Unusual occurence in April 28th Baltimore-Cleveland game
 

From what I understand, Cleveland is playing this game under protest. Here's the lead from the AP story and a link (that I hope works) from the ESPN site.

CLEVELAND (AP) -- A bizarre set of circumstances in Saturday night's game between the Baltimore Orioles and Cleveland Indians featured a run that was disallowed in the third inning apparently being counted three innings later.


http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=270428105

Hmmm...could the best in the world have botched a Time Play???

Botched, butchered, kicked, screwed, tattooed, burned at the stake, and then they tried to sneak it in. Hil-freakin'-larious.

Wait, it gets better

How do you NOT know the rule on this? How on freakin' earth do you send a Major League Baseball umpire off the field to thumb through the rulebook? Jeez this is stupid. What was there to debate anyway?

My question is that although they ultimately they got the call right, does the fact that they did it 3 innings after they should have make it protestable. I would think that Baltimore would have protested immediately after the original misinterp. It looked like Cleveland only protested after the call was reversed. I don't know of any ruling that would suggest that you can't go back and correct the score, but I'm certainly not an MLB ump.

kylejt is correct--how do you NOT know one of the most common examples of a time play? Inexcusable.

IMO, the problem in major league baseball is because of the huge scoreboards etc. etc. the umpires get into a comfort zone and do not VERBALLY communicate like we would in 2 person.

I am pretty certain the PRO schools go over this because we are taught on a time play to signal to our partners that we could have a potential TIME play and then if one does occur, say RUN COUNTS or RUN Does not count.

IMO, this crew should be embarassed.

We saw this in the Angels/White Sox series on the contoversial uncaught third strike.

IMO, Major League baseball needs to tell the head of the PRO Umpires that more verbalization / communication is needed. Just because this is major league baseball doesn't mean you will not encounter some "strange" things. Also, a player failing to tag up on a fly ball is not all that strange especially if it's a diving catch in the outfield.

Also, I am shocked that this crew had to refer to the rule-book to get it right.

If the aforementioned happened in the LLWS or some other youth event, most would say "well you get what you paid for" or "that's why they call them LL umpires" or something along those lines.

Pete Booth

This is perhaps one of the most common time play situations reflected on umpire exams everywhere. How they--one of the umpires at least--could not know this is inexcusable.

I couldn't agree with you more. I can see cutting one of these guys some slack for having a brain cramp, but all four having the same brain cramp...................no way.



Tim.

Pete, I train LL umpires, and I promise you our 11/12 year old rookie crop of Junior umps would all know this one. And that's without consulting a book. I'd venture to guess that most high school umpires would know this one too. :)

Why did they resume the game with such an important decision in question?

Sometimes I wonder if MLB's dictates about umpires always getting together to have their pow-wows causes more problems than it's supposed to resolve. Just my 2 cents.

They would have used 4.19 to show a misapplication of rule 4.09


4.19 PROTESTING GAMES

Each league shall adopt rules governing procedure for protesting a game, when a manager claims that an umpire's decision is in violation of these rules. No protest shall ever be permitted on judgment decisions by the umpire. In all protested games, the decision of the League President shall be final. Even if it is held that the protested decision violated the rules, no replay of the game will be ordered unless in the opinion of the League President the violation adversely affected the protesting team's chances of winning the game.

Official Notes - Case Book - Comments: Whenever a manager protests a game because of alleged misapplication of the rules the protest will not be recognized unless the umpires are notified at the time the play under protest occurs and before the next pitch is made or a runner is retired. A protest arising on a game-ending play may be filed until 12 noon the following day with the League Office.

4.09 HOW A TEAM SCORES

(a) One run shall be scored each time a runner legally advances to and touches first, second, third and home base before three men are put out to end the inning.

EXCEPTION: A run is not scored if the runner advances to home base during a play in which the third out is made (1) by the batter-runner before he touches first base; (2) by any runner being forced out; or (3) by a preceding runner who is declared out because he failed to touch one of the bases.
Cross References: 1.02, 1.03, 2.00 Run, 4.09(b, A.R.), 5.06, 6.09(h), 7.04(b), 7.05(a), 7.08(j)


Tim.

The crew should slink out of town with their tails between their legs. Waving that run off was just plain bad umpiring. Everything that transpired afterwards was a CYA.

In my opinion, it is plate umpire Marvin Hudson's bad all the way. He waved off the run that clearly scored before the 3rd out was made on appeal. He clearly was operating under the common but oh-so-wrong misunderstanding that doubling off a runner who leaves early on a fly is a force out.

I think Montague et. al. were kind of thrown under the bus by Hudson's ignorance, and didn't realize what had happened until it was too late, but then guilt gnawed on them for 3 innings until Montague made the executive decision to correct the error.

I think the protest should be upheld. The rules afforded the offense ample opportunity to appeal for a correct decision, and they did not. Montague's heart may have been in the right place, vis-a-vis the currently popular "get it right" mantra, but his 3-inning late mea culpa is without precedent and without support in the rules or published interpretations.

