Reds vs. Bucs - Short hop play in CF

[Larks]

A question from a Cincinnati basketball guy....

Reds vs. Bucs last night...

2 outs...

1st and 2nd - fly ball to short CF

CF dives and catches the ball on the bounce. After a second or two the 3rd base ump signals out. The Pirates leave the field and of course the Reds argue.

The umps get together and talk it out. They over ruled the catch, and put the batter runner on first. Advanced the guy on 1st to second and had the guy on second score.

Good from a Reds fan's perspective but my question is actually, why does the guy on second get to score? I get putting him on third? Is it umpires discretion is this case? Although with two outs the runners were moving so "most" guys would have most likely scored. What if there were only one out?

Thanks

Larks

[SanDiegoSteve]

I am sure the umpires took into consideration that the runner on 2nd had already rounded 3rd and would have scored easily with two outs. With one out the runner on 2nd would have had to wait and see if the ball was caught. He would have been totally confused by the umpires call, since it was quite obviously not caught. They likely would have placed him at 3rd, and placed R1 at 2nd, and the BR at 1st with a single.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Larks

The umps get together and talk it out. They over ruled the catch, and put the batter runner on first. Advanced the guy on 1st to second and had the guy on second score.

Wow. Even if they kicked the call, I don't think this is one I would likely "overturn"

[Larks]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Wow. Even if they kicked the call, I don't think this is one I would likely "overturn"

Someone must have had a very clear different view is my only guess. The replay on TV showed it short hopped the CF by maybe 8 inched to a foot (easy to see on replay). So, they got it right.

I'll bet Jim Tracy felt like an idiot arguing to the point of ejection only to see the replay and be 100% wrong. Although maybe he was arguing scoring the runner or not.