PDA

View Full Version : Cabrera double play interference


...
03-31-2008, 05:23 PM
Per the official MLB rule book...

7.09
(e) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate.


Where do you draw the line???

JermaineDye05
03-31-2008, 05:30 PM
Per the official MLB rule book...

7.09
(e) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate.


Where do you draw the line???

considering Blake did the same thing to Cabreras and baserunners do that all the time, it's pretty BS.

IlliniSox4Life
03-31-2008, 05:30 PM
considering Blake did the same thing to Cabreras and baserunners do that all the time, it's pretty BS.

I agree.

kevingrt
03-31-2008, 05:33 PM
considering Blake did the same thing to Cabreras and baserunners do that all the time, it's pretty BS.

The way the rule is interpreted by almost all umpires and even that same 2B umpire earlier in the game, it is one of the most BS calls you will see all season.

...
03-31-2008, 05:35 PM
The way the rule is interpreted by almost all umpires and even that same 2B umpire earlier in the game, it is one of the most BS calls you will see all season.

There's obvious and then there's OBVIOUS...

WhiteSox5187
03-31-2008, 05:35 PM
Folks, the reason we lost today was because we gave up ten runs. There may have been some bad calls in there, but when you give up ten runs, you're not going to win a lot of games.

kevingrt
03-31-2008, 05:36 PM
Folks, the reason we lost today was because we gave up ten runs. There may have been some bad calls in there, but when you give up ten runs, you're not going to win a lot of games.

We are not arguing that fact at all. When two pitchers give up 10 runs you deserve to lose a ball game. We are discussing this rule not the fact we lost the game.

Optipessimism
03-31-2008, 05:40 PM
Folks, the reason we lost today was because we gave up ten runs. There may have been some bad calls in there, but when you give up ten runs, you're not going to win a lot of games.
It doesn't matter if you allow 10 runs if you can score ten runs, and the Sox per bad officiating were denied the opportunity to score their ten runs.

This is the AMERICAN LEAGUE CENTRAL. This isn't Ozzieball Central. There will be an assload of games won by Cleveland and Detroit this year by similar scores. We have to do the same. Your comment about allowing ten runs, well it works the other way too. If you get shut down to 2 runs that doesn't mean you should look at the game as a lost cause. Sometimes its pitching, sometimes its hitting, but either way every single game is important. Stop making excuses for ****ty umping just to be different. If you watched the game you saw the Sox got screwed.

SoxSpeed22
03-31-2008, 05:41 PM
They were just talking about this on the postgame and I think it was called because it looked like Cabrera reached out with his right arm. If Cabrera was on the base when Blake slid, I don't see any problem with that. But I just got here.

Optipessimism
03-31-2008, 05:43 PM
We are not arguing that fact at all. When two pitchers give up 10 runs you deserve to lose a ball game. We are discussing this rule not the fact we lost the game.
No, you don't. Cleveland gave up 8 runs and should've given up more. Do they deserve to lose? And it works both ways. When your offense only supplies you with one or two runs you don't deserve to lose a game either. This is baseball, and it's a team game.

The Sox got the shaft here. Whether the score ended up being 10-8, 6-4, or 2-0, they still got shafted.

pmck003
03-31-2008, 05:44 PM
I think Cabrera's slide was significantly closer to interference than Blakes based on the official rule. At the same time, I think Cabrera should of gotten away with it based on some of the bad calls, all against the Sox, from earlier in the game.

ElevenUp
03-31-2008, 05:45 PM
If I read lips correctly the second base ump kept telling Ozzie that "He grabbed him". I don't think OC did anything more obvious than someone throwing their legs at a middle infielder while sliding into second.

doublem23
03-31-2008, 05:46 PM
There's obvious and then there's OBVIOUS...

Whatever, dude. You're "going against the crowd" and being "edgy" and "objective." We get it.

I've never seen a good slide at second on a double play that wouldn't break this rule. That **** never gets called. Everyone here can be legitimately pissed at the not 1, not 2, but three calls that went Cleveland's way today.

kevingrt
03-31-2008, 05:47 PM
No, you don't. Cleveland gave up 8 runs and should've given up more. Do they deserve to lose? And it works both ways. When your offense only supplies you with one or two runs you don't deserve to lose a game either. This is baseball, and it's a team game.

The Sox got the shaft here. Whether the score ended up being 10-8, 6-4, or 2-0, they still got shafted.

I agree they did get shafted.

voodoochile
03-31-2008, 05:54 PM
They were just talking about this on the postgame and I think it was called because it looked like Cabrera reached out with his right arm. If Cabrera was on the base when Blake slid, I don't see any problem with that. But I just got here.

Exactly, the plays were completely different. Cabrera got taken out while standing on the bag in a bang bang play where the runner arrived right after the ball and rolled through the bag.

Cabrera was perpendicular to the baseline with his feet on the bag and his body fully extended toward RCF and his arms outstretched above his head. He used his right arm to grab/smack the SS (who was 5 feet off of 2nd) in the knee as the SS prepared to transfer the ball from his glove to his throwing hand.

Rough not to have the call go against us, but at the least I think Orlando willfully and intentionally went out of his way to stretch the rule to the limit and probably broke the spirit of the law minimum. Personally, I think he broke the rule. There was clear contact by an overly extended body part on a fielder who was well away from the bag.

Jjav829
03-31-2008, 05:55 PM
If I read lips correctly the second base ump kept telling Ozzie that "He grabbed him". I don't think OC did anything more obvious than someone throwing their legs at a middle infielder while sliding into second.

That was my thought as well. I thought the ump called interference not based on when Cabrera slid, but rather because when Cabrera slid his arm went up and hit Peralta's leg.

btrain929
03-31-2008, 05:56 PM
Per the official MLB rule book...

7.09
(e) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate.


Where do you draw the line???

The only time it should be called is if the baserunner doesn't make an attempt at, or touches, the base he's sliding into. Cabrera and Blake did both, so nothing should have been called.

btrain929
03-31-2008, 05:57 PM
Folks, the reason we lost today was because we gave up ten runs. There may have been some bad calls in there, but when you give up ten runs, you're not going to win a lot of games.

Thanks for your input. However, that's not what this thread is about.

turners56
03-31-2008, 05:57 PM
Folks, the reason we lost today was because we gave up ten runs. There may have been some bad calls in there, but when you give up ten runs, you're not going to win a lot of games.