In all fairness to the rest of the MLB crews out there that I have observed, I regularly see the PU signal "Time Play" when the situation comes up. I have never heard of any crews getting this basic concept wrong (until now.)

I agree that the protest needs to be upheld. The offense DID appeal the situation immediately after the play occurred, and all 4 umps got together and they ALL didn't know the rule. All 4 deserve to be thrown under the bus. The offense (Baltimore) should have protested the game right there. They did not and that is there fault. You can't go change this after the next pitch, much less 3 innings later. This crew should be given a week off to re-read the rule book.

I don't always tap my wrist with one out. Two outs, and runners in scoring position I will, but rarely on one out.

This brings us back to
 

Where in the rulebook does it state that an umpire can wipe off an earned run by mistake?

The defense saw the umpires were still wondering about the play in question too. Both sides put in their arguments and the umpires corrected the mistake, albeit 3 innings too late. I believe there is a precedent to changing the official score to reflect player statitistics such as RBI awards. The defense should have been well aware of the mistake the umpires had made. I guess instant replay was shown and everyone knew the umpires had made a mistake. The right thing to do would be to withdraw the protest, if possible, or throw it out, if not.

Everyone is overthinking this. It's a judgment call, on a timing play. No one, NO ONE called it a misapplication of the rules after it happened. No run scores on this folks, as called by the umpire at the plate. If anyone had a problem with it they a had lot of time before the next pitch happened. Hey, maybe the PU didn't see the batter hit the plate in time. It really doesn't matter though. He made a very distinct wave off, just listen to the announcer. No question what he was calling. If the O's didn't like it, they should have spoken up at the time.

Too late now, or three innings later, IMO.

I disagree. There is NO way that this is a judgment call. Everyone in the park knew that the runner touched home before the appeal at 1st. If it was pure judgment, the O's bench coach would not have come out to argue, and they wouldn't have sent someone to check the rule book. This crew managed to screw up two basic rules in one game. Sad.

Everyone......except for one. Unfortunately, he's the only guy in the park that counts. He waved it off. Now the question is, why did he wave it off? Either he didn't know a very fundamental baseball rule, OR he thought the appeal came before the runner hit the plate. Both equally stupid. But who's to say that the PU just didn't think about the touch of the plate, saw R1 returning, and assumed R3 brainlocked as well. What I'm saying is that the PU didn't see R3 score, and he just waved off. A JUDGMENT CALL. A very poor judgment call, but that's all it is.

I don't know why you are tyring to hang your hat on a judgment call. Even the umpires involved said they were checking a RULE.

"We kicked it around and now I'm having a brain cramp on it," Montague said. "So I sent Bill (umpire Bill Miller) in, I said 'You know what, cause we're debating, you go in. Lets make it 100 percent sure."'

Miller checked the rule and said the run should have counted. Montague was vague about why it took until the sixth to make the change, saying "it kind of went on" with the umpires conferring with the managers.

Oh, I agree. They were looking for some sort of rule to overturn, negate or bypass a blown judgment call. They just couldn't find one, I guess.

I'm open to a logical explanation on why the PU waved off the run.

Again, I'm not saying I'm right. It's just what I would argue on this protest. I've got my lawyer hat on, instead of my six stitch combo. Bring it counselor!

Has Marv spoken about this incident yet? Have any of you groupies talked to him?

I was having dinner with 7 NCAA umpires when this umpires when this play happened and they were working two man during the game. 5 of the 8 of us had por experience and 2 of the 5 had MLB fill-in time, one guy with over 900 games. We were talking before they added the run in the 6th and When I suggested that they might in the 5th and it happened in the 6th we all got an ohhh my god look in our faces, but then we talked about why they did it. They did it because their ultimate goal is to get it right.

Guys are always *****ing about a guy kicking a call or a crew making a mistake. THIS IS WHEN THE BEST UMPIRING IS DONE AND THE REAL CREAM RISES TO THE TOP. Yes, they should have never missed the call, but they did and then they got it right. The idea as it was explained to me when I was in pro ball and being evaluated was not to be perfect, but get in a **** house and come out on the other side clean. You never wanted to have a nothing game when you were being looked at. This play was handled very well and the crew is to be comended for not caring what it looked like or what they looked like, but putting their personal interests aside and getting the freaking call right.

As for the protest, I honestly think that it will not be allowed. The protest was made by Cleveland when they added the run, but they umpires simply did they right thing once they realized what that was. So the timing of the protest by Cleveland was correct, but in the "judgement" of the umpires, they did what they felt was correct. You can't protest a judgement call and it was Ed's judgement to have the run awarded. It doesn't matter when, when he did it was still the right call.

To answer the lack of support in the rules, their is no support either way, so as per 9.01c they had the right to do what they did.

Fell free to tell me that I am wrong, because all 7 of my friends did.

I don't know him, but I think he might have thought for a sec, brain cramp, that it was a force play at 1st base. I think if it happens at 2nd and not 1st he is ok. Sometimes guys get screwed up with time plays at 1st.

Might be without precedent, but as you stated it sounds like they did a "right" thing.

I think they will disallow the protest also because the rules are not very clear either way.

