpire judges that the play could not have been made, there's no interference. They all know the rule, so that's the only possible interpretation. Unless you think that the entire crew has it in for the Sox to the extent they'd sacrifice their jobs by deliberately blowing an obvious call.

You're certainly correct that they would have had to have determined the play makeable. I don't know how that could have ever been in question, really. The throw was obviously going to be Sheff back to the bag.

The thing that ticks me off, and I was listening to the Yanks broadcasters, was that they were trying to say ARod was trying to get out of the way. BS. He stood in the basepath and WATCHED Dye make the throw, waited a moment, then turned around like he was walking back to the dugout while SOMEHOW knowing exactly when and where to act as if he were avoiding the ball. How can you try to avoid a ball that you didn't know was coming your way? What a cheap ploy.

I don't know how he gets the benefit of the doubt after that crap he pulled last season in the ALCS, trying to knock the ball out of Meintxklfj;alkfiicz glove at 1B. He's been exposed.

Ol' No. 2
08-08-2005, 10:33 PM
You're certainly correct that they would have had to have determined the play makeable. I don't know how that could have ever been in question, really. The throw was obviously going to be Sheff back to the bag.

The thing that ticks me off, and I was listening to the Yanks broadcasters, was that they were trying to say ARod was trying to get out of the way. BS. He stood in the basepath and WATCHED Dye make the throw, waited a moment, then turned around like he was walking back to the dugout while SOMEHOW knowing exactly when and where to act as if he were avoiding the ball. How can you try to avoid a ball that you didn't know was coming your way? What a cheap ploy.

I don't know how he gets the benefit of the doubt after that crap he pulled last season in the ALCS, trying to knock the ball out of Meintxklfj;alkfiicz glove at 1B. He's been exposed.Rodrieguez certainly looked to me to be acting deliberately, but trying to act nonchalant about it. And as I read the rule, intent has no bearing on it. I guess we'll read about the ruling in tomorrow's papers.

TheOldRoman
08-08-2005, 10:33 PM
Unless you think that the entire crew has it in for the Sox to the extent they'd sacrifice their jobs by deliberately blowing an obvious call.

I don't think that, but I know that there is no way in hell Wendelstedt gets fired no matter how many calls he blows. It's the nature of the game. Umpires aren't perfect, and they blow calls, therefore it is hard to question them and say that did something on purpose. Im not saying there is a "conspiracy" against the Sox, but it is obvious by the calls we have received this year that some umpires are very upset at Ozzie, and will go to any lengths to make sure the Sox lose. Some umpires are professional enough to call a good game even if they don't like Ozzie, and others like Wendlestedt cannot call a fair game in which Ozzie coaches. MLB will never fire an umpire for anything short of molesting one of the players. There is absolutely no accountability in umpiring, and it is horrible.

Ol' No. 2
08-08-2005, 10:40 PM
I don't think that, but I know that there is no way in hell Wendelstedt gets fired no matter how many calls he blows. It's the nature of the game. Umpires aren't perfect, and they blow calls, therefore it is hard to question them and say that did something on purpose. Im not saying there is a "conspiracy" against the Sox, but it is obvious by the calls we have received this year that some umpires are very upset at Ozzie, and will go to any lengths to make sure the Sox lose. Some umpires are professional enough to call a good game even if they don't like Ozzie, and others like Wendlestedt cannot call a fair game in which Ozzie coaches. MLB will never fire an umpire for anything short of molesting one of the players. There is absolutely no accountability in umpiring, and it is horrible.There's an ENORMOUS difference between blowing a judgement call and not following a well-established rule. I would think that, at minumum, an umpire would receive a significant suspension for ignoring the rule. Plus, the crew chief can always overrule him, so he'd have to be putting his job on the line, too.

soxwon
08-08-2005, 10:55 PM
fox news just showed highlites, but no AROD play!!!
why not- who will show the play?
im pissed i missed it.

infohawk
08-08-2005, 10:59 PM
The thing that ticks me off, and I was listening to the Yanks broadcasters, was that they were trying to say ARod was trying to get out of the way.