But what if I told you we could of scored 12? Cabrera's play was a lot more obvious than Blake's, but Blake's was a whole lot dirtier. He could of taken out Cabrera's knee, yet nothing freaking happened. I'm sick of this bull****, I thought that umps can see some sense before, but now I think replay should be thought of in some form.

Whitesox029
03-31-2008, 05:58 PM
Cabrera's hand hit the guy in the shoulder. I think that's pretty obviously interference. I was more annoyed at the two blown calls that both cost us runs (AJ at 1st in the 7th and Crede at home in the 8th). So while I agree that the umps handed this one right over to Cleveland, I don't agree that the interference call was BS.

btrain929
03-31-2008, 05:59 PM
Exactly, the plays were completely different. Cabrera got taken out while standing on the bag in a bang bang play where the runner arrived right after the ball and rolled through the bag.

Cabrera was perpendicular to the baseline with his feet on the bag and his body fully extended toward RCF and his arms outstretched above his head. He used his right arm to grab/smack the SS (who was 5 feet off of 2nd) in the knee as the SS prepared to transfer the ball from his glove to his throwing hand.

Rough not to have the call go against us, but at the least I think Orlando willfully and intentionally went out of his way to stretch the rule to the limit and probably broke the spirit of the law minimum. Personally, I think he broke the rule. There was clear contact by an overly extended body part on a fielder who was well away from the bag.

That's a long ****ing right arm.....:rolleyes:

TomBradley72
03-31-2008, 05:59 PM
If I read lips correctly the second base ump kept telling Ozzie that "He grabbed him".

That's exactly why it was called...you can see in the replay that Cabrera grabbed his leg. Very unfortunate...he didn't need to do that...his slide alone would have broken up the DP. It's probably something you get away with 50% of the time...not today.

voodoochile
03-31-2008, 06:01 PM
That's a long ****ing right arm.....:rolleyes:

Not really his whole body was laying that direction. The His head almost collided with the SS's other knee. If he hadn't grabbed the guy, he'd might have got away with it, but he grabbed him. It was obvious.

turners56
03-31-2008, 06:02 PM
Cabrera's hand hit the guy in the shoulder. I think that's pretty obviously interference. I was more annoyed at the two blown calls that both cost us runs (AJ at 1st in the 7th and Crede at home in the 8th). So while I agree that the umps handed this one right over to Cleveland, I don't agree that the interference call was BS.

It looked like his thigh.

veeter
03-31-2008, 06:09 PM
The sad part is, it looked Piralta wasn't even going to make the relay throw. IMO, the blown call with Crede was the worst of all. Simply because the ump was lazy and out of position, which I can't stand. If Joe scores it's 8-7 with bases loaded and no outs. Either way, other than Mark and Dotel the game was awesome. Mark will be fine, Dotel I just don't know.

kevingrt
03-31-2008, 06:09 PM
The call on AJ at 1st was the worst out of all of them though. That's the sad part.

...
03-31-2008, 06:11 PM
Whatever, dude. You're "going against the crowd" and being "edgy" and "objective." We get it.

I've never seen a good slide at second on a double play that wouldn't break this rule. That **** never gets called. Everyone here can be legitimately pissed at the not 1, not 2, but three calls that went Cleveland's way today.

Whatever, dude. You can "go with the crowd" and "ignore the umpire's right to use his discretion to interpret the rule" and whatever. I get it.

Seriously? I'm not allowed to have a point of view? I don't like the call at all but that's why they don't have fans calling the games...

soxinem1
03-31-2008, 06:14 PM
This is like the phantom DP. It happens. It's not always called, and sometimes it is obvious.

If Cabrera roadblocked him in an obvious fashion, sure. But this, like the blown call at the plate, and Garko missing tagging the bag were BS calls.

Like Hawk always says, there is no excuse for bad ump calls to factor in a game. The game should be decided by the players, not the umps.

Who knows how the game goes if the calls at first and home are made properly.

...
03-31-2008, 06:15 PM
Exactly, the plays were completely different. Cabrera got taken out while standing on the bag in a bang bang play where the runner arrived right after the ball and rolled through the bag.

Cabrera was perpendicular to the baseline with his feet on the bag and his body fully extended toward RCF and his arms outstretched above his head. He used his right arm to grab/smack the SS (who was 5 feet off of 2nd) in the knee as the SS prepared to transfer the ball from his glove to his throwing hand.

Rough not to have the call go against us, but at the least I think Orlando willfully and intentionally went out of his way to stretch the rule to the limit and probably broke the spirit of the law minimum. Personally, I think he broke the rule. There was clear contact by an overly extended body part on a fielder who was well away from the bag.

Great points. At some point you have to draw a line and the umpire did just that.

I really enjoy watching Cabrera play the game, he brings A LOT of energy and that's exactly what this team needs...

oeo
03-31-2008, 06:17 PM
Per the official MLB rule book...

7.09
(e) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate.


Where do you draw the line???

That's what the problem is, and why people are so upset. The judgment of the umpire sucked ass.

SoxandtheCityTee
03-31-2008, 06:19 PM
That was my thought as well. I thought the ump called interference not based on when Cabrera slid, but rather because when Cabrera slid his arm went up and hit Peralta's leg.

Me too. The runner can use his legs (within reason) when sliding into second. Use your hands or arms to reach out for the fielder and there's far more likely to be a call. That's my observation anyway.

BadBobbyJenks
03-31-2008, 06:20 PM
For as long as I have been watching baseball if you can reach the bag it is not interference. This was a terrible call plain and simple.

Jjav829
03-31-2008, 06:33 PM
For as long as I have been watching baseball if you can reach the bag it is not interference. This was a terrible call plain and simple.

It's not like this is the first time this has been called. Hell, it happened last October in the playoffs. Game 1 of the NLCS. Justin Upton goes into second hard, but takes out Kaz Matsui with his shoulder. The umpire rules interference on Upton and calls both him and Augie Ojeda, the batter who hit the ball, out. D'backs fans were so upset they threw trash onto the field and Clint Hurdle pulled his players off the field.

Taliesinrk
03-31-2008, 06:38 PM
The irony of this whole thing is that I thought after the game today things around here would settle down. Don't get me wrong.. I'm bitching too. But damn.. this place is bananas. What a start to the season.

Here's to a good Wednesday ass-whipping where we beat Cleveland so badly that we won't remember that there even are umps. :gulp:

Lip Man 1
03-31-2008, 06:40 PM
Am not debating in any way shape or form the fact that the umpiring was lousy this afternoon.