As we know in baseball, there is a first time for everything.

Thanks
DAvid

The protest will be disallowed since the umpires got it right.

It's not about what the call should have been, but rather how it got there. Was proper procedure followed? No way. This is a process failure, and the protest is all about the process.

Umpire mistakes are part of the very fabric of the game. Sometimes we goof, boys. And when we do, the managers have certain responsibilities. And when they fail it's TFB for everyone.

MLB is going to sugar coat this, I have no doubt. The "get the call right" brush will sweep it all under the rug. But the implications, just like the reversed foul call last year, will build up until the robots from Spacely Sprockets are calling the games. I just hope +POS won't be the official supplier for spare parts.

Since you seem to be abreast of the proper procedure for this type of situation, can you tell me where I can find it so I can read it for myself?

I thought the process and objective of an umpires job was to ultimately get the call right?

The process use to allow for swearing on the field, chewing tobacco on the field, living and dieing with a call. The process has changed and the guys followed it.

Must have missed something
 

Well I've looked in all of my books and can't seem to find a proper process for this play.

So there must be some information that I'm not aware of - if you could please let me know where to look or what the process is, that would be helpful.

Maybe its just the baseketball ref in me whereas you can always go back and fix the score until the game is over as long as you have evidence etc., It was the third out of the inning anyway so it didn't affect the outcome of the inning or the game for that matter.

Not that I'd ever have this play happen, but just in case ;),

Thanks
David

We all have our opinions but IMO, this play was not handled very well at all especially when you have 4 very well trained umpires at the highest level. As I said in my first post, if this were an amateur game, this crew would be getting "killed" by everyone.


IMO, the timing does matter.

Let me use an extreme example to get my point across.

In NFL football, pass interference is a judgement call and it is a spot foul. let's say we had a controversial play in the end zone a blatant Pass interference which was not called. The offense proceeds to run 2 more plays and then punts the ball. All of a sudden the officials huddle and now want to 'go back" and enforce the pass interference call.

One might say wait a minute Pete you are comparing apples / oranges. IMO I am not. In baseball a run is a HUGE factor in the game. IMO, you cannot go back and Retroactively put runs on the Board. The game is dictated by how many runs one is leading by. It effects the pitching match-ups etc.

The O's had plenty of time to question the play or appeal it. They didn't so IMO, you cannot go back and put runs on the Board.

My opinion doesn't count so we will have to wait and see what major league baseball does. Whatever the decision, it's my gut money will come into it, meaning if the protest is upheld, do the people who attended that game have free seats to see the game picked up from the protest or will they have 2 admissions sort of a day / night type double dip.

If the protest is NOT upheld then IMO the floodgates could be open.

IMO, this theory about getting the call right is overhyped becasue the fact is We will not get every call right. Timing is a factor that's why the rule-makers put "time limits" if you will into the appeal rules. We live in an imperfect world.

Bottom Line IMO, a Very Poor job by this umpiring crew.

Pete Booth

I don't think that there is any specific thing for this play, but baseball has a pretty consistent timeframe for dealing with things: next pitch or all infielders leave the infield. I think the umpires have to get it right in that time frame or live with it. Here a mistake was made but it just wasn't corrected soon enough.

I think it's a no-brainer that this protest should be upheld. The offense, at the time of the RULES misinterpretation, did not protest the incorrect ruling. 1 pitch later, it's too late. 3 innings later? Ridiculous. Since the offended team had no recourse 3 innings later, why should the umpires? They don't. Adding the run that late is not in accordance with the rules, and THIS was correctly protested.

The real question ... will MLB have the cojones to uphold the protest and replay the game from that point? I bet they don't, and I bet their excuse is that 1 run was not the difference in the game ... a contention I disagree with 100%.

Don't be surprised if this protest is denied for a couple reasons, one of which is that the ultimate ruling, which was correct, had "no substantial impact upon the outcome of the game."

Agreed. This protest is going to be denied for one reason and one reason only: Take away the run and Baltimore still wins 6-4. If the final score was 7-6, then maybe they'd uphold the protest (or maybe not). If the final score was 7-6 they would likely be forced to address the merits of Cleveland's protest...but with a 3-run difference, there is no need...they will quickly deny it and move on.

I know some will argue: "we'll that's not right because the impact of adding that run in the 6th could have affected how Cleveland played the rest of the game," or something like that. Unfortunately, MLB execs don't have PhD's...so this won't fly. The execs only care about the hard facts, baby. Take away the run and it doesn't matter.

IMO, this protest will be denied solely on the grounds stated by UMP25: The run doesn't matter one way or the other.

I am just saying that while you are correct, for an appeal to be made by a team the rules dictate that it must be done before the next pitch and/or before the players leave the field and what not. However, this wasn't an appeal play. This was the umpires working to get it right. And I can't find a section in the book that states they have a time limit to do that. The teams yes, the umpires no. You said it Pete, we do live in an imperferct world, and while the timing was imperfect, the call was correct. And Mc, you want to talk about cojones, man, would any of us have the cojones to do what Ed and the boys did? It truly will be interesting to see what MLB says.

