Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives
Several points:
1) The catcher saw the miss. That's why he appealed. He knows the runner didn't touch the plate.
2) The base coaches (runner's own team) saw the miss. That's why they didn't go nuts. They know their runner didn't touch the plate.
3) The black isn't part of the plate because the rule defining the plate says it's only the white part.
Now we have a bunch of folks saying "close enough". Really? "Close enough"? Right coach, the throw was almost in time and your runner only barely beat it so it was close enough and your runner is out.
For the play at hand:
So if you call "safe" the defense manager is in your face.
And if you call "out" the offense manager is in your face.
So your only choice is "which manager do I want in my face".
Who screwed up - the catcher or the runner?
Why on earth do you want to reward the runner for a screwup and punish the catcher for wanting a legitimate out?
Call it right.
Why is this so hard to comprehend?
|
The problem is this: If he touches the black, there's no way to tell if a small portion of his foot also touched the white. There's gotta be visible dirt between the foot and the plate before I call this cause then I *know* he missed the plate.
And I've called this in the past. I ejected the batter and his manager afterwards, too. But I'm not making the call based on "I think he missed it."
I get that you don't get that, but all the umpires here get it.