HOWEVER let's remember this, with the bases loaded and NO out, neither Cabrera nor Thome could even get the ball out of the infield. Rip a clean hit or drive a deep sacrifice fly and the umpires aren't even involved in the plays.

We saw a ton of awful clutch hitting last year didn't we?

And one other thing. This speaks as an indictment of umpiring but nonetheless could be a fact because they are human.

The White Sox lost 90 games last year, until they "prove" themselves (for want of a better word) they aren't going to get the benefit of the calls. That's the way it is. Lousy and wrong but a reality in my opinion. Umpires think, "who cares, they are a garbage team anyway..."

Lip

Taliesinrk
03-31-2008, 06:42 PM
Am not debating in any way shape or form the fact that the umpiring was lousy this afternoon.

HOWEVER let's remember this, with the bases loaded and NO out, neither Cabrera nor Thome could even get the ball out of the infield. Rip a clean hit or drive a deep sacrifice fly and the umpires aren't even involved in the plays.

We saw a ton of awful clutch hitting last year didn't we?

And one other thing. This speaks as an indictment of umpiring but nonetheless could be a fact because they are human.

The White Sox lost 90 games last year, until they "prove" themselves (for want of a better word) they aren't going to get the benefit of the calls. That's the way it is. Lousy and wrong but a reality in my opinion. Umpires think, "who cares, they are a garbage team anyway..."

Lip

We did.. but let's not forget, we had some clutch hits today as well. See: PK and AJ, and maybe even Juan with his 2B after failing to move Crede over on a bunt.

sox1970
03-31-2008, 06:42 PM
The White Sox lost 90 games last year, until they "prove" themselves (for want of a better word) they aren't going to get the benefit of the calls. That's the way it is. Lousy and wrong but a reality in my opinion. Umpires think, "who cares, they are a garbage team anyway..."

I think this is horse****.

Patrick134
03-31-2008, 06:45 PM
Am not debating in any way shape or form the fact that the umpiring was lousy this afternoon.

HOWEVER let's remember this, with the bases loaded and NO out, neither Cabrera nor Thome could even get the ball out of the infield. Rip a clean hit or drive a deep sacrifice fly and the umpires aren't even involved in the plays.

We saw a ton of awful clutch hitting last year didn't we?

And one other thing. This speaks as an indictment of umpiring but nonetheless could be a fact because they are human.

The White Sox lost 90 games last year, until they "prove" themselves (for want of a better word) they aren't going to get the benefit of the calls. That's the way it is. Lousy and wrong but a reality in my opinion. Umpires think, "who cares, they are a garbage team anyway..."

Lip


Umpires being human is one thing. But blowing 3 calls in the span of an inning is insane.

BadBobbyJenks
03-31-2008, 06:47 PM
It's not like this is the first time this has been called. Hell, it happened last October in the playoffs. Game 1 of the NLCS. Justin Upton goes into second hard, but takes out Kaz Matsui with his shoulder. The umpire rules interference on Upton and calls both him and Augie Ojeda, the batter who hit the ball, out. D'backs fans were so upset they threw trash onto the field and Clint Hurdle pulled his players off the field.


Ok you are right it is not the first time it has been called. But it was a brutal call regardless.

Tragg
03-31-2008, 06:52 PM
If someone gets a chance, could you summarize what happened and what the issue is? Thanks

...
03-31-2008, 06:57 PM
If someone gets a chance, could you summarize what happened and what the issue is? Thanks

A questionable but well-within-the-rules call was made when Orlando Cabrera was called for interference while sliding into 2nd base. OC had his foot on the bag and reached out in an attempt to grab Jhonny Peralta and hinder his relay to 1st base.

The umpire called OC out at 2nd and Jim Thome out at 1st.

btrain929
03-31-2008, 06:59 PM
Am not debating in any way shape or form the fact that the umpiring was lousy this afternoon.

HOWEVER let's remember this, with the bases loaded and NO out, neither Cabrera nor Thome could even get the ball out of the infield. Rip a clean hit or drive a deep sacrifice fly and the umpires aren't even involved in the plays.

We saw a ton of awful clutch hitting last year didn't we?

And one other thing. This speaks as an indictment of umpiring but nonetheless could be a fact because they are human.

The White Sox lost 90 games last year, until they "prove" themselves (for want of a better word) they aren't going to get the benefit of the calls. That's the way it is. Lousy and wrong but a reality in my opinion. Umpires think, "who cares, they are a garbage team anyway..."

Lip

Hahahaha. After a stressful game, I needed a laugh, thank you.

:rolleyes:

FarWestChicago
03-31-2008, 07:04 PM
Umpires think, "who cares, they are a garbage team anyway..."

LipNo Lip, that's what you think. You are not capable of reading the minds of the umpires. :rolleyes:

35th and Shields
03-31-2008, 07:20 PM
maybe cabrera's slide crossed the line of the rule book and should be called an out in a typical game, but when a team gets screwed on 2 bad calls immediately beforehand I would think you have to give them the benefit of the doubt in this situation

doublem23
03-31-2008, 07:23 PM
Whatever, dude. You can "go with the crowd" and "ignore the umpire's right to use his discretion to interpret the rule" and whatever. I get it.

Seriously? I'm not allowed to have a point of view? I don't like the call at all but that's why they don't have fans calling the games...


Sure you are, but you should expect to be called out for your opinion when it's presented in a pretty annoying fashion.

doublem23
03-31-2008, 07:24 PM
The White Sox lost 90 games last year, until they "prove" themselves (for want of a better word) they aren't going to get the benefit of the calls. That's the way it is. Lousy and wrong but a reality in my opinion. Umpires think, "who cares, they are a garbage team anyway..."

Good to see you're in mid-season form, Lip. :rolleyes:

Lip Man 1
03-31-2008, 07:25 PM
West:

There's no absolute way to know with 100% accuracy and I said that in my post ("could be a fact because they are human") but it wouldn't surprise me in the least. It was my opinion. That's human nature. If you're not the 'supposed' elite (think Yankees or Red Sox) I'm sure in my mind there are some umpires who think like I stated. There were a lot of 'controversial' calls against the Sox last year too. Maybe it was coincidence, maybe not. It was just a thought... if it was a bad one, I withdraw my statement.

Double:

I stated that was based on last year. Hunter Wendlestadt (sorry about the spelling) is a great example.

Lip

DickAllen72
03-31-2008, 07:27 PM
The way the rule is interpreted by almost all umpires and even that same 2B umpire earlier in the game, it is one of the most BS calls you will see all season.
I agree. However.....