No, I would never have the cojones (nor the audacity) to reverse a call made 3 innings ago, whether I was right or wrong in retrospect. Not because I have a lack of such anatomy ... but because it is the wrong thing to do. Just as the opposing team has until the next pitch to reverse a mistaken rules interpretation, the same limit should be applied to us.

I remember an example (from the J/R? from a rules quiz?) very similar to this case but not identical in process.

In the play, in the third inning, the run scores from 3B before the third out is registered on appeal of a runner who left 1B too soon on a caught fly ball. (Same as in the Cleveland-Baltimore game). But in this play, the umpires don't make a call either way on the run, and the game proceeds as if the run did not score. The rest goes something like this: the game goes to extra innings, and the team that got the "break" on the run eventually wins. After the game, the umpires realize that the third-inning run should have counted. Supposedly, the run is then counted and the outcome of the game is reversed.

From reading the newspaper yesterday, I got the impression that the umpire initially claimed that the out at 1B had occurred before the runner from 3B crossed the plate. I was umpiring down in Delaware/Maryland yesterday, and the fans were talking about the play. Everyone seemed to be saying that over the next couple of innings, somebody must have showed the umps a replay showing that the run had scored, but since they're not supposed to rely on replays, they looked for excuse to reverse themselves. It's inconceivable to me that four MLB umpires could blow that call on a rule misinterpretation.

I agree, there has to be more to it than what the news is describing...how can four of the best blow it that bad...I just don't get it...

Only one guy blew it. I'm guessing the other three didn't notice.

Anyone notice who had the "catch" on that rotation?

Palermo will tell you that all of the umpires had their eyes on the ball at some point...so I'm sure at some point, they all saw the catch...the time play...I agree with you that's ultimately that is PU's resp...but you win as a crew and you lose as a crew...

I've read this too I think it was in J/R.

This is a very bizarre occurance. Ed Montegue, an MLB umpire, does not know the time play. Why an umpire at that level would not know such an elementary rule is beyond me.

There is a second rule that Ed Montegue is unaware of. You cannot change a judgement call after another pitch is made. To wait more than 2 innings to change a call is unacceptable.

I know I shouldn't be dissing a fellow official, but this is just not acceptable.

Sorry to quote you as I don't normally like to do that, but the umpires got off extremely easy on this one. There should have been a whole gang of managers ready to tear their heads off.

Make up your mind. Was it a rule application, or a judgment call?

Don't feed the CDump.

GarthB,Mcrowder
 

My bad, it was a rules interpretation. Same deal though, they should nip it in the bud rather than waiting 3 innings to change it and add a run to the score.

Mcrowder, I would prefer if you didn't insult me.

From a rulebook
 

I find it hard to believe that the run was wiped off the board.
Something must have been said that we have all missed.

Occam's razor. The simplest explanation is the right explanation.

They screwed up. They admitted it. They had a "brain cramp."

I will play commissioner for a moment.

A manager cannot protest an alleged misapplication of a rule after a subsequent pitch or play. The protest was made after the "correction" of a misapplication of a rule in an earlier inning. This "correction" may be allowed under 9.01c (yes, I know many here don't believe in 9.01c since all things should be covered, but apparently not). The disputed correction may be allowed under 9.01C, the original ruling is ruled incorrect, the affect did not significantly affect the protesting team's opportunity to win the game so protest is denied.

If you're the commish, allow me to be the protesting manager.

There was no ruling on this play to protest. The ruling was the run didn't score before the appeal at first was made. There was no misapplication of the rules, just a very, very poor judgment call on a timing play. If my opposing manager didn't catch this, it's his fault.

Don't let the fifth umpire, with access to instant replay, have any say in this at all. Do that, and you'll have every judgment call being reviewed in the tunnel. Commish, you've got the stopper to put on the bottle before the genie comes out. Put a cork in it Boss.

My protest involves the umpires on the field inappropriately going to video tape to review a judgment call. This ain't hockey, and no one threw a red flag. This is baseball, and we have long and storied history of umpires making, and living with bad calls.

Thank you for your time.

If Commish Rules that Way....
 

He's nuts!

It is almost a sure thing that politics will lead to the protest being disallowed (MLB will sweep the mistake under the rug), but this protest needs to be upheld.

Sorry men, this is not a judgement call, it is clearly a misapplication of a rule, and while 9.01 covers everything in the rules, you cannot go back and retroactively change calls from previous innings.

Whatever the final score of the game is, it is irrelevant, unless Cleveland, the offended team, had won the game. It violates a simple rule of fair play to add a run several innings later in the game, mistake or not by PU. It not only changes how the game is played, it makes the whole idea of fair play questionable if you allow this to happen.

In the NFL, NBA, and NHL, it seems like almost every week there is a letter to some team from the league office about how the officials missed applied a rule. I never see the officials decide to correct an error five plays or a quarter later. It's always a case of "Our bad, sorry, see you later."

I feel awful bad for the umpire crew here, they would never want to make a mistake like this, and they have enough garbage from people to deal with. But you cannot have 2 bites of the apple in this play, especially when the next bite is 3 innigns later.

