This just happened...first inning...bases loaded Chicago White Sox vs. Chicago Cubs. Gload rips one down the right field line and Charlie Rulliford (1B umpire) rules it fair for a grand slam. Sosa comes in and Lee go out to argue the call. PU comes up and whole crew gathers for about ten seconds. THE ORIGINAL CALL WAS CORRECTED/OVER RULED/CHANGED whatever semantics you want to use. The ball is ruled foul and four runs are pulled off the board.

I just thought that you'd appreciate the fact that the best umpires in the world (remember they are full time and work more games than any other professional sport), sometimes get a JUDGEMENT CALL wrong and have the guts to get it right. You know that it will be all over SportsCenter and they will be laughed at for a while. But someone on that crew decided that the call was wrong, needed to be fixed and didn't have a problem doing it.

Way to go Blue!

where's Rut now?

Surely even you recognize the difference between this and the travesty that McClelland pulled last year in the playoffs.

Did the PU come up before Sosa and Lee argued and overrule Reliford without provocation? No, because he shouldn't. The umpire got more information from the rest of the crew and changed his own call. Likely, he lost the ball and was thrilled that other members of his crew were able to help out.

You may dismiss this as "semantics" but it is very important. Had Reliford refused to seek help or was convinced that he got it right, the other umpires can't just jump in and change a call.

I'm open to admitting when I got one wrong and am willing to change a call when necessary and when it is clear I got one wrong. But there's a right way and a wrong way to do this. For an umpire to go out to Reliford on his own with nobody asking him to do so would not be right and, with the exception of the McClelland play last year, is never done.

Nope, I'm here - you're not
 

[/B][/QUOTE]

You may dismiss this as "semantics" but it is very important. Had Reliford refused to seek help or was convinced that he got it right, the other umpires can't just jump in and change a call.

I'm open to admitting when I got one wrong and am willing to change a call when necessary and when it is clear I got one wrong. But there's a right way and a wrong way to do this. For an umpire to go out to Reliford on his own with nobody asking him to do so would not be right and, with the exception of the McClelland play last year, is never done. [/B][/QUOTE]

Rich,
I'm sitting at the game right now. I am in a right field line corporate suite. I am one of three Cub fans the rest are (ugh) Sox devotees. When the call happened, we did all we could to hear what was being said...no use. Relliford didn't move and got a horsesh*t look at the ball, but called it anyway. Exactly what you said wouldn't happen, did. The third base ump came in and told the PU what really happened. Relliford shrugged and shook his head when the call was being discussed. By the way, the plate ump signalled it and Relliford took the heat from Guillen.

Semantics are important. Read all of my posts. I have NEVER said that I would just jump in and change a call. In fact, I specifically said what should occur and gave examples that I was involved in. If you see a blown call - get together, discuss and get it right. That is what happened. I'm going to go gloat now. The Cubs are winning and my opinion was just backed by the big boys. Sorry if you don't agree.

You may dismiss this as "semantics" but it is very important. Had Reliford refused to seek help or was convinced that he got it right, the other umpires can't just jump in and change a call.

[/B][/QUOTE]They can't do that in basketball either. The calling official is the only official that can change a call. Basketball has very specific rules against any official overruling another official. :D

Here comes the green needle...
 

Wanna bet?

If all three crew mates said that they saw it differently and he refused to make it right, it would be his last day in the bigs. By the way, he didn't change his call. The home plate ummpire did.

The scrutiny he is under is intense and he realizes that every call he makes we'll be dissected on SportsCenter. The last thing they want is a live and die by the call. If you haven't noticed, they are slowly making the profession more human.

The other wonderful thing about this call was its judgement nature, I could have sworn that you and Rut both commented that judgement calls don't get corrected/over ruled/ changed. I gave you a specific example of a basketball game that refuted your statement regarding this same scenario. You still insist it can't happen, so I guess Texas tech should file a protest. Don't watch the highlights, that way your fantasy can continue. We'll all be wrong and you and Rut can live happily ever after.

Re: Here comes the green needle...
 

Stick with baseball. :rolleyes:

Peace

Re: Here comes the green needle...
 

I do not call basketball, but you are wrong on this issue. Two rules were posted to cite that you were wrong. You admit that you only do baseball, so it is perfectly understandable for you to be mistaken about a basketball rule. But why can you not admit that you made a mistake? You were wrong. No one is insulting your baseball knowledge, all that was said was that you were incorrect in you knowledge of a specific basketball rule, and there is nothing wrong with that. But there is something wrong with not being able to admit that you were wrong.

Re: Nope, I'm here - you're not
 

You may dismiss this as "semantics" but it is very important. Had Reliford refused to seek help or was convinced that he got it right, the other umpires can't just jump in and change a call.