The rule is actually very clear-cut. It reads that the player would be out if another player hinders or impedes. It says nothing about intent. I think the language about "continuing to advance" probably refers to a situation where an out is called but the runner continues to advance in order to deke the defense. For example, a runner going from first to second on a ground ball who is swipe-tagged halfway to second and called out but continues running in the hopes that the defensive player applying the tag didn't hear the call. If the defender didn't hear the call and throws to second and not first, the defense can't claim that the runner's actions qualified as hindering or impeding an out at first. Anyway, some weird situation like that. Fortunately the call didn't end up mattering.

jdm2662
08-08-2005, 11:02 PM
fox news just showed highlites, but no AROD play!!!
why not- who will show the play?
im pissed i missed it.

The play did not impact the game. So, it's going to be ignored.

cubhater77
08-08-2005, 11:15 PM
a few points, ty to dalgren (sp) for the $100 crabshack certificate. i called in and voiced my displeasure towards this crew and to mlb. the powers at hand will NEVER show the stones to give umps what they deserve, out of fear the umpires will strike. it's a load of bs, and i hope that this crew does not "work" one postseason game involving the sox.

tstrike2000
08-08-2005, 11:18 PM
Actually, there is a gray area. It's basically no-harm-no-foul. If the umpire judges that the play could not have been made, there's no interference. They all know the rule, so that's the only possible interpretation. Unless you think that the entire crew has it in for the Sox to the extent they'd sacrifice their jobs by deliberately blowing an obvious call.

Looking at the play a few times, I thought it was clear Sheffield probably would've been out if GayRod did not get in the way. However, that was just my interpretation since the ump was standing right there. Fortunately, it didn't matter anyway since Matt Suey struck out the next at bat.

ChiSoxGirl
08-08-2005, 11:35 PM
a few points, ty to dalgren (sp) for the $100 crabshack certificate. i called in and voiced my displeasure towards this crew and to mlb. the powers at hand will NEVER show the stones to give umps what they deserve, out of fear the umpires will strike. it's a load of bs, and i hope that this crew does not "work" one postseason game involving the sox.

I heard your call tonight and agreed with absolutely everything you said! For MLB to even THINK about assigning this crew of crappy umpires to any playoff game would be asinine. I would be devastated if I watched or was at Game 1 of the ALDS and saw Wendelstedt & crew as the umpires. That blown call tonight was a load of crap and with each botched call we receive as a team, the more aggravated I become. :angry:

downstairs
08-08-2005, 11:53 PM
Actually, there is a gray area. It's basically no-harm-no-foul. If the umpire judges that the play could not have been made, there's no interference. They all know the rule, so that's the only possible interpretation. Unless you think that the entire crew has it in for the Sox to the extent they'd sacrifice their jobs by deliberately blowing an obvious call.

Actually, the first part isn't true. Or isn't supposed to be.

If a fan interferes with a fly ball to the outfield that would still never be caught, and the ball moves so little that there is no difference... its still interference. Same goes for a runner who is out.

Now... the conspiracy theory junk bothers me too. No, the umps do not have it in for us.

It was a terrible non-call. Umps are supposed to know the rules- every damn one of them- inside and out. Its a tough job, but its their job.

It does bother me when this "grey area" begins to creep in. Its why I've hated the NBA in the past 5-10 years. All rules in the NBA are completely subjective. Same with hockey (no penalties in the last 2 minutes, blah blah blah).

With the grey area stike zone (which admittedly both teams, in the end, benefit the same from, but still)... its making a joke of the sport.

MIgrenade
08-08-2005, 11:55 PM
I agree -- Wendlestedt should be reprimanded and fined. Hawk and DJ weren't exactly on top of things, either, because they seemed to think A-Rod's intent mattered.

That being said, it was a brilliant play by Rodriguez. He could see Sheffield wasn't going to get back in time, so there wasn't much to lose in trying to deflect the throw. They can only call him out once.

VC

The only thing worse than seeing the A's in the playoffs would be Wendelstedt umpiring.
I think what actually happened was ARod was trying to get into the sightline of PK. I doubt he was trying to deflect the ball. Anyone would assume you'd be out if you did that even if you weren't clear on the rule. The umpires blew the call without question. After the series in Oakland I'd have to say this entire crew sucks, but I don't know how often crews change.

