PDA

View Full Version : Good 10/12 dropped third strike images


downstairs
10-14-2005, 08:09 AM
Good 10/12 dropped third strike images...

http://www.vnvo.com/specials/sox_angels_10-12-05

oeo
10-14-2005, 08:14 AM
They showed a replay like this on FOX last night, except I think they cut out all the frames that would make it look like it hit the ground. Well, in one frame it was about to hit the ground, the next frame it had changed directions into the glove. I really do think that ball hit the ground, whether the replay looks like it did or not, I think it was the right call.

Pulaski
10-14-2005, 08:14 AM
Good 10/12 dropped third strike images...

http://www.vnvo.com/specials/sox_angels_10-12-05

Pretty good site.

As much of the country debates over the third stike it is key to realize that the players moved on and will be ready for Game 3.

Ol' No. 2
10-14-2005, 08:49 AM
Those shots present as good a view as there are and it's still not definative. People will take from it whatever they want. The key points, for all the dimwit TV, radio and newspaper "experts":
Was this a game-changing moment? No. Well, at least no more than the 200+ other plays in the game, each of them having a slight affect on the game. The game changing moments in both games one and two were the White Sox many, many block-headed baserunning and defensive decisions. Both games were presented on a silver platter to the Angels. The Angels didn't deserve to win either game.

Low-and-behold... the series is tied 1-1. Funny how things work out.

bobowhite
10-14-2005, 08:54 AM
I was at the game, sitting in my sisters' season tickets seats. I don't know if the ball touched the ground, but I know it was close. When I first caught in Little League, my coach always said, "When in doubt, tag him out." I can't imagine Josh Paul never heard that.

mike squires
10-14-2005, 09:08 AM
This is the last I'm posting on this subject cuase it is gettinga little tiring. I believe the change in mdirection of the balll was simply due to the late movement on that breaking ball. It was that good that night. I still believe he caught it. I'm just glad we were on the receiving end of the lucky breaks for a change.

Iguana775
10-14-2005, 09:12 AM
This is the last I'm posting on this subject cuase it is gettinga little tiring. I believe the change in mdirection of the balll was simply due to the late movement on that breaking ball. It was that good that night. I still believe he caught it. I'm just glad we were on the receiving end of the lucky breaks for a change.

I didnt know breaking balls broke UP.

Ol' No. 2
10-14-2005, 09:15 AM
I didnt know breaking balls broke UP.Sure. Sometimes they even accelerate as they approach the plate.:rolleyes:

elrod
10-14-2005, 09:16 AM
As I said yesterday, the important angle is the umpire's. From where he is standing, there is no way he can tell if it bounced off the webbing or the ground. For that reason, Josh Paul should have played it safe and tagged out AJ.

OEO Magglio
10-14-2005, 09:21 AM
As I said yesterday, the important angle is the umpire's. From where he is standing, there is no way he can tell if it bounced off the webbing or the ground. For that reason, Josh Paul should have played it safe and tagged out AJ.
The key is both Eddings and AJ both heard two sounds and because of this they both thought the ball hit the ground.

doublem23
10-14-2005, 09:26 AM
I didnt know breaking balls broke UP.

Of course they do. After they hit the ground, that is. :cool:

OEO Magglio
10-14-2005, 09:32 AM
This is the last I'm posting on this subject cuase it is gettinga little tiring. I believe the change in mdirection of the balll was simply due to the late movement on that breaking ball. It was that good that night. I still believe he caught it. I'm just glad we were on the receiving end of the lucky breaks for a change.
You should pitch in the majors if you have a breaking ball that not only breaks down but breaks up as well. That's nasty.

IronFisk
10-14-2005, 11:41 AM
That does it for me. Looks like it bounced in his mitt. See the tiny space between the ball and the ground on the ball's deepest position? Yeah, it still could've "scraped" the ground as well, but more than likely it make it into the mitt first, albeit barely.

Just consider this...if it DID scrape the ground too, then it would have taken a funny bounce due to the edge of the catcher's mitt. Probably would have bounced off of the mitt.

EVEN SO...waaaaaay to close to say the ump "blew the call". I'm also quite sure that instant replay would have NOT overturned this either. Paul should have tagged. Period.

So.ILSoxFan
10-14-2005, 12:36 PM
That does it for me. Looks like it bounced in his mitt. See the tiny space between the ball and the ground on the ball's deepest position? Yeah, it still could've "scraped" the ground as well, but more than likely it make it into the mitt first, albeit barely.

Just consider this...if it DID scrape the ground too, then it would have taken a funny bounce due to the edge of the catcher's mitt. Probably would have bounced off of the mitt.

EVEN SO...waaaaaay to close to say the ump "blew the call". I'm also quite sure that instant replay would have NOT overturned this either. Paul should have tagged. Period.

What I care about more is your sig image. That's sweet.:cool:

mike squires
10-14-2005, 12:39 PM
You should pitch in the majors if you have a breaking ball that not only breaks down but breaks up as well. That's nasty.

Ok, I guess you guys got me there. I guess what I was saying was there was incredible movement on Escobar's ball that night. It was a wicked pitch.

IronFisk
10-14-2005, 01:11 PM
What I care about more is your sig image. That's sweet.:cool:

Thanks! It really hit me when you notice the color used as the backdrop for AL playoff games press conferences. I'm really not stupid-sticious, but it does make you think...