I'm open to admitting when I got one wrong and am willing to change a call when necessary and when it is clear I got one wrong. But there's a right way and a wrong way to do this. For an umpire to go out to Reliford on his own with nobody asking him to do so would not be right and, with the exception of the McClelland play last year, is never done. [/B][/QUOTE]

Rich,
I'm sitting at the game right now. I am in a right field line corporate suite. I am one of three Cub fans the rest are (ugh) Sox devotees. When the call happened, we did all we could to hear what was being said...no use. Relliford didn't move and got a horsesh*t look at the ball, but called it anyway. Exactly what you said wouldn't happen, did. The third base ump came in and told the PU what really happened. Relliford shrugged and shook his head when the call was being discussed. By the way, the plate ump signalled it and Relliford took the heat from Guillen.

Semantics are important. Read all of my posts. I have NEVER said that I would just jump in and change a call. In fact, I specifically said what should occur and gave examples that I was involved in. If you see a blown call - get together, discuss and get it right. That is what happened. I'm going to go gloat now. The Cubs are winning and my opinion was just backed by the big boys. Sorry if you don't agree. [/B][/QUOTE]

You act as if everything the big boys does automatically makes it right for what we do. While I'm very interested in what they do and I'm willing to consider it for the amateur level since they are the best umpires in the world, that doesn't mean you're "right" and others are "wrong."

I sincerely doubt that Reliford would get fired if he refused to change a call, too. There is still a union, even though their power isn't what the old union once had.

That explains everything.
 

Now I see what is wrong with you. :D

Peace

Re: Nope, I'm here - you're not
 

I agree that this is a call that could be seen well by someone not right on the foul line. The 3rd base umpire has a great shot to be able to see the ball go either in front or behind the foul pole. But this part does not make sense to me, if Reliford did not see the play, then whey did he call the ball fair? If I am unsure about a call, I would ask my partners for help before I made the call. I think it would have looked a whole lot better if the umpires could have just gotten together and made one call and stuck with it. It would also have save Reliford a lot of grief that he got from Guillen.

Windy, I very specifically said that a basketball call cannot be overruled. Nothing's changed. It still can't be overruled. In the Texas Tech game, the official changed his own call. He was NEVER overruled by another official because NCAA rules do not permit that. I cited the NCAA rule that states that exact fact very,very explicitly. I ain't gonna waste my time citing it again. You WERE wrong then. You are STILL wrong now.

At no time, did either Rut or I state that a basketball call couldn't be corrected or changed. We did state that a call could only be corrected or changed by the official that originally made the call. However, at NO time can that official EVER BE OVERRULED BY ANOTHER OFFICIAL! You don't overrule yourself.

At least you admitted why you started this same old/same old crap up again by posting a new thread on an old theme that rightfully got shut down- so you could GLOAT. If it feels good, hey, go ahead and do it. That's an admirable trait to have - fer sure.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jul 3rd, 2004 at 03:09 AM]

JR,

He is a Cub fan. They get excited about things that have no real meaning. Just like being excited about being in first place in May. I do not expect him to act any differently when talking about this issue. Also like Rich said, the umpire that made this mistake changed the call himself.

I had a play during this past baseball season where my partner helped me. I was the PU. There was a runner on 1st and 2nd with 1 out I believe. There was a pitch in the dirt (I could not see it hit the dirt) on a swinging 3rd strike. The catcher completely blocked me off from an angle on the play and the batter start running to first base. The batter/runner made first cleanly, because the throw to first was an errant throw and pulled the first baseman off the base. My partner comes right to me after the play is dead (like we had talked about in our pregame on situations like this) and we had a talk away from the coaches and players. He told me that the ball was caught by the catcher, which made the batter/runner out immediately. I completely agreed with him because I did not have the best look at the play. I was the one that made the signal for the batter being out after our conversation. Not my partner, but me. I took his information and changed my own call. How you are suppose to do it. Just like in Basketball. The same procedure applies. Similar language in the rulebook applies. My partner that day is a D1 and Minor League Umpire as well. Anyone from our area knows him and that is how we handled that situation.

Peace

Re: Re: Nope, I'm here - you're not
 

I disagree. Reliford called what he saw (even if it was "wrong"). His call becomes the "default" decision -- overturned only with clear evidence. If he didn't make a call, what would have happened if no one else saw it? That would be a worse situation.

As far as the word "override" is concerned, I prefer "provided additional information and the call was changed." Sure -- "override" describes that, but it is too often heard as "unilaterally changed another umpire's call."

The problem with using it is that too many coaches, players, umpires buy into the belief that the plate umpire can "override" any decision the base umpire makes. So, in a youth game, BU Young Reliford makes a call on a play at first, and the coach screams, "Hey PU -- you've got to override that call. The MLB umpires overrode the BU's call in teh Sox-Cubs game last week."

(It's like the term "reach" in basketball -- "reach" is a good layman's description of a kind of foul, but not all reaches are fouls.)

1st and 2nd with one out? Even if the third strike goes uncaught the batter is out. How did neither one of you notice this when you had your conversation?