J Co
08-09-2005, 12:08 AM
fox news just showed highlites, but no AROD play!!!
why not- who will show the play?
im pissed i missed it.

If you missed it, the play is on the 'Top Plays' video highlights on the White Sox website. It's the clip called "Dye's catch at the wall"

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/wrap.jsp?ymd=20050808&content_id=1162672&vkey=wrapup2005&fext=.jsp&team=away

Chips
08-09-2005, 12:28 AM
Didn't A-Rod intentionally knock the ball out of the first baseman's glove last year in the ALCS vs Boston?

He's a damn cheater.

kobo
08-09-2005, 12:40 AM
****ing blind bat or idiot Wendelstadt saw the whole play in front of him and didn't call it. Riggoddamndiculous.
The call was bad, but there is the possibility he did not see what happened. Wendlestedt seems to be a pretty inept umpire, so he may have been focusing on first base and if Sheffield was going to beat the throw to first or not. He was about halfway down the line when the play happened, so who knows what he saw. I know I would have seen it, but I don't think we can give Wendlestedt the benefit of the doubt here. At least the blown call didn't lead to anything.

And what A-Rod did was yet again another bush league move. After his slapping of the ball out of the glove in last year's ALCS and then what happened tonight, my hatred for him has grown ten-fold. I hope the Yankees never win the WS with A-Rod, I don't want to see that ass ever get a ring.

tstrike2000
08-09-2005, 01:24 AM
Didn't A-Rod intentionally knock the ball out of the first baseman's glove last year in the ALCS vs Boston?

He's a damn cheater.

Yes, he did. I think trying to get away with stuff like this is just part of being a Yankee.

skobabe8
08-09-2005, 01:53 AM
If you missed it, the play is on the 'Top Plays' video highlights on the White Sox website. It's the clip called "Dye's catch at the wall"

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/wrap.jsp?ymd=20050808&content_id=1162672&vkey=wrapup2005&fext=.jsp&team=away

And its the Yanks announcers commenting on the "smart" play by Adrillrod.

itsnotrequired
08-09-2005, 07:31 AM
The call was bad, but there is the possibility he did not see what happened. Wendlestedt seems to be a pretty inept umpire, so he may have been focusing on first base and if Sheffield was going to beat the throw to first or not. He was about halfway down the line when the play happened, so who knows what he saw. I know I would have seen it, but I don't think we can give Wendlestedt the benefit of the doubt here. At least the blown call didn't lead to anything.

EXACTLY!!! I was saying this in the gameday thread. If you miss the entire play, it doesn't matter if you know the rule or not. You cannot rule on what you cannot see. I would find it hard to believe that the crew wouldn't know the rules but find it very easy to believe that they just missed the play. The angle of the umpires in relationship to the players, the hop the ball took, etc. made it a hard play to rule on. The replay shows what obviously happened but the umpires couldn't make use of that. It was still a blown call but IMHO, not a blown call based upon not knowing the rules. Result? This is baseball and things like this happen. Move along.

BeviBall!
08-09-2005, 08:10 AM
Hunter saw the whole play. Is it just coincidence that this kind of stuff happens to us only when he's working the game? I doubt it... it's obvious he's carrying a grudge.

Any of the other umps could have stepped in, but chose not to. That's pretty pathetic considering the years Frodo Froemming has been an ump.

harwar
08-09-2005, 08:22 AM
Yea,a-rod is a bad actor.
He threw his arms up at the last second and twisted his hips ever so slightly like a bullfighter,while trying to line up his body with the ball.
Also,that missed call was bad enough but the missed call at first base with Scotty running and not giving El Duque the outside corner while giving mussina the inside corner was a handicap for the White Sox.

fquaye149
08-09-2005, 08:32 AM
Now... the conspiracy theory junk bothers me too. No, the umps do not have it in for us.


Ok...well this is debatable.

I mean, no the umps don't have it in for us, but Wendlestedt hates Ozzie. Plain and simple. He talked **** to him last year and said some inappropriate things. He ran him from a game this year just for coming out of the dugout. He hates Ozzie. Period.

