Quote:
Originally posted by brumey1107
With regards to 9.02(c)"If a decision is appealed, ..." Did McClelland not change the call before it had a chance to be appealed by the Red Sox manager? Thus McCelland didn't violate this rule.
Btw - McClelland was not only the plate umpire but also crew chief? Doesn't that add any weight to his ability to change the call like he did?
|
McClelland violated the part of 9.02(c) that Garth already quoted, but I'll repeat:
No umpire shall criticize, seek to reverse or interfere with another umpire's decision unless asked to do so by the umpire making it.
McClelland flat out overruled Hernandez's call, and there is simply no basis in rule or professional custom and practice for what he did.
The great irony is that McClelland was almost surely WRONG about what he saw - he has been quoted today as saying that he was certain the ball hit the foul pole, but most observers who have studied the replays are convinced the ball never hit the foul pole; it hit the fan instead.
So as the other thread's title states, McClelland saw it wrong but got it right, for no reason other than luck. He acknowledges that he didn't handle the situation "technically" correctly; I would argue that he didn't handle the situation correctly in
substance.
There is precedent for changing a foul call to a homerun; it's even one of Carl's "Fab Five." But you don't change it the way McClelland did. And as can be seen already by the discussion on this and other boards, McClelland's handling of the matter is being lauded by many who subscribe to the "get it right at all costs" philosophy. This play is a bad, bad example of that doctrine, because in this case they got it right for all the wrong reasons.