Did he Touch the plate?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

This is because you just want to blindly support the umpire like a sniffer and never say one word against any MLB umpire under any circumstances.

If you can show me where the runner actually touched the plate (he didn't), then I will buy this argument. I have seen replay after replay from every camera angle and not one has CONCLUSIVELY, 100% shown me that the runner touched the plate. That is what is required for a runner to be safe. A touch of the plate.

The umpire has to actually see the runner touch the plate or assume that he did not. McClelland has never once ever said "I saw Holliday touch the plate." He does not come out and say this for one reason: He never saw Holliday touch the plate. The replays don't have to prove that Holliday didn't touch the plate. The umpire is supposed to be watching the touch of the plate. That's why he gets paid the big bucks. If I hear one time where McClelland comes out and says definitively that Holliday touched the plate, then I'll be happy to drop the subject. But he won't, because he can't.

Sure, the ball ended up on the ground. But Barrett picked it up and tagged the runner, who had yet to touch the plate. The on-deck hitter yelled at Holliday to go back and touch the plate, so it looked to him like he never touched the plate.

Barrett and Black and everyone else is not going to publicly say anything against McClelland's call. Of course not. They have to play again next year. Do ya think they want to have an umpire pissed at them every time they see him? They're not going to say sh!t about the call. "Good call, Tim." That's the "official" response from the Padres.

Again, McClelland's call did not cost the Padres the Wild Card. They had plenty of opportunities to wrap it up long before the Monday one-game playoff. That game should not have even been necessary. The Padres fans with any intelligence are blaming the Padres, not the umpire.

The default position on this play MUST be that the runner touched the plate unless positive otherwise.

Unless, of course, you are a Jerry Coleman sniffing San Diego homer.

[lawump]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Uh, you missed my point apparently.

I said ballplayers. No one ballplayer in particular. I was certainly not talking about Michael Barrett. Other players at other times throughout the years. Other broadcasters at other times throughout the years. This is not the first time the subject has come up.

I don't have the quotes all cataloged in my mind. I couldn't tell you who said what. It's just that I have heard rumblings from several players and broadcasters at one time or other about Tim calling things way too slow, and not appearing enthused in his job. I know that it is a misperception, but a perception nonetheless.

I don't know Steve. First, I'm sure you've heard some grumblings from some players about Tim, and I won't argue that point...But frankly, its my belief that if you stay around in the bigs enough, every umpire will have more than one person whine about them.

Frankly, I don't think players are qualified to evaluate umpires...but with that said, and since you are taking about "players", Steve...in Sports Illustrated's most recent poll of MLB players (that they do every few years or so) that asked them to "name the best umpire in MLB"..Tim McClelland was not ranked #2, he was not ranked #68 and he was not ranked anywhere between those two numbers. Rather he was #1.

470 MLB players actually responded to that survey, which is a very large sample size (although I'm no statistician).

Thus, I think you've missed the boat on this one, Steve.

But that's o.k...as great as it has been to be a Boston sports fan this past month (Sox, Pats, BC and actually anticipating the C's season)...it must be even worse for SD fans...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

This is because you just want to blindly support the umpire like a sniffer and never say one word against any MLB umpire under any circumstances.

And you're just another typical fanboy. And you're like every other fanboy too. You'll say that the officials didn't cost your team the game, but that's just for public consumption. Down deep, you really don't believe that. It won't stop you from whining, pissing and moaning interminably about a supposed blown call.

It's over. San Diego lost. Life goes on.

Let it go, fanboy.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

This is because you just want to blindly support the umpire like a sniffer and never say one word against any MLB umpire under any circumstances.

Steve, you keep repeating this and it is simply and verifiably, untrue.

Rich, along with others you paint with this broadbrush, including me, have often been critical of some MLB umpires and umpiring. Froemming, West, Hernandez, Bucknor and others have been criticized roundly by those you claim, "never say one word against any MLB umpire under any circumstances."

Surely you can make your point without misrepresenting those with whom you disagree.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And you're just another typical fanboy. And you're like every other fanboy too. You'll say that the officials didn't cost your team the game, but that's just for public consumption. Down deep, you really don't believe that. It won't stop you from whining, pissing and moaning interminably about a supposed blown call.

It's over. San Diego lost. Life goes on.

Let it go, fanboy.

Get back under your bridge. I'm no more of a fanboy than anyone else here is.

I am well over the fact that San Diego lost. Life has gone on. I was over it about 15 minutes after I heard that they lost. I am certainly not whining, pissing, or moaning about anything. I am simply trying to understand why some people always side with the MLB umpires, even when they are wrong. That's all I'm doing.

I mainly hold Trevor Hoffman responsible for the Padres losing. I'm not looking at this from a fan's perspective. Umpires blow calls. Why is that so hard for some people to admit? I am serious when I say that McClelland didn't cost us the game. Even if he called the runner out, the game would have remained tied. The Padres were bound and determined to lose anyway.

And, I've got your "boy" swingin' low, sweet chariot.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Steve, you keep repeating this and it is simply and verifiably, untrue.

Rich, along with others you paint with this broadbrush, including me, have often been critical of some MLB umpires and umpiring. Froemming, West, Hernandez, Bucknor and others have been criticized roundly by those you claim, "never say one word against any MLB umpire under any circumstances."

Surely you can make your point without misrepresenting those with whom you disagree.

Alright then, you guys never say one word against Tim McClelland. Is that better?