Orlando Cabrera needs to take sliding lessons from Casey Blake. He could have easily gone in hard into the second-baseman and cleanly broke up that DP. Instead, he goes straight into the bag, then reaches out with his hand. Poor play by OC.

cws05champ
03-31-2008, 07:29 PM
We are not arguing that fact at all. When two pitchers give up 10 runs you deserve to lose a ball game. We are discussing this rule not the fact we lost the game.
True...but would have the Indians scored those 3 runs if the Sox had a 2 run lead at the time? You don't know...no one does. Does Jenks come in to get the last out of the 8th if they have the lead there?

So everyone that is saying stop bitching about the calls because we gave up 10 runs need to consider that getting the lead in the game vs a tie changes the whole dynamic of the game. Not to mention the momentum.

Jjav829
03-31-2008, 07:29 PM
I agree. However.....

Orlando Cabrera needs to take sliding lessons from Casey Blake. He could have easily gone in hard into the second-baseman and cleanly broke up that DP. Instead, he goes straight into the bag, then reaches out with his hand. Poor play by OC.

I think someone said it earlier, but Cabrera went in backwards. He tried to touch the bag with his feet and ended up using his arm to take out Peralta. He should have slid using his hand to grab the base and his feet to take out Peralta. If he does that, there's no issue here.

DickAllen72
03-31-2008, 07:30 PM
I think someone said it earlier, but Cabrera went in backwards. He tried to touch the bag with his feet and ended up using his arm to take out Peralta. He should have slid using his hand to grab the base and his feet to take out Peralta. If he does that, there's no issue here.
Exactly.

Paulwny
03-31-2008, 07:32 PM
I agree. However.....

Orlando Cabrera needs to take sliding lessons from Casey Blake. He could have easily gone in hard into the second-baseman and cleanly broke up that DP. Instead, he goes straight into the bag, then reaches out with his hand. Poor play by OC.

I think someone said it earlier, but Cabrera went in backwards. He tried to touch the bag with his feet and ended up using his arm to take out Peralta. He should have slid using his hand to grab the base and his feet to take out Peralta. If he does that, there's no issue here.


Agree, the slide takes out the fielder not a grab with a hand.

TDog
03-31-2008, 07:48 PM
Am not debating in any way shape or form the fact that the umpiring was lousy this afternoon.

HOWEVER let's remember this, with the bases loaded and NO out, neither Cabrera nor Thome could even get the ball out of the infield. Rip a clean hit or drive a deep sacrifice fly and the umpires aren't even involved in the plays.

We saw a ton of awful clutch hitting last year didn't we?

And one other thing. This speaks as an indictment of umpiring but nonetheless could be a fact because they are human.

The White Sox lost 90 games last year, until they "prove" themselves (for want of a better word) they aren't going to get the benefit of the calls. That's the way it is. Lousy and wrong but a reality in my opinion. Umpires think, "who cares, they are a garbage team anyway..."

Lip

The White Sox' 2007 record has no more to do with the calls going against them today than any leftover animosity from the the 2005 championship run did. Three of the four umpires made calls they believed were the right calls, I'm sure.

The Sox had some clutch hitting and failed in some clutch situations. The bad calls all came on plays where the Indians defense seemingly, apparently nearly -- whatever adjective you want to use there -- botched relatively easy plays. When Thome hit into the interference doubleplay, Thome hit it as a routine doubleplay ball. Had someone with some speed had hit the ball, the interference may not have been so obvious.

As I posted in the game thread, I think the way the opening game unfolded, with the comeback and so many calls going against them, this game could bring the team together.

But if every game goes like this, it could be 1977 all over again, with the Sox developing a cult following while finishing 13 games behind the Royals.

TomBradley72
03-31-2008, 07:55 PM
I think someone said it earlier, but Cabrera went in backwards. He tried to touch the bag with his feet and ended up using his arm to take out Peralta. He should have slid using his hand to grab the base and his feet to take out Peralta. If he does that, there's no issue here.

Well said.

...
03-31-2008, 08:04 PM
Sure you are, but you should expect to be called out for your opinion when it's presented in a pretty annoying fashion.

Likewise...

Bill Naharodny
03-31-2008, 08:26 PM
Per the official MLB rule book...

7.09
(e) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate.


Where do you draw the line???

In my mind, Cabrera went in "the obvious intent to break up a double play." The question is whether he "deliberately interfere[d] with . . . a fielder."

The rule book places this determination in the umpire's judgment.

I take issue with his judgment. In my judgment, Peralta already had the ball, had recorded an out at second and wasn't going to make a play at first. To me, therefore, there was no interference.

Just for the heck of it, I went to dictionary.com (I know, a truly irrefutable source) and found this definition of "interfere;"

"to strike against each other, or one against another, so as to hamper or hinder action; come into physical collision."

Physical collision? Yes. Hamper or hinder action? No.

Again, it's a judgment call, made in a bang-bang fashion. But if you're a stickler for the rules, as the umpire seemed to be, then you better be a stickler all the way.

He got it wrong.

TheOldRoman
03-31-2008, 08:43 PM
West:

There's no absolute way to know with 100% accuracy and I said that in my post ("could be a fact because they are human") but it wouldn't surprise me in the least. It was my opinion. That's human nature. If you're not the 'supposed' elite (think Yankees or Red Sox) I'm sure in my mind there are some umpires who think like I stated. There were a lot of 'controversial' calls against the Sox last year too. Maybe it was coincidence, maybe not. It was just a thought... if it was a bad one, I withdraw my statement.

Double:

I stated that was based on last year. Hunter Wendelstadt (sorry about the spelling) is a great example.

LipThere is no doubt that many umpires are horribly inconsistent and biased. I don't know specifically that many call it like the NBA, where you will get all the calls if your team is good.

As for individual players, nobody can deny that certain players get every call. Greg Maddox in his prime got an extra six inches off the plate. Johan Santana, as good as he is, routinely got 6-8 inches off the plate. So much so that, after the Twins lost a game in which the ump actually called a consistent strike zone, Ron Gardenhire got thrown out and then called out the umpires after the game. He basically said "How dare they, he is Johan ****ing Santana, you have to respect him with all the calls".