Not basketball
 

John, won't work in basketball, they allow for it in the rules.

Actually happens all the time - one team complains about the score. Officials get together and fix it etc., Of course they have to have evidence that the score should be changed etc.,

Especially at HS level.

thanks
David

Is a "call" being changed? A run that legally scored by rule wasn't properly reflected on the scoreboard and was added later.

Ah, the crux of the whole discussion. The PU ruled that the run didn't cross the plate before the appeal was made. Thus, the wave off. The PU looked to the scoring booth, pointed to the plate, and waved it off. We all know now, because we saw the replay, that that wasn't the case. But that was the judgement call on the field at the time.

But was it a judgment call or was it his ruling that R3 didn't score. There IS a difference.

We'll never actually know, because the offensive manager never came out and questioned it. The rest was just the umpiring crew trying to cover it up.

I'd say that the only time you wave off runs is on a timing play. Do you do it on force outs? No. Any other times? No. Just timing plays. So the PU knew it was a timing play, and JUDGED that the runner didn't cross in time.

So you have a ruling: Timing play, and a judgement call: No he didn't hit the plate in time. We all know he blew it, but it's gotta stand.

Question: Is there any other time that you, as an umpire, wave off runs?

Another angle: R1, R3, two outs. A ball is hit back to the pitcher, who throws in to the catcher. The catcher tags the plate, and PU calls out on the force. The sides are changed, but two innings later someone figures out it wasn't a force at the plate. Now what? Same deal here folks.

I don't think it really matters. Either the PU really kicked the timing play or he misapplied a rule. If he kicked the timing play, bummer, yell all you want about his judgement (not protestable). If he misapplied a rule, great, the offended team has an opportunity to protest that call....they didn't (in the time frame laid out in the rule book). The protest by the new offended team three innings later should be upheld because no where in the rule book does it say that the umpire crew can come back and fix somehting they blew three innings earlier.

No, there isn't. The only difference between this being judgement or this being a rules misapplication is that if it was a rules misapplication, it could have been protested RIGHT THEN, and if it was judgement, it could not.

But AFTER the protest period was over (1 pitch), it was too late to fix this.

3 Innings Later !?!?!?! Whether it was judgement or rule misapplication, it's too late to retroactively change the call and award a run. I don't care if the final score was 1 run or 10 runs - the situation AT THE TIME was close enough that decisions could have been made based on the score at that time. Protest upheld. Play it again, Sam.

A cover up usually is when the umpires ignore something. I wouldn't call this a cover up, they let everyone in the world know what they were doing.

I'd do it anytime there might be confusion. For example, we had a play the other weekend where R1 was hit by the batted ball. The ball continued into the outfield, R2 crossed the plate and only then did everyone realize that BU had a call. I wiped the run and made sure both benches knew.

In the play at hand, it was an "unusual" third out and so, I think giving an indication was proper (even if the ruling was wrong).

Slightly related question from a non-umpire/ <i>beisbol</i> fanboy......

In yesterday's St. Louis game, Albert Pujols walked on 3 balls. Nobody caught it. At what point does a mistake like that become set in stone- i.e. not fixable?

It should become unfixable as soon as the next pitch is thrown.

Unless it's noticed 3 innings later.

I wasn't going to post this, but now I am. It really doesn't affect anyone's analysis of the Cleveland/Baltimore game, but it is an example of how some NCAA Division 1 umpires handled this exact situation.

I was umpiring at an early season non-conference Division 1 tournament. (In a city that has 3 Division 1 teams...who were all jointly co-hosting the tournament with a bunch of northern teams).

Anyways, at my ballpark I was sitting in the press box watching a game with my crew (we had the next game). (We were in the press box (1) because our locker room was in the lower level of the press box tower, and (2) except for the SID staff running the scoreboard and PA, it was empty and we'd rather watch a game than sit in the locker room).

While watching the game, the exact same play as the Baltimore/Cleveland play happened. The home plate umpire waived off a run that crossed well before the out at first was recorded. In fact, he scored so far in advance of the out at first, that the offensive team didn't even see him waive off the run because they had moved on to watching the play at first.

Anyways, nobody says a thing at that time. The SID staff (in the press box) doesn't put the run on the scoreboard. The SID actually says, "I think that's wrong" and looks to us. We immediately act like we're in a deep discussion of what's better: Star Wars or Star Trek?

Next half inning is played without anything being said. Before the next half inning (when the offensive team described above is about to bat again) the offensive coach comes out to tell the umpires that "the scoreboard is wrong,"...not that the umpire screwed up in waiving off the run (He had no clue the umpire had done so), but that the scoreboard was "missing a run last inning." The coach said that they scored two runs in the sixth, and not one as shown on the scoreboard.

The umpires get together. The crew chief (long-time college guy) tells his crew (as told to me in the locker room after the game), "I have one run scoring early in the inning, and one on the double-play so it should be two." The other base umpire agrees. The plate umpire says, "no the run on the double play does not score." The crew chief said, "what, you waived the run off?"