[Kaliix]

From the previously posted article in USA Today "Michael Barrett stuck out his leg, but he didn't have it planted in the ground," McClelland said. "What I saw was Holliday kind of slide through that leg and TOUCH THE PLATE." (emphasis added)

Tim says he saw the runner touch the plate. I've watched the replay 20 times. It doesn't show that Holliday touched the plate. It doesn't show that Holliday missed the plate. It shows neither because every replay that I've seen is blocked at the key moment where one could tell if home was touched or not. The replay is inconclusive.

McClelland didn't signal because there was no tag attempt when the runner touched the plate. I've always read here that you don't signal if there is no play. When Barrett finally got the ball and went to go tag Holliday, McClelland signaled safe to indicate he had seen the touch and a tag was irrelevant at that point.

McClelland's timing has always been on the slow side. He was probably replaying the play in his mind and taking his time like I hear most people hear recommend that you do. I do agree though that a quicker safe signal after he saw the touch would likely have put this whole thing to bed, at least for us umpires.

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

This is because you just want to blindly support the umpire like a sniffer and never say one word against any MLB umpire under any circumstances.

If you can show me where the runner actually touched the plate (he didn't), then I will buy this argument. I have seen replay after replay from every camera angle and not one has CONCLUSIVELY, 100% shown me that the runner touched the plate. That is what is required for a runner to be safe. A touch of the plate.

The umpire has to actually see the runner touch the plate or assume that he did not. McClelland has never once ever said "I saw Holliday touch the plate." He does not come out and say this for one reason: He never saw Holliday touch the plate. The replays don't have to prove that Holliday didn't touch the plate. The umpire is supposed to be watching the touch of the plate. That's why he gets paid the big bucks. If I hear one time where McClelland comes out and says definitively that Holliday touched the plate, then I'll be happy to drop the subject. But he won't, because he can't.

Sure, the ball ended up on the ground. But Barrett picked it up and tagged the runner, who had yet to touch the plate. The on-deck hitter yelled at Holliday to go back and touch the plate, so it looked to him like he never touched the plate.

Barrett and Black and everyone else is not going to publicly say anything against McClelland's call. Of course not. They have to play again next year. Do ya think they want to have an umpire pissed at them every time they see him? They're not going to say sh!t about the call. "Good call, Tim." That's the "official" response from the Padres.

Again, McClelland's call did not cost the Padres the Wild Card. They had plenty of opportunities to wrap it up long before the Monday one-game playoff. That game should not have even been necessary. The Padres fans with any intelligence are blaming the Padres, not the umpire.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Alright then, you guys never say one word against Tim McClelland. Is that better?

Yes. Much better. I don't know if it's 100% accurate, but it is much better.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

The Padres were bound and determined to lose anyway.

And, I've got your "boy" swingin' low, sweet chariot.

Tim Tschida is the only reason the Padres and Rockies were in extra innings to begin with. That was a missed call in my opinion. Haven't heard a peep out of you about that one. If they were bound and determined to lose, you might as well say the were 1 for 2 on blown calls.

Nice use of a Christian hymn, if you're a Christian as you proclaim, I don't believe you would use such language. Saying it doesn't make so, living it makes so.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Alright then, you guys never say one word against Tim McClelland. Is that better?

Not quite grammatically correct yet, but potentially more accurate.

[UmpLarryJohnson]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I said ballplayers. No one ballplayer in particular. I was certainly not talking about Michael Barrett. Other players at other times throughout the years. Other broadcasters at other times throughout the years. This is not the first time the subject has come up.

I don't have the quotes all cataloged in my mind. I couldn't tell you who said what. It's just that I have heard rumblings from several players and broadcasters at one time or other about Tim calling things way too slow, and not appearing enthused in his job. I know that it is a misperception, but a perception nonetheless.

Har. so ballplayers re iritated that mr MCc appears to put as much effort in HIS job as a lot of multimilliondollar 'pro ballplyers' do in THIERS. wah.

[UmpLarryJohnson]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Wow. 8 pages of whogivesaflip.

the WORST part is its broken cannotump6s 3-page rule by 5! WE ARE DOOMED.




oh and mr Steve this just in = Pads still lost and franco is still dead.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson

oh and mr Steve this just in = Pads still lost and franco is still dead.

Thanks for the update, Chevy!

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson

the WORST part is its broken cannotump6s 3-page rule by 5! WE ARE DOOMED.




oh and mr Steve this just in = Pads still lost and franco is still dead.

Yet, LMan stills lives vicariously though you.

[Interested Ump]

Originally Posted by Kaliix

From the previously posted article in USA Today "Michael Barrett stuck out his leg, but he didn't have it planted in the ground," McClelland said. "What I saw was Holliday kind of slide through that leg and TOUCH THE PLATE." (emphasis added)

Tim says he saw the runner touch the plate. McClelland didn't signal because there was no tag attempt when the runner touched the plate. I've always read here that you don't signal if there is no play. When Barrett finally got the ball and went to go tag Holliday, McClelland signaled safe to indicate he had seen the touch and a tag was irrelevant at that point.

I never enjoy seeing a brother official make a public fool out of himself. I cringe at Mr. McClelland's repeated attempts to do so. If PU had a touch, and a loose ball, he has "Safe". McClelland's insistence on slow mechanics across all calls severely damaged the authority of this call. In turn, it equally damaged the perception of his competence.