I don't think the Sox are a garbage team this year, and I don't think this is the issue. The White Sox have been completely over by the umpires at every possible chance for much of the past three years. I have said it a dozen times, but it all stems from an incident with that piece of crap Wendelstedt and Froemming in 04. Bruce Froemming beached himself behind second base. Carlos Lee successfully stole second, but was called out because Froemming couldn't manage to move his 450 pound sack of crap into the line of sight so he could actually see the play. The SS was blocking his view, and he didn't even make an attempt to tag Lee. Ozzie had the nerve to call them out about it. The next year, after horribly biased strike zones and and a questionable call against the Sox, Wendelstedt threw out Ozzie before he even left the dugout. He holds a grudge. He was suspended for his actions, but only because the Comcast cameras caught him telling Ozzie to "Shut the **** up. You don't know what you are talking about."

Umpiring is the good 'ol boys club. They protect their own, and they don't like to be called out for their laziness and incompetence. Since that game, the Sox have beed screwed over repeatedly. It is rarely in the forms of obvious blown calls as we had today. Most of the times the umps will squeeze the Sox pitcher, and give the opponent and extra 8 inches. Since there is no accountability for the umpires, I don't think it will stop any time soon. As long as Ozzie is the Sox' manager, they will be screwed over.

BeviBall!
03-31-2008, 09:37 PM
I think someone said it earlier, but Cabrera went in backwards. He tried to touch the bag with his feet and ended up using his arm to take out Peralta. He should have slid using his hand to grab the base and his feet to take out Peralta. If he does that, there's no issue here.

Yep. Just made the same observation in the postgame thread. My initial thought was, "what the hell are you doing, OC?"

IlliniSox4Life
03-31-2008, 10:11 PM
Folks, the reason we lost today was because we gave up ten runs. There may have been some bad calls in there, but when you give up ten runs, you're not going to win a lot of games.

Actually, we lost today because all of the events that occurred during the game led to the final score being higher for Cleveland than for us. A lot of those events were Cleveland scoring runs, however quite a few of those events were also ****ty calls by the umpires that prevented us from scoring the runs that would have scored if the correct calls were made.

It is true that when you give up 10 runs, you aren't going to win a lot of games. However, when the umpires make calls such that the 10 runs you would have given up are only counted as 8, you will win a few more than if they made the correct calls.

fquaye149
03-31-2008, 10:24 PM
West:

There's no absolute way to know with 100% accuracy and I said that in my post ("could be a fact because they are human") but it wouldn't surprise me in the least. It was my opinion. That's human nature. If you're not the 'supposed' elite (think Yankees or Red Sox) I'm sure in my mind there are some umpires who think like I stated. There were a lot of 'controversial' calls against the Sox last year too. Maybe it was coincidence, maybe not. It was just a thought... if it was a bad one, I withdraw my statement.

Double:

I stated that was based on last year. Hunter Wendlestadt (sorry about the spelling) is a great example.

Lip

Wendlestadt has always had a hardon to screw us over, whether we're a winning team or losing tem

Elephant
03-31-2008, 10:26 PM
Why is it okay to take out the SS with the lower body and not the upper?

Either way, they ****ing owed us one at that point, not to employ a subjective b.s. call to cost us an out and a bunch of runs. We got screwed not once, not twice, but thrice.

This stuff happens once every 12-18 months it seems where the game turns into the Twilight Zone where all of the umpires are conspiring against us. It's like a bad dream where the crew removes their shirts to expose Indian jerseys underneath.

In other words, let it go. Hopefully they get fined or whatever the appropriate punishment is. The third one could go either way really, but the two missed tags were unacceptable.

Jjav829
04-01-2008, 07:18 AM
Why is it okay to take out the SS with the lower body and not the upper?

It's a thin line. If you slide using your hand to grab the base and your lower body to take out the fielder, the takeout is considering to be part of the slide, since you could technically just be trying to grab the base and your body just happens to take out the fielder. Obviously everyone knows the intention of the runner, but it's considering part of the slide.

If you slide with your feet going for the bag, and you use your arm to actively reach out and hit the fielder, it's generally considered to be more than just part of the slide.

It's not a huge difference, but I suppose if you're an umpire, you have to draw the line somewhere or players will keep trying to stretch the limit.

oeo
04-01-2008, 10:35 AM
Agree, the slide takes out the fielder not a grab with a hand.

I just want to point this out: ESPN slows the play down, and it does not look as if he grabs Peralta's leg. Obviously his arm is out there, and it hits Peralta's knee, but it's not as clear cut as some of you are making it.

voodoochile
04-01-2008, 10:41 AM
I just want to point this out: ESPN slows the play down, and it does not look as if he grabs Peralta's leg. Obviously his arm is out there, and it hits Peralta's knee, but it's not as clear cut as some of you are making it.

In super slomo HD I assume. Ump doesn't have the benefit of that though does he? He can't even watch a standard slow motion replay. Once that hand hits the thigh/knee it's up to the ump. Under the circumstances, I still think he made a good call. I don't like the results, but can't blame the ump for ruling as he did.

Paulwny
04-01-2008, 10:44 AM
I just want to point this out: ESPN slows the play down, and it does not look as if he grabs Peralta's leg. Obviously his arm is out there, and it hits Peralta's knee, but it's not as clear cut as some of you are making it.

According to today's Trib., the sox agreed with the call.

Elephant
04-01-2008, 10:47 AM
I could see how slomo could make it look questionable but the first impression I had was that he was grabbing at the SS with his arms to prevent the play. It just looked bad.

I just think that it was b.s. to call us on that considering A. we'd just gotten screwed out of runs twice on botched calls, and B. was he even gonna attempt to turn it? Maybe he'd given up on account of the "interference" but from his body language it sure didn't look like he was gonna turn it.

Oldfellah
04-01-2008, 12:26 PM
Why does it seem like we are always on the bad side of these calls... ******* Umps!!

voodoochile
04-01-2008, 12:36 PM
Why does it seem like we are always on the bad side of these calls... ******* Umps!!

They don't, it's just the way we remember things. We tend to gloss over the times we got the benefit of a call because we don't like to admit we got lucky to score/win/etc. Our brain quickly forgets that stuff, but boy do we remember the times we think we got screwed.

It's like in poker. You remember the bad beats you took, but not the bad beats you handed out...

TheVulture
04-01-2008, 12:49 PM
How can this be viewed as a bad call? Unless applying a tag or trying to lessen the impact of a collision, there is no reason in the world for a player to ever put his hands on an opposing player during play. Pretty simple, if you ask me.

gogosox16
04-01-2008, 01:07 PM
By this game alone, this is why I think the MLB should initiate reviews, give each team 2 reviews per game (can't be balls or strikes). The game goes so fast that Umpires are going to make mistakes. But this would give a better oportunity for the opposing team, that doesn't believe the call is right.