At this point, the crew chief thinks the plate umpire just made a bad JUDGMENT call. The plate umpire responded, "yeah, a run can't score on a play in which the third out is made at first base." The crew chief and other umpire quickly correct him.

They then called out the coaches and said the scoreboard was wrong and that they were putting the run on the board. The other team's coach mildly protested (the game was a blow-out, and he was winning big). The crew chief in defending his decition to put the run on the board stated, "the run had scored legally. Once a run scores, a runner can't do anything to take away that run. He scored legally, we can't take it away, so we're putting it on the board."

The crew chief said it with enough legalese mumbo-jumbo to convince the defensive coach and the game finished without incident, (and the defensive team still won by A LOT).

After the game, in the locker room, the crew chief lit into his plate guy...as he should have. I, however, being a veteran(not as much as the crew chief) told the crew chief he was wrong for putting the run on the board when he did. We got into a spirited (not nasty, just spirited) debate about whether they could put the run on the board when they did. In the end we decided: that he should never have been in that position and that the plate guy owed everyone a beer after our game.

You'll forgive me, but as a lowly D3/HS umpire I have to ask:

How the hell does this happen? It's a rule that second year Little League umpires know.

Will they ever announce the ruling on the protest?

If that were the case, they would not have sent Miller in to check the rulebook. Nice try, though. You are determined to turn a rules misapplication into a judgment call.

It's a simple FU, they incorrectly ruled the run couldn't score on the appeal play, treating it as a force.

I'm not really that determined, just promoting one side of the debate. I'm really not sure what they were consulting the rulebook over. I'd doubt they were going over the original play, rather, trying to figure out how on earth to sneak that run in without a protest. Didn't work, I guess.

It will be interesting to see how the protest gets turned down though. Has Marv owned up to this FU yet?

Yes, there IS. If you cannot tell the difference, then there is no hope for you.

Let's reveiw what Ed said: "We kicked it around and now I'm having a brain cramp on it," Montague said. "So I sent Bill (umpire Bill Miller) in, I said 'You know what, cause we're debating, you go in. Lets make it 100 percent sure."'

"Miller checked the rule and said the run should have counted."

I don't know how you can read it any other way...rule misapplication...plain and simple.

Don't be like that.

I can tell the difference. I'm saying that 3 innings later, the difference between this being a judgement call and a rules misinterpretation no longer matters. I think I said that pretty clearly too.

Don't ask me: I think I learned this the second week of umpire school.:D

Upon reading the many people who are adamant that MLB should uphold this protest, I wonder if these same people are aware of the three possible outcomes of a protest. Pursuant to MLB's policy, when a protest is filed, it is:

1. Denied
2. Upheld, but game stands as played (i.e., nothing happens)
3. Upheld, game is replayed from point of protest (this is interesting, because in this specific situation, is not the "point of protest" a time later than when the actual infraction occurred? "Point of protest" is the policy mainly because it coincides with the time of the rules infraction if/when the protest is filed before the next pitch or play, yada...yada...yada)

MLB denied the protest today- no reason given.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/b...orts-headlines

[QUOTE]IMO, I think most are adament because the ruling from major league baseball could have an adverse effect on all of us amateurs.

Look at the impact on the overhyped "getting the call right" on a 2 person crew.

I realize major league baseball stands alone but if the protest is NOT upheld get ready for the floodgates and a change in the appeal rules. If the protest is not upheld then in effect major league baseball is saying you can appeal any misapplication of a rule anytime during the game and also retroactively put runs on / off the board.

IMO I do not think most are interested in what major league baseball will ultimately do but that the protest is upheld because you do not have 'all day" to appeal.

Pete Booth

Score one for the good guys.

There is a precedent. About 4 or 5 years ago in AAA, the same thing happened. Plate umpire had a brain fart, but the crew didn't get together. An inning later, the first base umpire came down to talk with the plate umpire to ask about the play because he thought it was rather odd that R3 didn't beat the throw. The plate umpire said that he did (by about 2 steps), but it was a force out at 1st for the 3rd out so the run doesn't count. The 3 umpires got together and said that they kicked that call, and the run should have counted. Then, they put the run on the board. Of course, the defensive team for the play in question immediately protested the game.

End result - the protest was denied.

BJ

Well, Well, Well....
 

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.

Which is?</comment>

Nice response Garth
 

Here we go:

1. Yes, the rules are unwritten, but: Own your own call. PU made the call, stick with it. If you are wrong, life's is tough when your mistake is shown on ESPN, I'll trade with him any day.
2. Once a play it happens it is over, you can't go back and change it later.
3. Appeals can be made on some rule violations until the next pitch or play not at the end of a half ining, and not three innings later.
4. Judgement calls are not appealable (normally), and rule mistakes have to be appealed when the happen, not later.

Garth, I see your point, I believe. I think you are saying that the crew used 9.01c to change the score when they decided the PU made an error, whether it was a judgement call or rule that he blew in making the incorrect call. And the time doesn't matter, they can change things any time they want to

My view is that if he made a bad judgement call, the PU has to live with it, you can't go back and change the whole game situation three innings after the call was made. You are opening up Pandora's Box for questioning calls.
If the PU blew a rule the offense has to come out then and appeal or protest the game when the call was blown.

