World series calls

I'll grant you the check swing was indefensible. However, the play at first is a different story. It took them using stop motiion to definitely say one way or the other.

U1 could have solved the problem by ringing up the strike. I'm surprised he didn't. It sure looked like Rocco offered at the pitch.

Another horrible call on the tag at third. How does a major league ump miss that? Longoria's glove was halfway up his rear.

This game is played by human beings not video replay. I don't want video replay for everything; we all make mistakes players, coaches, managers, umpires and announcers. What is NOT shown time and time again are the MANY, MANY calls and close calls the umpires get right time after time. Our era seems to be one of criticism of anything and everything a player, coach, manager or umpire does or doesn’t do. Those coaches out there KNOW what I mean…parents are out of control against GOOD COACHES. SORRY I just am calling it like I see it. Let the kids play, let the coaches and managers manage and let the umpires do their job….everyone makes mistakes, even the spectators.

My whole concern about questions about calls is if you did not have super slow motion replays from multiple angles would you as a fan ever know there was a miss..

The umpire has one chance.....at game speed


(and for the most part slow motion replays show umpires are right most of the time...)

quote:

(and for the most part slow motion replays show umpires are right most of the time...)

But nobody cares when the umps are right

quote:

Originally posted by Emanski's Heroes:

quote:

(and for the most part slow motion replays show umpires are right most of the time...)

But nobody cares when the umps are right

Dont we know it!

What about the no call on the infield fly rule? The ball was clearly landing in the infield, so why didn't the umpire call infield fly? I know it is a subjective rule, but c'mon...

quote:

Originally posted by larrythompson:
What about the no call on the infield fly rule? The ball was clearly landing in the infield, so why didn't the umpire call infield fly? I know it is a subjective rule, but c'mon...

There is always the fine print. It says it must be caught "with reasonable effort". Rollins earlier dropped an "easy" popup due to the weather. I guess they thought no popups now would be with reasonable effort.

I'm sorry. I am not usually extremely critical of umpires. But this World Series has been marked by incredible incompetence. I don't care at all who wins, so I have no dog in the fight.

This crew has booted it big time. The strike calling tonight was so bad that even McCarver had to point it out repeatedly. Kazmir's walked his last batter on 4 strikes and two balls.

Just because they are umpires and have a hard job is not an excuse. These guys are stinking it up, and it is OK in my opinion to point it out.

amen Rob. This has been the worst. The strike zone issues have had a much bigger effect than the stuff on the bases, IMO.

How can they not call infield fly? Even with the weather conditions, it has to be called, they don't not call one if the sun is in their eyes

Homerun04,
Jaksa/Roder offers the following guidance: "When determining ordinary effort wind is a factor, sun in a fielder's eyes and natural darkness (e.g., fly ball is temporarily lost above the lights) are not factors."

As mentioned by three finger, weather does play into ordinary effort, sun does not. With the rain falling and the wind blowing as hard as it was, no way is it an IFF.

I don't get how wind can make them not call the rule. It is there to protect the offense. So if it is windy, just let the ball drop and take the sure thing double play.

Fielders were having big problems with pop-ups all game (at least one was dropped). Calling the IFR in that situation could very well have penalized the offense - 180 degrees from the intent of the rule. I thought it was a great non-call.

I don't agree that letting the ball drop would result in a "sure thing" DP. No one was about to attempt that anyway. They were happy to catch the pop-up and get an out.

quote:

Originally posted by 3FingeredGlove:
Homerun04,
Jaksa/Roder offers the following guidance: "When determining ordinary effort wind is a factor, sun in a fielder's eyes and natural darkness (e.g., fly ball is temporarily lost above the lights) are not factors."

Did anyone see any of the press conference after the game was called? I was half asleep, but I believe umpire Tim Tschida (note to McCarver- the "T" in Tschida is silent) specifically mentioned sun and lights as factors in calling the IFF. They were asked specifically why the IFF wasn't called, and they mentioned wind, sun, and lights as factors in making a pop up outside of ordinary effort. I'm not saying it's right, but I am saying they said it.

quote:

This crew has booted it big time. The strike calling tonight was so bad that even McCarver had to point it out repeatedly. Kazmir's walked his last batter on 4 strikes and two balls.

NEVER listen to McCarver when it has anuthing to do with a rule, a strikezone or umpire. First he has no clue what he talking about. Second h seems to be hellbent on slamming umpires any chance he gets. For somebody that played the game he knows nothing about what he is talking about. I haven't seen or heard an ex-player that was any good at announing. Palmer is OK if he is talking pitching but beyond that he is a close second to TM.

quote:

NEVER listen to McCarver when it has anuthing to do with a rule, a strikezone or umpire. First he has no clue what he talking about. Second h seems to be hellbent on slamming umpires any chance he gets. For somebody that played the game he knows nothing about what he is talking about. I haven't seen or heard an ex-player that was any good at announing. .

For a guy who spent so many years squatting in front of the umpires, you would think he would have garnered a better rules education.....especially in light of the fact that many coaches and umpires are former catchers....

Not so Tim McCarver..

Dont know if this is true or not, but its funny so I will pass it on..

Supposedly McCarver called time and went out to talk to Bob Gibson....Gibson met McCarver half way and told him to get his A^& back behind the plate and squat because the only thing Mc Carver knew about pitching was he couldnt hit it.....

and he is equally as knowledgable about the rules....

You know what they say......

....THOSE WHO CAN DO, THOSE WHO CAN'T BROADCAST IT

quote:

Originally posted by piaa_ump:

Dont know if this is true or not, but its funny so I will pass it on..

Supposedly McCarver called time and went out to talk to Bob Gibson....Gibson met McCarver half way and told him to get his A^& back behind the plate and squat because the only thing Mc Carver knew about pitching was he couldnt hit it.....

