The Lofton Out at Second
 

Seems to me that the play at second where Kenny Lofton was out on a nice throw from Manny Ramirez is a perfect example of why instant replay is a bad idea in MLB.

Lofton went in hand first, the umpire was in perfect position and the ball beat Lofton, but slow mo replays showed Lofton's hand beat the tag which first grazed the bag as it swept toward him.

Lofton never argued the call and went back to the dugout. It is a play that is called the same way hundreds, if not thousands, of times in the regular season.

The players know that a slide into the tag when the ball is there the result is most likely an out, even if the foot or hand gets in.

Agonizing on each of those calls over slo-mo replays would serve no useful purpose and delay the game to the point of boredom.

lofton out
 

yes, but don't you want to make the correct call? A nice slide that clearly beats the tag even though the ball was there and you want to call him out!
So if a runner beats the ball, but the defensive player clearly finds a way to tag the runer out, do we now call him safe? Be careful!

That, however, was not the play.

A nice slide that avoids the tag is much different than coming straight in to the tag. Kenny Lofton knew the situation and the result, even though he knows he got his hand on the bag first. That is the way the game is played.
And everyone accepts plays like that as the "right" call, even though instant replay does not.

lofton out
 

sorry didn't see the play, so I guess in this situation you are correct!

I don't know if this would ever make the list of calls eligible for an IR review but, I believe the right call was made for the given situation though.

Why, the umpire was right on top of the play and the ball beat the runner to the bag. The fielder made a swipe tag that could or could not have got the tip of the runners fingers. The runner had a slight hesitation getting to second. The umpire did not have the benefit of reviewing the call 3 times at 3different angle's either.

It is impossible to have perfection in an unperfect game.

Batters only hit around 30%.

Pitchers are probably less that 60% effective.

Fielders make errors.

Humans play the game.

The ONLY thing we have not taken into consideration here is the media.

They make there living and thrive on the controversy. Right or Wrong

I agree with the jest of your post, there after all was no argument from anyone; however, the umpire was "on top of the play" literally.

He was way too close to the play for some reason and might have been a problem on the call. He probably could have seen it from a better distance, it looked on TV like he was only about five feet from the call.

Don't know how that happened ...

Thansk
David

I don't believe he was joking, but I got the "gist" of what he was saying.:)

I also don't believe that the umpire was "too close" to the play. He just made the "expected call," which was the correct call for that situation. Still not a reason to institute instant replay.

Yes, it was that one darn call on Kenny Lofton that lost the game for the Indians.:rolleyes:

Oh well, back to burning up.

I don't think he was joking.

Lofton tried to catch Ramirez napping, and failed. I didn't notice the umpire too close to the play.

If you see the replay from the camera angle behind first base (looking up the a$$ end of the play), you will see Lofton's right foot make contact with the umpire's front foot. That is way too close. I am not saying that his being too close played any part in his making the call (either the "expected" call or the wrong one, whichever side of the debate you are on), but he was definitely too close.

Watch the replay, there is no way that's where you want to be to make this call.

At least not a MLB umpire, that's a LL mistake.

I would have made the same call, but I would have made it from 12 -15 feet

thanks
David

Wing nut U2 didn't hustle to get proper positioning more than likely. He either thought it was a sure double or Lofton wasn't going attempt second. Poor mechanics for a game seven playoff umpire.

The expected call in a playoff game. Give me a break.

I'm not arguing with you. I just didn't notice it.

IMO, the aforementioned is not a good example because that type of play would be on the list of items that are not reviewable.

Not everything in PRO football is reviewable and the same would be true in baseball.

What will probably be indoctrinated into baseball as far as IR goes is on a HR vs. book rule double and whether or not the ball was fair/ Foul concerning a dinger. Also, if a fan interfered with a ball in play.

The type of play you refer to would not be reviewable.

Pete Booth

Reviewing home runs/or not is okay by me. Some parks have such crazy configurations it is impossible to be in postion to see everything. I know in Detroit there is a section of the fence in right center field which takes a 90 degree turn where if a fan reaches out and touches the ball it would be very difficult to determine home run or rule book double.