In my view of the rules, the umpire does not have the ability under the rules to hit a reset button and and play god to cover up a mistake. You have to eat the call in this case.

The MLB suits don't agree, their mistake.

Can't win win gracefully?
 

Please consider that correcting a misapplication to one rule 3 innings later (1 week ago), really means a 1/2 inning later (today), and may eventually turn out to mean at the appropriate time (in another 2 weeks). :rolleyes:

Of course, if it happens again, we now have a precedent set for correcting any misapplication of the rules for an indefinite time period following the game. :eek:

Modern philosophers like it!
 

Night means day, up means down, left means right, one plsu one is three. Deconstructionists love it!:D

#3) Who made an appeal? No one, so under the rule book the next play/pitch reasoning doesn't apply here. But we have been asked to work to get it right.

The rules regarding the timing of an appeal applies to the "offended" team, not umpires.

9.01 (c) is, indeed, the God Clause.

The action they took further convinces me that the issue was not a judgment call. That they would have left alone. This was, no doubt, a misapplication of the rules, and whether we like it or not, the die was cast for this use of 9.01(c) two years ago when MLB began encouraging the umpires to huddle, hold hands, sing and "get it right."

I am not any more in favor of this approach to umpiring than you, however, I have seen enough of it at the MiLB and MLB levels to understand that I am powerless to stop this perverted concept of progress.

I also have matured in age and attitude to the point that I won't get heartburn over it.

Bottom line, there was no rule to prevent them from doing what they wanted to do, and the God Clause was there to allow them to do what they wanted to do, so they did it. Those of us who disagree have no real footing for that stand other than emotional ties to the past.

And so it goes.

(RIP Kurt)

How is this - score one for the good guys.

I would like to see what would have happened in the 7th game of the World Series - Game Tied after 9 complete innings, all of a sudden the umpires 'go back" and put a run on the Board = game Over.

What happened here is what happens many times in Corporate America. It's called CYA.


Pete Booth

Pete,

Just one question! Did the runner cross the plate before the out at 1st?

If no, they screwed up.

If yes, they got it right.

Is it that hard?

Opps, that is two questions.

The umps kicked this one - twice. The first mistake was not knowing the rule - inexcusable for anyone calling any game above t-ball level. The second mistake was adding the run. The misapplication of the rule occurred in the top of the third inning when Baltimore's run was disallowed. (I don't think anyone is claiming this was a judgment call.) Baltimore should have protested at that point. They didn't.

Now, after thinking it over the umps decide that they kicked it and want to correct it. Basically they decided, 'we screwed up but Baltimore didn't catch it so let's fix if for them.' Bad decision. And bad ruling by MLB.

The only thing that could be worse than what this umpiring crew did, in my not-so-humble opinion, was if a crew decided after a play to change a "foul" call to "fair". Thank God that's never happened. Oh, wait....:eek:

Two mistakes doesn't make one right call. Yes, they kicked when the run was waived off. They had until the next pitch to correct it and they didn't, neither did Baltimore challenge the incorrect application of the rules. Three innings later, the umpires decided to take it upon themselves to protest their mistake and correct it. This is an error because the time for correcting the error had passed. This is, quite literally, a make-up call.

Screwing up once does not give you license to intentionally screw up again because you think the second one makes up for the first.

1) MLB ruled they were right. Again, we are umpires, we enforce not interpret. There is nothing that prohibits them from doing what they did. Some tradition, maybe, but rule no. MLB Interpreted that the umpires were correct in their actions. That is good enough for me.

2) This was not an appeal or protest, before they added the run, so nothing says the have 1 pitch/play to fix it.

3) Like I said earlier, these guys aren't MLB umpires because they never make mistakes, they are MLB umpires because they can handle their ****. Great umpires are definded by being able to get out of hairy situations, and have the call be right, no ejections if possible, no protests if possible, and winning one if you have it. EVERYONE MAKES MISTAKES ON THE FIELD, not everyone has the knowledge and/or skill set to fix em in a ****house.

I could be wrong, and we don't have to agree, but the men that get paid to make the decisions publically said the umpires did the right thing.

"Mindful of their obligation that 'the first requisite is to get decisions correctly,' as the Rules instruct them, this umpire crew was within the authority that Rule 9.01(c) gave them to correct the game score when they did."

This umping stuff just gets funner and funner all the time. I'd love to see the NCAA and FED address this one. I think most of us are in agreement that if Pandora's Box hasn't been opened completely, at least the lid has been cracked a little. Summer ball is going to be a lot of fun this year...and what's that I hear in the distance (and getting closer)? "Replay!" "Replay!" "Replay!"

JJ

PS Yes, I know "funner" isn't a dictionary word...

Anytime that you have to invoke 9.01(c) "The umpire is always right." to show that the umpire was right, the umpire was wrong. MLB ruled that they were going to engage in CYA. What other things do the rules not prohibit that we are going to tolerate the umpires doing? If an umpire realizes three innings later that he declared a batter out on two strikes, are we going to allow the batter to start the new inning with the old count to correct the mistake? Mistakes in the application need to be corrected when the occur or not at all.