You draw your own conclusions when an umpire like Wendlestedt absolutely hates the manager of a team. Throw in the fact that he has been blowing calls against us and the evidence looks grim to say that he's calling a fair game. Conspiracy? Maybe not, but I don't feel confident that a fair game will be called when Wendlestedt is standing in black.

Bucky F. Dent
08-09-2005, 08:39 AM
Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play


To an earlier point. IMHO there is no intent written into this language. If you hinder or impede intentionally or not the other runner is out.

downstairs
08-09-2005, 08:48 AM
EXACTLY!!! I was saying this in the gameday thread. If you miss the entire play, it doesn't matter if you know the rule or not. You cannot rule on what you cannot see. I would find it hard to believe that the crew wouldn't know the rules but find it very easy to believe that they just missed the play. The angle of the umpires in relationship to the players, the hop the ball took, etc. made it a hard play to rule on. The replay shows what obviously happened but the umpires couldn't make use of that. It was still a blown call but IMHO, not a blown call based upon not knowing the rules. Result? This is baseball and things like this happen. Move along.

See... this is where I don't understand this supposed "grey area". There is not a grey area in this rule. And I just like rules followed to the letter, otherwise we're the NBA and NHL.

The rule:
Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner


It does not say "any following play where the guy would have been out." It does not say "any play that would have mattered, in the end".

The second the ball makes contact with A-Rod (and the umps HAD to see that)... even if it just brushes against him, even if he is completely trying to get out of the way... the guy on first is out. Plain and simple. You're out, you can't make contact with the ball.

If I am a fan, with a 1st row seat in fair territory, I cannot make contact with the ball in play. I just can't. My fault or not, its still interferrence. Affects the direction of the ball or not, its still against the rules.

Like I've mentioned... I know it didn't affect the game. I just get angrier and angrier as this sport starts having a lot more "grey areas".

itsnotrequired
08-09-2005, 09:36 AM
See... this is where I don't understand this supposed "grey area". There is not a grey area in this rule. And I just like rules followed to the letter, otherwise we're the NBA and NHL.

The rule:
Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner


It does not say "any following play where the guy would have been out." It does not say "any play that would have mattered, in the end".

The second the ball makes contact with A-Rod (and the umps HAD to see that)... even if it just brushes against him, even if he is completely trying to get out of the way... the guy on first is out. Plain and simple. You're out, you can't make contact with the ball.

If I am a fan, with a 1st row seat in fair territory, I cannot make contact with the ball in play. I just can't. My fault or not, its still interferrence. Affects the direction of the ball or not, its still against the rules.

Like I've mentioned... I know it didn't affect the game. I just get angrier and angrier as this sport starts having a lot more "grey areas".

I'm not saying there is a gray area. Interference is interference, intentional or not. The rules are very clear. All I'm saying is that it appeared as if the umps didn't see the interference. How can you expect them to rule on something they didn't see? As to what they were looking at instead, who knows? I'm guessing they were looking at first base and not the ball. If so, all they would have seen is a long throw from the outfield come up short and bounce away from Konerko. It would be very difficult for them to determine that ARod hit it if they weren't looking directly at him.

People can argue that they did see it and chose to ignore it or they have a vendetta against the Sox or any other excuse they want. It was no doubt a blown call but at this point all that can be done is to have the umps review the play, see how they blew it, learn from the experience and move on.

All this being said, I still think that crew stinks. There are a million other reasons I believe this but this incident isn't at the top of the list.

jdm2662
08-09-2005, 09:41 AM
Ok...well this is debatable.

I mean, no the umps don't have it in for us, but Wendlestedt hates Ozzie. Plain and simple. He talked **** to him last year and said some inappropriate things. He ran him from a game this year just for coming out of the dugout. He hates Ozzie. Period.

You draw your own conclusions when an umpire like Wendlestedt absolutely hates the manager of a team. Throw in the fact that he has been blowing calls against us and the evidence looks grim to say that he's calling a fair game. Conspiracy? Maybe not, but I don't feel confident that a fair game will be called when Wendlestedt is standing in black.