Fair or foul is not that hard, since the foul line in baseball is fair and the foul pole has a large screen in fair territory. In football the ball must be entirely inside the extended upright, but in baseball it does not.

Glad to see you would not burden the game with any other replays.

being all over a tag play is coming from their supervisors. the proper positioning for this play, again, from their supervisors, is to put the bag between you and the ball, which would mean that he would have had to be in the path of the sliding runner to be in what they want for proper positioning. obviously he couldn't be in the path, so he had to choose one side or the other. take it step by step. he started in the outfield, so if he went to the 3b side on the way in he would be crossing the path of the ball. so he went the other way, keeping the developing play in front of him. as the play developed, he moved in to get all over the play, per what their supervisors want. you can like it, or you can not like it, but everybody on here that gives advice says to do whatever your supervisor wants, correct?

Bobby. bobby, bobby.......are you expecting consistency of thought from internet poster? Fie!

This summer of following MiLB umpires around the southwest and northwest was one of many revelations. The impact of umpire supervisors, previously invisible, became "in your face" obvious.

My 1st thoughts on watching the play live was, Lofton was out and Wow- the ump was really close when kneeling and did Lofton bump him?
After the slomo replays, I just hoped that the out(no run scored) wouldnt be a factor in who wins...

Lofton --> didn't say a word to the umpire
Wedge --> stayed in the dugout

Must've been a HORRIBLE call if the only complaints were by the rabble-rousing announcers.

I think we have come full circle to the point of this thread.
Sort of like the brouhaha over McClelland's call in the Padres/Athletics' game.

I am NOT a proponent of instant replay in baseball, but why wouldn't it be reviewable? There are numerous football judgement plays that are: were both feet in bound when the catch was made, was he juggling the ball as he went out of bounds, was his knee down when the ball came out of his hands, did the ball cross the plane, was the QB's hand going forward when the ball came out, and so on. There has to be irrefutable evidence to reverse the call on the field, and if that were applied to the call on Lofton it would very likely be reversed.

I think you are assuming that if baseball adopted an IR they would only review fair/foul and HR or not, judgement calls which are sometimes reversed after an umpire huddle. Why would safe or out be off limits?

Don'r forget the unhappy internet umpires. That's a force to be reckoned with.:rolleyes:

Oh good, let's make sure the second baseman or shortstop has possession of the ball and contact with second base on every double play opportunity and that every slide into a tag has clear evidence that the tag, while waiting for the runner, actually touched the runner before he touched the bag.
And on any close play at first base, let's slow down the replays to make sure. And what about balls and strikes...let's go to Questech every time the manager says "Where was that pitch?"
What a wonderful six hour game we will have,.but, damn it, every call will be correct. Even the ones no one argued about.

You misspelt "farce".

[/QUOTE]

RE: Continuous action

In baseball "moves" are predicated on what the umpire calls.

Example:

Game tied bottom 9 runners at the corners.

Ground ball to F4 who attempts a tag on R1.

Let's freeze. The call by the umpire is now crucial because it will determine F4's next move.

Let's say U2 calls R1 Out on the tag and then F4 fires to F3 to complete the inning ending DP and we head for extra innings.

Now the play goes to the replay booth. There is indistibutable evidence that shows that F4 DID NOT TAG R1.

Now what?

Score the run - Game over
Put R2 on second return R3 to third - 2 outs

Suppose in the original play R3 was a slow runner and had the umpire not ruled R1 out on the tag, F4 would have fired to F2 and R3 would have been a dead duck

There are to many "what ifs" in baseball when there is continuous action.

That's why I say that baseball will most likely adopt IR but ONLY on a HR vs. Book rule double, Fair / Foul on a HR or Fan interference.

Why!

Because on those type plays the ball is Dead and can be fixable.

Pete Booth

RE: Continuous action

In baseball "moves" are predicated on what the umpire calls.

Example:

Game tied bottom 9 runners at the corners.