PorkChopExpress
04-01-2008, 01:29 PM
Why does it seem like we are always on the bad side of these calls... ******* Umps!!

How soon we forget the infamous AJ "strikeout" in the 2005 ALCS. And the phantom tag in that series as well.

CLR01
04-01-2008, 01:44 PM
How can this be viewed as a bad call?

Because it went against the Sox. Get with the program.

A.T. Money
04-01-2008, 01:46 PM
Here is what I'd like to know.

Why does the homeplate umpire appeal to the baselines on a check swing that they cannot judge because of the angle, but base umpires won't appeal to another base umpire when they can't make a judgment because of angles. In both the first base AJ play and homeplate Crede play, the umpires had bad angles to make a good call. Don't you think it was possible that the second base umpire could have seen that Garko was off of the base at first? Maybe the third base umpire could have seen the catcher miss Crede.

I just don't understand why appeals can't be made when bad angles are taken. Neither the first base nor the homeplate umpire were in any position to make a call on those plays. Cost the Sox the game. That 8th inning could have been huge.

DickAllen72
04-01-2008, 01:50 PM
How soon we forget the infamous AJ "strikeout" in the 2005 ALCS. And the phantom tag in that series as well.
You mean the correct dropped third strike call and calling AJ safe at first when he was tagged with an empty mitt? Those were not bad calls.

voodoochile
04-01-2008, 01:50 PM
Here is what I'd like to know.

Why does the homeplate umpire appeal to the baselines on a check swing that they cannot judge because of the angle, but base umpires won't appeal to another base umpire when they can't make a judgment because of angles. In both the first base AJ play and homeplate Crede play, the umpires had bad angles to make a good call. Don't you think it was possible that the second base umpire could have seen that Garko was off of the base at first? Maybe the third base umpire could have seen the catcher miss Crede.

I just don't understand why appeals can't be made when bad angles are taken. Neither the first base nor the homeplate umpire were in any position to make a call on those plays. Cost the Sox the game. That 8th inning could have been huge.

It's different situations. On a pitched ball the base umps have the responsibility of watching the batter for a swing. However when the ball is in play, they all have their own responsibilities. You don't really want the 1B ump concentrating on anything but whether the guy approaching first is safe or out.

In yesterday's situation the bases were loaded and the ball was hit on the ground in the infield. That means every single ump had to pay attention to their base to make a potential call.

They do consult, but it's not like yesterday it would have changed a thing. Both "blown" calls were bases loaded infield grounder situations.

PorkChopExpress
04-01-2008, 01:55 PM
You mean the correct dropped third strike call and calling AJ safe at first when he was tagged with an empty mitt? Those were not bad calls.

The dropped third strike call could have gone either way. But yes, the tag with an empty mitt was the right call. My point is that strange calls have gone our way in the past.

Madvora
04-01-2008, 01:56 PM
You mean the correct dropped third strike call and calling AJ safe at first when he was tagged with an empty mitt? Those were not bad calls.
A couple more...

The ball hitting Dye's bat instead of arm that led to the Konerko grand slam was a huge one that went our way.
Also, the Astros had that homerun called in game 3 that hit below the line, that went against us.

A.T. Money
04-01-2008, 01:56 PM
It's different situations. On a pitched ball the base umps have the responsibility of watching the batter for a swing. However when the ball is in play, they all have their own responsibilities. You don't really want the 1B ump concentrating on anything but whether the guy approaching first is safe or out.

In yesterday's situation the bases were loaded and the ball was hit on the ground in the infield. That means every single ump had to pay attention to their base to make a potential call.

They do consult, but it's not like yesterday it would have changed a thing. Both "blown" calls were bases loaded infield grounder situations.

The one in the 7th was a first and third situation.

And I'm sure the second base umpire saw the play at first. The homeplate umpire has about as close of a view on the check swing, but it's all about angles.

The third base ump should have been in a secondary position once the ball was thrown home. I'm sure he could have seen the play clearly.

ajismyhero
04-01-2008, 01:58 PM
By this game alone, this is why I think the MLB should initiate reviews, give each team 2 reviews per game (can't be balls or strikes). The game goes so fast that Umpires are going to make mistakes. But this would give a better oportunity for the opposing team, that doesn't believe the call is right.

I think MLB should do reviews, as well, but in this Cabrera/interference call, I don't think Ozzie would have even had it reviewed because even he was okay the ump's decision.

jabrch
04-01-2008, 01:59 PM
Here is what I'd like to know.

Why does the homeplate umpire appeal to the baselines on a check swing that they cannot judge because of the angle, but base umpires won't appeal to another base umpire when they can't make a judgment because of angles.

They do - quite a bit. You see umpires conference to make sure they get the correct a bunch of times.

That doesn't mean they always get the call correct - they didn't yesterday. But it isn't like it never happens.

voodoochile
04-01-2008, 01:59 PM
The one in the 7th was a first and third situation.

And I'm sure the second base umpire saw the play at first. The homeplate umpire has about as close of a view on the check swing, but it's all about angles.

The third base ump should have been in a secondary position once the ball was thrown home. I'm sure he could have seen the play clearly.

You think in the 1/2 second it takes for the ball to go from the SS to home the 3rd base ump has enough time to realize what is happening, readjust his angle and refocus on the play at the plate? Because right up until the ball actually heads home, the 3rd base ump has to be covering his own base.

Domeshot17
04-01-2008, 02:01 PM
Few notes

For Pork and Dick, I think more than the dropped phantom tag was the world series, Dye's 'HBP' and Pods not being picked off. However, the real truth is the plays that came AFTER all of those calls both had the bigger impact and made them famous. The Ump did not make Ozuna steal 2nd and Crede Double him in, or Konerko hit a Grand Slam. We may have gotten a break, but we EXECUTED after.