He was also reparmanded after the Oakland game. How many times have you heard umpires getting disciplined or their actions? Not often, but he did after that game. He blew the call. He may very well didn't see it. Would we be having this compiracy discussion if another umpire missed the call? I doubt it. It didn't effect the game. Time to move on.

Ol' No. 2
08-09-2005, 09:43 AM
See... this is where I don't understand this supposed "grey area". There is not a grey area in this rule. And I just like rules followed to the letter, otherwise we're the NBA and NHL.

The rule:
Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner


It does not say "any following play where the guy would have been out." It does not say "any play that would have mattered, in the end".

The second the ball makes contact with A-Rod (and the umps HAD to see that)... even if it just brushes against him, even if he is completely trying to get out of the way... the guy on first is out. Plain and simple. You're out, you can't make contact with the ball.

If I am a fan, with a 1st row seat in fair territory, I cannot make contact with the ball in play. I just can't. My fault or not, its still interferrence. Affects the direction of the ball or not, its still against the rules.

Like I've mentioned... I know it didn't affect the game. I just get angrier and angrier as this sport starts having a lot more "grey areas".That's simply not true. The same can be said for obstruction calls. Runners get only the bases they would have had if not for the obstruction. You can't hinder or impede a play that would not have otherwise been made.

And your fan interference example is not correct, either. I've seen plenty of cases where the batter was given a ground rule double but baserunners were allowed to advance more than two bases. If, in the umpire's judgement, the runner would have scored from first, they can allow it. The rule may be written in black and white, but umpires have a lot of leeway in applying them.

MsSoxVixen22
08-09-2005, 09:50 AM
My Dad and I had the same reaction you guys did. A-Rod clearly should have been out. That was a BS call. Scott was safe as well, IMHO. These umps are going to call the game for the Yankees I think we all know that. A-Rod plays dirty and he gets away with it and its seen as being "smart." If any Sox player did that, they'd be called every name in the book. Its a bunch of BS. These umps really blow. If its possible for these umps to have their **** t/g, I hope they do tonite. We don't need to go to NY and get our ass kicked.

Paulwny
08-09-2005, 10:22 AM
I'm sure there are others besides me who remember Reggie Jackson's interference and the umpire ruling in the 78 world series. Although the rule appears to be quite clear there is a grey area.

From the baseball digest:

Reggie Jackson's sticking his hip out intentionally in the 1978 World Series to deflect a throw from Dodgers shortstop Bill Russell to first baseman Steve Garvey. The umps ruled, however that Jackson did not intentionally deflect the ball with his movement.

Bucky F. Dent
08-09-2005, 10:23 AM
And, after seeing the replay on the Sox site, I'm struggling to see how either the first base umpire or the homeplate umpire did not see the ball hit A-Rod.

the gooch
08-09-2005, 10:30 AM
That's simply not true. The same can be said for obstruction calls. Runners get only the bases they would have had if not for the obstruction. You can't hinder or impede a play that would not have otherwise been made.

And your fan interference example is not correct, either. I've seen plenty of cases where the batter was given a ground rule double but baserunners were allowed to advance more than two bases. If, in the umpire's judgement, the runner would have scored from first, they can allow it. The rule may be written in black and white, but umpires have a lot of leeway in applying them.
to hijack this thread: is there ever a time where a fan would help the team by interfering with the home players? im thinking if the left fielder falls down on a shot down the line and theres a runner on first. also with one out and a runner on third would it help the team to interfere with a deep pop foul to prevent the runner from advancing? the batter is still out, and it cant be assumed that the runner would automatically score. (by the way, great play by scotty yesterday going into the stands.)

the gooch
08-09-2005, 10:34 AM
I'm sure there are others besides me who remember Reggie Jackson's interference and the umpire ruling in the 78 world series. Although the rule appears to be quite clear there is a grey area.

From the baseball digest:

Reggie Jackson's sticking his hip out intentionally in the 1978 World Series to deflect a throw from Dodgers shortstop Bill Russell to first baseman Steve Garvey. The umps ruled, however that Jackson did not intentionally deflect the ball with his movement.
its not that umpires see a grey area, they just see pinstripes.