Ground ball to F4 who attempts a tag on R1.

Let's freeze. The call by the umpire is now crucial because it will determine F4's next move.

Let's say U2 calls R1 Out on the tag and then F4 fires to F3 to complete the inning ending DP and we head for extra innings.

Now the play goes to the replay booth. There is indistibutable evidence that shows that F4 DID NOT TAG R1.

Now what?

Score the run - Game over
Put R2 on second return R3 to third - 2 outs

Suppose in the original play R3 was a slow runner and had the umpire not ruled R1 out on the tag, F4 would have fired to F2 and R3 would have been a dead duck

There are to many "what ifs" in baseball when there is continuous action.

That's why I say that baseball will most likely adopt IR but ONLY on a HR vs. Book rule double, Fair / Foul on a HR or Fan interference.

Why!

Because on those type plays the ball is Dead and can be fixable.

Pete Booth[/QUOTE]

Excellent point.

12- 15 feet!!!!!!!!!!! That's why you're not in the show.

Among other reasons.

But if you watched the replay when they showed it again in one of the later innings, you could clearly see that yes Lofton's hand did touch the base but then he clearly came up off the bag and there was a time, while the tag was in contact where no part of Lofton was touching the bag.

Good call.

I don't want to be in the show, but I do know proper positioning for this play, and I'm sure his supervisor has made certain that he knows it.

MLB pays too much money for an obvious mistake, and they are professionals paid lots of money for what they do.

I don't have a problem with the call as I stated earlier, but I was just making a point to many of our younger officials,

"the umpire was not in the best position to make the call"

Thanks
David

All you younger officials out there pay no mind to this guy. He is wrong in this case.

what do you know of their supervisors???? do you not read other posts on here? remove shoe, stick foot in mouth, proceed.

Amen

Proper is what their supervisors say. Period. Not what you or I or any other amateur official thinks.

Obviously you don't agree with the positioning and I would assume then that you didn't see the play either.

Enough said

Thanks
David

I did see it and you are wrong. He was in perfect position to see the wacker at second. If I can be 3 to 5 feet away with the right angle why would I want the exact same angle at 10 to 12 feet away? I fail to see your point. Perception is reality. Who is more beleivable assuming the exact same angle and exact same call. The Umpire from 3 to 5 feet away or the one from 10 to 12 feet away. Assuming a four man crew make your calls from 10 to 12 feet away and I gurantee you'll set a new record for ejections.

You can't always get to the best possible postion. You need to get to the best position possible.

It's obvious you would have missed the call in real time and in instant replay. The tag had most definitely come off of Lofton by the time he had come of the base. I had originally thought from the original camera angle this was reason for the out call, if Lofton was out at all. My contention is that poor positioning or lack of hustle by U2 is the major reasoning the call was incorrect.

I do not attend nor watch baseball games to witness the umpires in action. However, I cannot recall a U2 taking a throw from left field and making a call from that position. From the cut of the grass inside the infield, yes. From behind second with the runner between him, no.

BTW-No argument by Wedge or Lofton doesn't mean they don't think a close call wasn't missed. That's just part of the game. Poor positioning by a MLB umpire shouldn't be.

Lofton lead off the inning. Position of the second base umpire is in center field. Remember the ball came off the Green Monster to the outfielder who threw to second. It would be next to impossible for him to get in the infield to make that call.

However, if they were using Lance Cokalinski's 12 man mechanics, it would have been a piece of cake.

Another great reason to attend UmpireLance's Common Sense Umpiring and Screen Door Repair Clinic next March. The cost is affordable, the instruction unique and beer is free.

I highly recommend it. Get your reservation in before all the trailers are filled.

Yes, I'm aware that Lofton was the lead off hitter and that the ball came off the Green Monster. Why would it be next to impossible? They've been getting inside for years at every ballpark in America, including Fenway. If Lofton has to run between 180' to 200', this slug should have been able to make at the maximum, 50'.