In terms of yesterday the only Ump you can really be mad at is the home plate. The play at first was an impossible angle for the ump to get. Even in slow motion its so hard to tell when Garko has the ball if his toe is on the base or not. On a bang bang play like that with no angle, he had to go with his gut. Ozzie has come out and said the ump made the right call at 2nd. While it sucked, Cabrera has to smart enough to reach for the base with his hands and arms and take out with his legs. The play at the plate on Crede, the ump blew 100%. He was out of position, it was preventable, and it cost us. Say the same result happens with Thome. We are up a run, we score on the DP, and have a runner on 3rd with 2 outs and 2 in for Konerko. It is a huge swing.

voodoochile
04-01-2008, 02:05 PM
Few notes

For Pork and Dick, I think more than the dropped phantom tag was the world series, Dye's 'HBP' and Pods not being picked off. However, the real truth is the plays that came AFTER all of those calls both had the bigger impact and made them famous. The Ump did not make Ozuna steal 2nd and Crede Double him in, or Konerko hit a Grand Slam. We may have gotten a break, but we EXECUTED after.

In terms of yesterday the only Ump you can really be mad at is the home plate. The play at first was an impossible angle for the ump to get. Even in slow motion its so hard to tell when Garko has the ball if his toe is on the base or not. On a bang bang play like that with no angle, he had to go with his gut. Ozzie has come out and said the ump made the right call at 2nd. While it sucked, Cabrera has to smart enough to reach for the base with his hands and arms and take out with his legs. The play at the plate on Crede, the ump blew 100%. He was out of position, it was preventable, and it cost us. Say the same result happens with Thome. We are up a run, we score on the DP, and have a runner on 3rd with 2 outs and 2 in for Konerko. It is a huge swing.

How was the home plate ump out of position?

The whole play took what, 2 seconds from the time the ball left the bat? Where exactly should he have been standing and how could he get there in the time he had while remaining focused on the play as it unfolded?

I agree about the play on the stretch play at first also. I still haven't seen conclusive video evidence he came off the bag before he caught the ball.

doublem23
04-01-2008, 02:06 PM
I think MLB should do reviews, as well, but in this Cabrera/interference call, I don't think Ozzie would have even had it reviewed because even he was okay the ump's decision.

The two calls that beg for review are the play at 1B when it looked like Garko's foot came off the bag and the phantom tag at home, both, I believe were the wrong call and I think anyone upstairs with the benefits of slow-mo and multiple camera angles would have overturned at least 1.

Obviously balls and strikes cannot ever be reviewed as that would take forever. The Cabrera interferance call, IMO, shouldn't be reviewable because that's umpire's discretion (what the rule book explicitly states). Ozzie said he agreed with their ruling after he watched it on camera again.

Iwritecode
04-01-2008, 02:07 PM
A couple more...

The ball hitting Dye's bat instead of arm that led to the Konerko grand slam was a huge one that went our way.
Also, the Astros had that homerun called in game 3 that hit below the line, that went against us.

Also the missed catcher interference call. I don't even remember who the batter was but if he would've ran to first rather than turning around and complaining he probably would've been safe...

doublem23
04-01-2008, 02:09 PM
How can this be viewed as a bad call? Unless applying a tag or trying to lessen the impact of a collision, there is no reason in the world for a player to ever put his hands on an opposing player during play. Pretty simple, if you ask me.

Sliding feet first into the guy covering second base is just good, hard baseball right?

It's Dankerific
04-01-2008, 02:18 PM
The Cabrera interferance call, IMO, shouldn't be reviewable because that's umpire's discretion (what the rule book explicitly states). Ozzie said he agreed with their ruling after he watched it on camera again.

I don't take any of the CWS public comments about agreeing with the call with any grain of salt. they got 2 more games with this crew in cleveland and then whatever other games this season. They got to try to avoid a grudge. that means sucking it up and not continuing the point when it wont change the game outcome anymore.

as for joe? he might want to swing at any 3 strike thats close =)

voodoochile
04-01-2008, 02:21 PM
Sliding feet first into the guy covering second base is just good, hard baseball right?

Yep.

gogosox16
04-01-2008, 02:33 PM
I think MLB should do reviews, as well, but in this Cabrera/interference call, I don't think Ozzie would have even had it reviewed because even he was okay the ump's decision.
well for sure I would of had the play at the plate reviewed and the play at first which looked to have Garko's foot off the base

Kilroy
04-01-2008, 03:14 PM
There was clear contact by an overly extended body part on a fielder who was well away from the bag.

Of course there was clear contact. That's how a double play is broken up, thru contact. For at least half a century, probably an entire century, if the runner going into second can touch the bag while breaking up the DP, then it has NOT been interference, regardless of hands, feet, or ass doing the breaking up.

It was a BS call made for the home team. PERIOD.

Domeshot17
04-01-2008, 03:15 PM
How was the home plate ump out of position?

The whole play took what, 2 seconds from the time the ball left the bat? Where exactly should he have been standing and how could he get there in the time he had while remaining focused on the play as it unfolded?

I agree about the play on the stretch play at first also. I still haven't seen conclusive video evidence he came off the bag before he caught the ball.


This is just personal opinion, but when that ball is hit, I think the ump should be 5-10 feet to the right to see if the Tag was put on or not. Instead he did not move from his original position, so all he saw was Shoppachs back and arm, NEVER had a chance to see if Crede was tagged or not.

Lip Man 1
04-01-2008, 03:28 PM
Dome:

I agree with your conclusion. The home plate umpire didn't even try to move to get an angle.

On the post game radio show yesterday an umpire from the Chicago amateur ranks called and made that same point.

And Bill Melton yesterday said that because the ball arrived before Crede the umpire "assumed" that Crede would be out without even considering the throw was slightly off line and resulted in a tag up on the leg after Joe got a foot on the plate.

Pat Boyle was royally pissed yesterday.

Lip

sox1970
04-01-2008, 03:38 PM
The way I look at it, is crazy stuff happens when you leave games to bullpens.

The Sox had chances to get runs by just hitting th ball out of the infield. They didn't.

Ramirez striking out with a man on third and one out was the biggest AB of the game. That made Ozzie look stupid for putting him in the 6-hole to begin with. Poor managing.

Cabrera was stupid for using his arms. The ump had no choice making that call, even though the runner at first would have been safe if Cabrera slid in normally.

Bottom line--Mark Buehrle sucked. Octavio Dotel sucked. Ozzie Guillen made his first bad lineup of the year.

doublem23
04-01-2008, 03:45 PM
Cabrera was stupid for using his arms. The ump had no choice making that call, even though the runner at first would have been safe if Cabrera slid in normally.

You really think Jim Thome beats out that DP? :o:


Ozzie Guillen made his first bad lineup of the year.

I know. Those bums only scored 8 runs and had 13 hits. What a bunch of bums.

:rolleyes:

sox1970
04-01-2008, 03:49 PM
You really think Jim Thome beats out that DP?

