Journeyman said:
so doesn't that contradict trusting what the catcher does?
I give credit to Pryzinski he was behind the plate all night and didn't hear an out call so he ran. The ump's fist pump is stupid for a strike call but it seems he does that for strikes as well as outs - but the Angels catcher screwed up - he had his back to the ump when he threw the ball away - how would he know what the signal was?
Catchers tag guys out all the time even though they have caught 3rd strikes it is something you do just to avoid things like this. 9th inning of a tie playoff game you make sure its an out you don't roll the ball away
Replays did look like he caught it though
I feel bad for Paul what is he like 3rd string catcher and this is how he gets some attention - I think regardless of what he thought, it's like when you make a shoestring catch you hold the ball up to prove you have it. He didn't even do that, so sure, to him it was clear cut but the ump is blocked behind him, you can't assume an out with this much on the line.
It might be nice if MLB could get all these umps on the same page though and get rid of all the variations with how balls and strikes and outs are signalled and called. They need uniform signals and get rid of the guys who make the delayed calls
It might be nice if MLB could get all these umps on the same page though and get rid of all the variations with how balls and strikes and outs are signalled and called. They need uniform signals and get rid of the guys who make the delayed calls
t3a said:
I took JM's comment as sarcasm.
You see catchers all the time tagging guys out after a ball's near the dirt - whether it's called by the ump or not. Never the opposite, though. I realize it might have been the catcher's fault for not just tagging or throwing to first, but at that point you've gotta make the common sense call if you're the crew.
I'm not a replay proponent, but I HATE to see such a great game with so many awesome defensive plays more or less decided on a call like that. The error aspect is fine... as in "bang-bang (hate that term)" plays on the bases and obviously the strike zone, but not things that are so obviously wrong and can completely decide the game.
even if it is a bad call, replays look like he caught it - it wasn't the final play of the game. Yea it gave the Sox an extra out and a baserunner just like if an ump blew a safe call on a bang-bang play at first. But the Sox still got a pinch runner to steal second and Crede ripped a 2 strike pitch off the fence.
It reminds me of the bartman stuff with the cubs - YES it was a bad break but they could have made plays after it happened to negate it and they didn't. That stuff happens all the time
It reminds me of the bartman stuff with the cubs - YES it was a bad break but they could have made plays after it happened to negate it and they didn't. That stuff happens all the time
The obvious call was that he caught it. But, like someone said earlier, on the live broadcast on Fox, they showed a closer replay than the one on ESPN, and it did appear that it changed directions. That would indicate that it hit the ground. It should have obviously been called a catch, but if replay came into play, and they showed the Fox close-up, it would not have been overturned.Chuck Sims said:
What you don't realize is that there are a lot of calls to make on one play. A strike/ball on the pitch, whether or not he swung, and whether the catcher caught it. And what if it was a check swing? The plate umpire could call it a ball, but then be overruled on an appeal. The bottom line is that his signal was not "out," but rather "strike three." He probably did not need to signal strike three, because it was obvious that it was swung at, and was not a check swing. His first call was "no catch," before he signaled strike. So a delayed call after reading the situation is what should have been made. But his quick call actually caused all the problems.t3a said:
i didn't mean delayed calls from this game I was ranting about umps in general who wait a couple seconds before they call a pitch a ball or strike
But on the hand signals, I agree he made the correct call it was strike 3, not necessarily an out if he thought the ball was trapped or hit dirt . His signal for a strike - which he used through out the game - is that fist pump which is causing all the complaints that a lot of people automatically think means it is an out signal.
what is the standard sign for a strike for instance? There really isn't one, each ump does it his own way. How about a ball? Some guys just grunt or make a noise. Or the lack of hearing "steee-rike" means its a ball.
But on the hand signals, I agree he made the correct call it was strike 3, not necessarily an out if he thought the ball was trapped or hit dirt . His signal for a strike - which he used through out the game - is that fist pump which is causing all the complaints that a lot of people automatically think means it is an out signal.
what is the standard sign for a strike for instance? There really isn't one, each ump does it his own way. How about a ball? Some guys just grunt or make a noise. Or the lack of hearing "steee-rike" means its a ball.
Regardless of whether an ump uses a strike signal or an out signal the ump would use the same signal whether the ball hit the ground or not. Is there no signal that the ball hit the ground and that the runner can advance to first base? If not, then it's left up to the whim of the umpire without the knowledge of either the catcher or the batter.
He called "no catch," and then he called a strike. The strike call was not necessary in this case, because it was obvious that it was a swing. But you are so used to signaling strikes on swings that it just comes naturally. You have to train yourself to not signal it on plays like this. Not signaling was never really taught anyway, just something that I, and other umpires, find the most convenient and pain-free way to call a play like this. But it cannot be like this all the time, because if it's a check swing, you may have to emphatically signal "strike" on a bounced ball, even though that strike 3 is not yet an out. It's just a fucked up situation.quantumleap said:
Illinois, I speak with authority as I watched the live press conference with HP umpire Doug Eddings. Here is a summary of what he said:
1. Never verbally or signalled no catch before Paul rolled the ball to the mound.
2. His first signal and I quote: "I first signalled "no contact" on the swing.
3. His next gesture was his fist pump which signalled strike 3.
4. He then watched Paul roll the ball toward the mound.
5. Never verbally or signalled the batter out, therefore the play was still live.
1. Never verbally or signalled no catch before Paul rolled the ball to the mound.
2. His first signal and I quote: "I first signalled "no contact" on the swing.
3. His next gesture was his fist pump which signalled strike 3.
4. He then watched Paul roll the ball toward the mound.
5. Never verbally or signalled the batter out, therefore the play was still live.