Knucksie
08-09-2005, 10:55 AM
Rodrieguez certainly looked to me to be acting deliberately, but trying to act nonchalant about it. And as I read the rule, intent has no bearing on it. I guess we'll read about the ruling in tomorrow's papers.

AROD gave the famous pose all defensive backs give when they know they have interferred or basketball players make when they reach in. He lifted up his arms and said, "No, I didn't do it."

BeviBall!
08-09-2005, 10:57 AM
AROD gave the famous pose all defensive backs give when they know they have interferred or basketball players make when they reach in. He lifted up his arms and said, "No, I didn't do it."

That's his pose... he did it last October as well. I believe he has it trademarked.

ode to veeck
08-09-2005, 11:14 AM
this crew is the pits, they've been blowing calls all year, and not just against the Sox

SOX ADDICT '73
08-09-2005, 01:48 PM
this crew is the pits, they've been blowing calls all year, and not just against the Sox
How are umpiring crews chosen for the post-season? Someone raised the point earlier in this thread that Wendelstedt, Froemming & Co. could end up officiating a Sox playoff series, and that troubles me. Surely there are more competent crews out there than this band of idiots.

"Conspiracy" and "vendetta" are loaded words, but this particular crew does seem to have a difficult time calling a fair game when the Sox are involved. Far too many blown calls and confrontations to be considered a coincidence. Going back to last season, Wendelstedt has made no effort to conceal his contempt for Ozzie. It's reached Hugh Hollins vs. the Bulls proportions, for crying out loud.

I wish there were some sort of appeal process in the event these clowns get assigned to a Sox series this fall. But that will never happen, as it would be an admission by MLB that an umpire or umpiring crew could not be objective. Pull them from a series, and you might as well fire them - fat chance! The best we can hope for is that these guys get split up next season. Maybe working with umpires who know how to do their job (and do it impartially) will rub off on them.

SoxEd
08-09-2005, 02:45 PM
OK, this is my worst-case/conspiracy theory/tinfoil-hat-wearing-dystopian nightmare scenario (so apologies in advance) but let's say we have to play Oakland in the ALDS, and the Umpiring crew is announced as Wendlestedt et al.

What would you do?
If I'm managing, at the first call 'blown' in the A's favor, I pull the Sox off the field and forfeit that game - rather than letting stats show we 'lost' it.

When MLB want to chew me out in public I bring up the video of this crew's 'blown calls' against us this season, and point out that with all the history it's just unprofessional for them to be umpiring our games in the post-season.

Or do I need to go back to the Hospital for more ECT?

Flame me now...

downstairs
08-09-2005, 02:50 PM
What would you do?
If I'm managing, at the first call 'blown' in the A's favor, I pull the Sox off the field and forfeit that game - rather than letting stats show we 'lost' it.

When MLB want to chew me out in public I bring up the video of this crew's 'blown calls' against us this season, and point out that with all the history it's just unprofessional for them to be umpiring our games in the post-season.


No, the MLB would then forfeit the next two for you.

What would I do? Manage the game so we win three out of five (or four out of seven games). After that, it would be impossible for the A's to beat us again this season. Because they'd be eliminated.

Also... I'm hoping the Sox put some preventitive measures in place so "blown calls" don't affect us as much. You know, like scoring more than 1, 2, 3 runs...

Dick Allen
08-09-2005, 03:52 PM
Doesn't MLB use some kind of a merit system when choosing umpires for the post-season? I would hope so, since that crew wouldn't have a chance of doing the Sox games, with the probation and all.

34rancher
08-09-2005, 05:38 PM
What would you do?

Seriously? If the game was in Chicago and I knew these guys were the crew ahead of time, I would mail my unused ticket to the Comissionors office and tell him to stick it where the sun don't shine. Sorry, but I would.

Rooney4Prez56
08-09-2005, 10:48 PM
Wendlestedt knew exactly what he was doing. This crew is determined to screw the Sox any chance they get.


He's screwing himself more than the Sox. He looked like an idiot in front of thousands of people.