I know. Those bums only scored 8 runs and had 13 hits. What a bunch of bums.

I meant if Cabrera slid in hard but without doing the stuff with his arms.

As for lineup--yeah they scored 8 runs, fine. To put a rookie in his major league debut in the 6-hole is stupid--and it cost them.

mcg
04-01-2008, 04:11 PM
Of course there was clear contact. That's how a double play is broken up, thru contact. For at least half a century, probably an entire century, if the runner going into second can touch the bag while breaking up the DP, then it has NOT been interference, regardless of hands, feet, or ass doing the breaking up.

It was a BS call made for the home team. PERIOD.

I gotta agree. I think it's kind of a BS rule too. The part of the rule that gets me is ...willfully and deliberately interferes with.. a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play... Don't they all do that every time they get the chance to break up a double play?

Earlier Casey Blake slid way past the bag to deliberately interfere with Cabrera with obvious intent to break up the double play. I think as the rule is written then it applies Blake in that situation.

I don't think trying to break up a double play should be taken out of baseball, I just think the rule should be more along of the lines of a dead ball if the ump feels there was intent to injure.

voodoochile
04-01-2008, 04:23 PM
I gotta agree. I think it's kind of a BS rule too. The part of the rule that gets me is ...willfully and deliberately interferes with.. a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play... Don't they all do that every time they get the chance to break up a double play?

Earlier Casey Blake slid way past the bag to deliberately interfere with Cabrera with obvious intent to break up the double play. I think as the rule is written then it applies Blake in that situation.

I don't think trying to break up a double play should be taken out of baseball, I just think the rule should be more along of the lines of a dead ball if the ump feels there was intent to injure.

You know there's this little thing called base lines. The bag is in the baseline, hence the guy standing on the bag is in the baseline.

At the minimum, Cabrera was stretching the concept of running in the baseline to it's absolute maximum.

A.T. Money
04-01-2008, 05:23 PM
You think in the 1/2 second it takes for the ball to go from the SS to home the 3rd base ump has enough time to realize what is happening, readjust his angle and refocus on the play at the plate? Because right up until the ball actually heads home, the 3rd base ump has to be covering his own base.

voodoo, with all due respect, these guys are supposed to be professionals. Are you telling me they are too slow to follow the action? They're staring at a base when they can see the ball being thrown somewhere else. You've got to be kidding me....

A.T. Money
04-01-2008, 05:27 PM
Dome:

I agree with your conclusion. The home plate umpire didn't even try to move to get an angle.

On the post game radio show yesterday an umpire from the Chicago amateur ranks called and made that same point.

And Bill Melton yesterday said that because the ball arrived before Crede the umpire "assumed" that Crede would be out without even considering the throw was slightly off line and resulted in a tag up on the leg after Joe got a foot on the plate.

Pat Boyle was royally pissed yesterday.

Lip

Also, keep in the mind, the umpire didn't move because it was supposed to be a forceout. The umpire didn't move and when it was a bad throw to the plate forcing the catcher off of the plate, the umpire was in no position to make a call.

That is bad umpiring...plain and simple!

A.T. Money
04-01-2008, 05:29 PM
The way I look at it, is crazy stuff happens when you leave games to bullpens.

The Sox had chances to get runs by just hitting th ball out of the infield. They didn't.

Ramirez striking out with a man on third and one out was the biggest AB of the game. That made Ozzie look stupid for putting him in the 6-hole to begin with. Poor managing.

Cabrera was stupid for using his arms. The ump had no choice making that call, even though the runner at first would have been safe if Cabrera slid in normally.

Bottom line--Mark Buehrle sucked. Octavio Dotel sucked. Ozzie Guillen made his first bad lineup of the year.

Ridiculous. Bad lineup? The Sox scored 8 runs!!!! And if you didn't have those brutal 7th and 8th innings, the Sox score at least 3 more.

Are you kidding me? Buehrle didn't pitch well...you're right. Dotel could have been better...but don't you think you're being a little harsh on Ozzie? I think the Sox still played rather well despite the 2nd and bottom of the 8th.

sox1970
04-01-2008, 05:42 PM
Ridiculous. Bad lineup? The Sox scored 8 runs!!!! And if you didn't have those brutal 7th and 8th innings, the Sox score at least 3 more.

Are you kidding me? Buehrle didn't pitch well...you're right. Dotel could have been better...but don't you think you're being a little harsh on Ozzie? I think the Sox still played rather well despite the 2nd and bottom of the 8th.

I think it was ridiculously stupid to start a rookie in the 6-hole. Ramirez should have been batting 9th.

oeo
04-01-2008, 05:48 PM
In super slomo HD I assume.

Unless my Magnavox TV from ~1998 constitutes HD, no.

Ump doesn't have the benefit of that though does he? He can't even watch a standard slow motion replay. Once that hand hits the thigh/knee it's up to the ump. Under the circumstances, I still think he made a good call. I don't like the results, but can't blame the ump for ruling as he did.We do have the benefit to watch the replay, and I was just pointing out that he never grabs Peralta's leg. To the viewers out there, not the umpire.

btrain929
04-01-2008, 05:49 PM
I think it was ridiculously stupid to start a rookie in the 6-hole. Ramirez should have been batting 9th.

....and have Uribe bat 1 slot higher in the order. Yay.

oeo
04-01-2008, 05:51 PM
This is just personal opinion, but when that ball is hit, I think the ump should be 5-10 feet to the right to see if the Tag was put on or not. Instead he did not move from his original position, so all he saw was Shoppachs back and arm, NEVER had a chance to see if Crede was tagged or not.

It's lazy and terrible umpiring, just like when AJ was called out.

Bruce Froemming is no longer around, but his "style" still lives on.

sox1970
04-01-2008, 05:54 PM
....and have Uribe bat 1 slot higher in the order. Yay.

Uribe shouldn't be on the roster. But that's another story.

Oldfellah
04-01-2008, 11:33 PM
To you responders on page 5..... That's not what I want to hear! Stop raining on my parade.... I want logical answers on how messed up the umps are,, not excuses for them.. No matter what call the umps make,, it better dag-gum be for the Sox.. Anything else is just NUTS... Got it!!

gogosox16
04-01-2008, 11:34 PM
To you responders on page 5..... That's not what I want to hear! Stop raining on my parade.... I want logical answers on how messed up the umps are,, not excuses for them.. No matter what call the umps make,, it better dag-gum be for the Sox.. Anything else is just NUTS... Got it!!
Another Hawk in the making here?