Quote:
Originally posted by Sal Giaco
I guess I'll throw my 2 cents in as well...
1. Just so we are on the same page, the correct term for this play is "Third Strike Not Legally Caught" - Some people say "dropped third strike" but that phrase can lead to some confusion
2. As a post said earlier, whether the ball was caught cleanly or not is NOT the issue here - atleast not from an officiating standpoint. The REAL issue is the mechanics used by the PU - Doug Eddings
3. Eddings uses the hammer for all first and second strike calls. On swinging third strikes, he sticks his right arm straight out and then pumps his fist. That throwing out of the arm is just his own style - it really doesn't mean anyhting from an officiating stand point
4. If you look at the photo on espn.com, Pierzynski is looking at Eddings "quirky" strike 3 call with his arm sticking straight out (unnecessarily). If he would have just came out with a fist only, Pierzynski would have just kept walking to the dugout. But because he saw the arm out only and no verbal call saying it was a catch or no catch, he took off running
5. The proper mechanic for a third strike not legally caught is simply pointing straight out to the side and saying "strike 3 - no catch". Some umpires take it one step further by saying "strike three, no catch" and then give the safe mechanic to let the catcher and the batter know that we don't have an out yet
6. At times, if the catcher drops the ball on a third strike not leagally caught, Eddings will stick the right arm out like he always does but will wait for the catcher to tag the B/R and THEN, pump the fist for an out call. He did this 1/2 inning earlier on a swinging third strike in the dirt that the catcher picked up and tagged the B/R.
7. Eddings hung himself by pumping his fist for what looked like an out call. Perhaps he should have just left his arm straight out which let's everyone know that the pitch is strike 3 but NOT necessarily an out.
8. All this may have been avoided if Eddings would have immediately glanced at U3, Ed Rapuano, to see if he had a closed or open fist - signaling a catch/no catch. If Rapuano had a catch, then Eddings could have sold the out call by pumping the fist a couple times and saying "that's a catch" which may have prevented Pierzynski from going all the way to first.
9. I'm surprised Crawford didn't get the whole crew together to discuss the call. I thought that is what MLB wants them to do on contraversial calls.
A few other comments.... Props to Manager Mike Sciossa for not burying the umpiring crew. He could have went off in the press conference but instead acted extremely professional about the whole thing. I feel really bad for Eddings because he had a great game behind the plate but instead, he'll be remembered for the contraversial call. It just goes to show you how humbling the game of baseball is.... just when you think you're having a great game and with two outs and two strikes in the bottom of the ninth inning, everything just falls apart.
PS. Why does Eddings have his number embrodiered on the collar of his undershirt? That looks like something a "rat" would wear - not an umpire. Despite him being a "pretty boy", I think he's a damn good umpire - regardless of what happen tonite.
[Edited by Sal Giaco on Oct 13th, 2005 at 02:47 AM]
|
I think you've described it pretty well. The bottom line is what the umpire
verbalizes and the only ones who know that is the PU, F2 and the batter.
The batter having caught the entire game knew the umpires "vocal" calls and that's what tipped him that the ball was in the dirt.
He knew that when the ball was questionably caught by F2 that the umpire would say "Batter out," or something to that effect.
On the play in the 9th inning, the batter knew that the umpire said nothing and thus he knew immediately to run.
One of the keys that veteran umpires will notice is the
players reaction. The batter never hesitated in running to first - that tells me he knew what the call was.
The Angels catcher basically thought he caught the ball and ran away before he had time to hear the umpires "verbal call."
Now I agree that Eddings mechanics I don't like personally, but then he's in MLB and I'm not. But, I had a similiar play two years ago in a HS state playoff game and pretty much had the same results, and I don't signal an out on a third strike with the fist unless there is an out.
(BTW, the video showed that the ball did hit the dirt in my game also)
With so much tension, noise and etc., in a playoff atmosphere, the ones who are paying attention the most will get the advantage on these type of plays.
But, I agree with you that I don't understand why they didn't get the crew together and confirm - U1 and U3 have a great look on the play also and U3 had to make a call of out or safe also.
Thanks
David