Yes, it does. Baltimore had 1 pitch/play to appeal or protest the run not being added. When they did not, it (should have) closed the door on correcting the error.

If this was them handling something, I would hate to see them lose control!

I'll repeat: if you have to use 9.01(c) to justify your actions, you are wrong.

Agreed, the "get it right police" have emerged and ain't going away soon.

Especially in summer leagues where the parents run the programs etc.,

Thansk
David

What happened has nothing to do whether they got it right or not.

It has to do with TIMING. There was a rule misapplication as evidenced by the crew chief instructing one of his umpires to check the rule book and according to the rules as written there is a certain amount of time that the injured party has to appeal the decision and it is not some 3 innings later.

Botton Line IMO this was a CYA in the first degree. As mentioned it would be very interesting to see what would have happen in a World Series game.

Pete Booth

FWIW, if you go to www.rulesofbaseball.com and take their online quiz, this exact situation (changing the score later) comes up:


R1, R3, one out, home team at bat, fifth inning. Squeeze play; runners stealing on the pitch. The batter attempts to bunt over the head of the charging first baseman. He pops the ball over the first baseman's head, but the pitcher makes a spectacular diving catch (taking attention away from R3). R3 touches home as the catch is made. He sees that R1 will be out easily, and he proceeds quietly to his dugout. The pitcher tosses the ball to first base for an easy retouch appeal, and R1 is the third out. The pitcher's trainer and manager sprint onto the field to check their pitcher for injury. A normal change of half-innings ensues; no one, including the plate umpire, deals with R3's failure to retouch or his run (which obviously scored before the third out-a time play). After nine innings, the scoreboard says the score is 2-2, and the visiting team eventually wins by an apparent score of 4-2 after 12 innings. In their locker room after the game, the umpires discuss the fifth inning double play, and realize that the run scored for the home team. What should they do?


Answer:



In professional rules, the 'correct' answer is 'b', the umpires must inform the official scorer and the two managers that the home team won the game in eight-and-a-half innings by a score of 3-2.

Don't feel bad if you got this one wrong. There is nothing written to cover this situation in the Official Rules. You will find other, similar game-ending situations in The Rules of Professional Baseball that are not treated, or inadequately treated in the Official Rules.

NFHS (high school) rules directly treat the situation in which there is an error in the score. In the quiz question, letter 'd' would be the correct answer for a high school game. The scoring error must be found before the umpires leave the field, or the final score stands. You will find these vital rule differences in Jaksa and Roder's Rule Differences Edition, which includes NCAA, NAIA, and NFHS rule differences.




So apparently according to the J/R, the umpires on the field got it right

All is well that ends well
 

Which rule is more important: a) make no appeal or protest after the next pitch or b) the other rules in the book? Let me answer that.

Umpire waves a run off the board. The network cuts to commericals. The manager makes a last second appeal to check out the facts and restore the run. His team is sitting in disbelief of the events that had transpired.

By the end of the next half-inning, the entire viewing audience knows about the mistake(s). All agree that it wasn't the RIGHT call and it wasn't the RIGHT explanation. The Cleveland fans are delighted with the outcome. The umpires erred twice in their favor.

The crew chief is standing there amazed and confused. It was their OBLIGATION to make the RIGHT call before and after the appeal. The phone lines are busy, the bosses are notified of the situation, and someone is sent to turn the pages of a rulebook. The baseball world is abuzz in speculative chatter.

The decision is made to ADD the run back onto the scorebook. The umpires, knowingly, have contradicted another rule in the book. Manager Y feels his copy of the code has been incorrectly modified. He could give a rats *** between previous rights or wrongs. This is NOT the PROCESS he states as he now lodges a formal protest. His opponents right to due process expired three innings ago.

The protest is filed with and later denied by the very folks who COUNT most, the league office that determines which rule violation is more egregious. It is apparant that rules of the game prohibit umpires from incorrectly applying the rules of the game for which they are directly responsible. Whether it is before the next pitch or after, the league office directs UMPIRES not to do that.

Here's the question that's been nagging me since day one:

Where is the professional scorekeeper in all of this? Surely they knew it was a timing play. And they must have known the run scored. Everyone would have been served if they sent word to the field about Fido being violated, and no one would have been the wiser. You've got a lot of time between innings in a MLB game.

Look, Marv had a senior moment, and the other three probably didn't see it. The fifth wheel starts hearing about it in the dugout, yanks a field guy to thumb through the book for some rule, other than 9.01(c), to stave off the ugly protest. Failing that, they "get the call right", and back over the PU. I guess they thought that the protest coming from this direction would be easier to deflect.

Again, the only folks who've thought any more than thirty seconds about this are us umpire geeks.

Well at least we don't have to argue judgment vs. rule application anymore. The MLB has stated it was not a judgment issue.

It took me two times reading this before I got it. LMAO and ROTF.http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_11_6.gif