According to Jim Evans, this line (at least the part about pitching) was delivered by Jim Palmer to Earl Weaver when Earl came out to change pitchers.

They truly hated each other - still do.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:

quote:

Originally posted by piaa_ump:

Dont know if this is true or not, but its funny so I will pass it on..

Supposedly McCarver called time and went out to talk to Bob Gibson....Gibson met McCarver half way and told him to get his A^& back behind the plate and squat because the only thing Mc Carver knew about pitching was he couldnt hit it.....

According to Jim Evans, this line (at least the part about pitching) was delivered by Jim Palmer to Earl Weaver when Earl came out to change pitchers.

They truly hated each other - still do.

thanks dash, I thought it might be one of those legends........it might actually be funnier knowing how much those two hated each other....

Love that line...either way...

It is a great line. And I can easily see Gibson saying it to McCarver too.

MST, PIAA:
I wasn't "taking McCarver's word for it."

I was saying EVEN a guy as clueless as McCarver was able to see the fact that the ball and strike calling was horrendous.

Also - Dash: How could not calling the IFF rule have protected the offense in that situation? If the ball hits the ground, a double play is still a sure thing.

quote:

Originally posted by Rob Kremer:

Also - Dash: How could not calling the IFF rule have protected the offense in that situation? If the ball hits the ground, a double play is still a sure thing.

Because it was such a snotty night, there was a decent chance the pop-up would not be caught (Rollins had dropped one earlier). I am not saying that should be part of the decision to call or not call the IFR however. I thought the "ordinary effort" element was just not there under those conditions. The fielder was chasing the ball.

I don't think a DP would be a given either. The batter was running, so the DP would have to be at 3rd and 2nd. Wet baseball, mud around the bases, etc. makes for a challenge.

Dash - My point is that not calling the IFF rule in no way protects the offense. In fact, the opposite. I think the DP would have been all but a sure thing - the runners had to hug the bases. That gives about 3.5 seconds to throw to third then second. Even in those conditions, really no problem.

Look at it this way: if you are the 2nd baseman in that situation, would you rather have the IFF rule called, or let it drop and take your chances?

I would have LOVED to see the controversy, after all the other umpire screwups, if the 2nd baseman had his wits about him enough to let that ball drop and go for the DP!

That place would have exploded!

quote:

Originally posted by Rob Kremer:
Dash - My point is that not calling the IFF rule in no way protects the offense. In fact, the opposite. I think the DP would have been all but a sure thing - the runners had to hug the bases. That gives about 3.5 seconds to throw to third then second. Even in those conditions, really no problem.

That's why "ordinary effort" is part of the rule. If it can't be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, it's not an infield fly, the batter is not out, and the defense is free to let it drop and try for 2. The IFR is a "gift" out for the defense. If the fielder is having a tough time getting to the ball, a "gift" out just might penalize the offense, whom the rule is designed to protect.

quote:

Originally posted by Rob Kremer:
Look at it this way: if you are the 2nd baseman in that situation, would you rather have the IFF rule called, or let it drop and take your chances?

I don't know about the second baseman, but the Rays manager sure wanted it called.

quote:

Originally posted by Rob Kremer:
I would have LOVED to see the controversy, after all the other umpire screwups, if the 2nd baseman had his wits about him enough to let that ball drop and go for the DP!

That place would have exploded!

What the 2nd baseman does has nothing to do with the (non) IFR call. The umpires (intentionally plural) made a decision to NOT call the infield fly rule. I still think they got that one right.

quote:

The IFR is a "gift" out for the defense.

This is where I disagree. Earlier you said it was to protect the offense. It isn't a gift, because any infield fly that touches the ground will easily be converted into an out no matter what, and almost always would be converted into two outs.

So calling the IFR is a way to protect the offense from having it converted into two outs by a savvy infielder. How is calling the rule a gift?

quote:

I was saying EVEN a guy as clueless as McCarver was able to see the fact that the ball and strike calling was horrendous.

I didn't think you were taking TM's word for it. My point was Tim seems to look for reasons to bust on the umpires. He was on Welke in the first game and I thought he had a good zone. The only bust Tim could have with Welke should have been the no balk call. I personally thought that was a good no call. Tim immediately jumped on it and I thought good move live.
The elements for an IFF were not there so it was a good call. As messy as the field was it would have been incredibly stupid to let it drop, it could have gone anywhere.
This will be one of the very few times you will see a ball in the infield with pros and it not get called.
Edited to add the last two paragraphs.

quote:

Originally posted by Rob Kremer:

quote:

The IFR is a "gift" out for the defense.

This is where I disagree. Earlier you said it was to protect the offense. It isn't a gift, because any infield fly that touches the ground will easily be converted into an out no matter what, and almost always would be converted into two outs.

So calling the IFR is a way to protect the offense from having it converted into two outs by a savvy infielder. How is calling the rule a gift?

The IFR is there to protect the offense against a cheap DP. I think we agree on that. However, CALLING the IFR when it is not warranted could result in rewarding the defense with an out that they might not otherwise get (e.g., a gift), thus unfairly rewarding the defense (penalizing the offense). This is precisely why, by rule, the IFR is NOT called on a pop-up that requires more than ordinary effort to field.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the "sure thing" DP. Carlos Pena was chasing the ball in the wind & rain. He would have had to let it drop, chase it some more, make a good throw across the diamond to 3rd, then you would need another good throw to 2nd for the DP. I don't think that's a sure thing DP even with Earl Battey as R1.

Under the conditions in that game, I think bases loaded one out, or 1st & 3rd two out (both of which are better outcomes for the offense than an IFR call) would have been just as likely as an inning ending DP.