As I was coming home from my game tonight, I happend to turn on the Indians game. The broadcast crew reported that the protest was disallowed. No reason was given.
Mike Heagen, Color guy: "I don't know what sense it makes to even protest games any more, because if there was ever a case for a protest to be upheld, this was was it."
Tom Hamilton, Play-by-play: "Of course the Indians think this is a terrible decision, but will not say anything in public because they will only get in more trouble..."
It seems very obvious that the suits in NY wanted to shovel this thing under the rug, and the political way was to disallow the protest. Saves the umps from any bad pub, and since Batlimore won the game, who cares anyway right? Only us guys who care about the game being played right
By the way, rules mavens, the MLB office used 9.01c to justify the ruling, here the press release from the Indians site:
http://cleveland.indians.mlb.com/new...=.jsp&c_id=cle
CLEVELAND -- Indians general manager Mark Shapiro understands the Commissioner's Office had a tough decision to make regarding Saturday's protested game against the Orioles.
Ultimately, however, Shapiro and the rest of the Indians feel the league made the wrong decision.
"I still feel," Shapiro said, "we have a strong, solid, well-presented case."
It's a case Major League Baseball rejected Wednesday afternoon. MLB president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy denied the Tribe's protest from that game, and the Orioles' bizarre, 7-4 victory over the Indians was upheld.
The Indians had protested the umpiring crew's ability to add a run to the scoreboard three innings after it crossed the plate. But a little-known clause in the rule book apparently gives the umpire's that power.
In a memo from the league office explaining DuPuy's decision, Rule 9.01(c) is cited.
"The Official Baseball Rules do not address when the umpires can make such a correction in those circumstances," the memo read. "When the rules do not address a situation, Official Baseball Rule 9.01(c) gives them the discretion to rule on any point not otherwise covered by the Rules."
Shapiro jokingly referred to the rule as an "escape hatch."
Here's how the umpires found themselves using that hatch Saturday night:
In the bottom of the sixth inning, with the score tied at 2, crew chief Ed Montague instructed the official scorer to add a run to the Orioles' tally, making it 3-2.
The run had come in the top of the third inning. The Orioles were up, 2-1, with one out and runners on the corners. Ramon Hernandez hit a line drive to center field that was caught by Grady Sizemore, who then threw to first base, doubling up Miguel Tejada. But while Sizemore lobbed the ball to first, Nick Markakis tagged up at third and scored before Tejada was ruled out. Thus, Markakis' run should have counted, but it was waved off by home-plate umpire Marvin Hudson.
Baltimore didn't argue the call until after the third, when bench coach Tom Trebelhorn talked it over with Montague. The rule book was summoned, and the umpires had several conversations with both dugouts before Montague finally ruled the run should be tacked on in the sixth.
Indians manager Eric Wedge immediately told Montague the Indians would play the remainder of the game in protest. The Indians took a 4-3 lead on Jhonny Peralta's two-run homer in the sixth, but they eventually lost the game, 7-4.
Once an official protest was filed Sunday, the Indians were hoping MLB would accept it and have the game replayed this weekend in Baltimore -- either from the third inning, with the run intact, or the sixth inning, with the run nullified.
Instead, the game stands as a Cleveland loss.
Wedge opted not to offer much comment on the league's ruling, saying only, "Obviously, I disagree with their decision."
Shapiro, meanwhile, said he's concerned about the precedent the decision might create.
"It was going to be problematic, either way they ruled," he said.
As part of the protest, the Indians' front office sent video evidence and documentation to the league office. Shapiro also placed a call to Joe Garagiola Jr., MLB's senior vice president of baseball operations, on Wednesday morning to ensure the league didn't need anything else from the club.
"There's no way to appeal this any further," Shapiro said. "It's time to put it to bed."
That being said, with this strange scenario in the back of his mind, Shapiro said he hopes the little-known rule is a topic of discussion at November's GM Meetings.
"We'll put it on the agenda this year," he said.
Wow, I hope it is on the agenda. What a bunch of garbage. The thinking is:
1. PU srews it up.
2. 3 innings later, crew realizes he/they screwed it up
3. Crew decides to change a fundamental of rules and umpiring to correct the mistake.
4. League office refuses to take a stand, so they bail on the decision, since:
5. Umpires under 9.01c can do anything they want to cover their rear ends since noone has screwed up this play before and there is no rulebook coverage for dealing with such a screwup.
This is an embarassment. I've umpired a lot of baseball games over the years, and I have some calls I wish I could take back, but I had the guts to own my own controversial calls, even if get them wrong. But now I find I can go hit the big 'ole Reset Button anytime I want in pro rules and make things "right". what, we get to go to a Star Trek Holodeck and replay everything to get our claas right now?
Dollars to donuts sometime this season someone on this board will post a sit about a crew who was convinced in a game to add runs later, or go back to a play where rule was missapplied, or someone had second thoughts about the call. And then there wil be the mechanics of doing it post, then the "how to score it" post.
I guarantee you I will get asked in sumer ball to overrule or change a call based on this play.
As you can tell, I am upset about this.