Garth, I seem to remember Lance's mechanics applying to a 13-man crew: one umpire on each base, plus one on each member of the defense. :cool:

But I have no quarrel with the main point of your post.

agree
 

I do agree with you guys, IR for non infield calls. Let's keep the element of judgement in this game, if not then we are not really needed out there!

Just curious. What level of ball do you work? I'm guessing little fields.

Despite your insistance, 12 to 15 feet away is a very good distance away from a force play. You should be much closer to the play for a tag. We've bantied this one about ad nauseum, but that's the way Jon Bible taught it, as well as the pro school guys I learned from. How the hell can you see a really slick tag of the runner on a banger from 15 feet away? What, you wearin' binoculars? I rarely missed a banger tag play over the years (other than the occasional pickoff where I was, listen closely, TOO FAR from the play). I feel that it was my positioning in a little closer proximity to the play that gave me a far superior look at exactly what transpired.

Currently evacuated to in-laws due to fires. Hope I don't lose home. Prayers appreciated.

You must not have had MLB Extra Innings like I did this past season.

Prayers outgoing. . .

Prayers from Spokane on the way, as well as an engine company that left last night.

Prayers from here as well, Steve. :(

Thought maybe I see you here today. I've been in DC for almost a month. I was to fly home tomorrow, but decided to head to San Diego to check in on relatives. It's a b*tch trying to get a flight, though. I may have to fly to SFO and then drive down.

Stay cool.

Pete

Good points, but there was no continuous action on the Lofton play. The ball was not dead but the call was fixable via IR. What if it was the bottom of the 9th in a tie game with none out. The call would be critical and the IR proponents would argue that IR should be used to get it right.

And like I said, I am NOT a proponent of IR.

What would be wrong with that premise is that it would change how that call was made in the previous 162 games of the year.

Just because the press box is full of sportswriters and the TV audience is bigger does not warrant changing the way the game is played in the post season. After all any call in the 9th inning of a tied regular season game could have affected what team even got to the post season.

The other problem with your argument is you cannot base a replay on the lack of any other action. Assuming a bad call you would suggest that if there is no other action then review it? But if the play has continuing and ensuing action after the call we ignore it?

Thanks to all for the well-wishes, prayers, and kind words. Hopefully the air tanker fixed-wing planes will knock these fires out and we can go home soon. If they get going first thing in the morning, I think my place will be alright. I feel tremendously bad for those who have lost their homes.

I can agree with what you said. When I said 12-15 feet that was probably in haste for a tag play, but I like what Bob said above, he was in the best possible position for him to be, I think the play fooled him and he was just late getting into position.

Sorry to read about the evacuation, have put you on our prayer list at church.

Thanks
David

you're still wrong.

Thanks David, and all the others too!

Hey all,

First and foremost, thoughts and prayers go out to anyone involved in the fire situations.

I believe that the Tribes 3rd base coach holding Lofton at third when the ball was @ 30-40' away from Manny being Manny in left field was MORE detrimental to the Indians' cause. Sure, it didn't involve a call by an umpire, but I still think that is what cost them the game, and eventually, the series.

LomUmp:cool:

I think Cleveland got blown out in that game. How could 1 run make a difference. If the run scored all it does is tie the game. BTW if memory serves me correct there was one out and the next batter hit into a DP. At best the game is tied and Cleveland still loses.

Hey all,

I think that the game would have been played differently by the Indians if they were tied and not behind. Would the result have been the same? Who knows.

LomUmp:cool:

If, MLB had IR, it could be used all year, not just playoffs. Pete was making the argument that continuing action would eliminate certain types of calls from being reviewed. I pointed out that Lofton call at 2B was not a situation where continuing action applied.

Are you keeping up with this discussion or coming in the middle without reviewing what has been said?

You are kidding, right? What would the Indians have done differently? At the point in the game when this happened there was no argument. Had this happened in a late inning under same conditions I doubt that would have been the case.

You may want to review who started the thread.

remember the rule
 

gentlemen, remember "angle to distance" not "distance to angle"---get the best possible angle and you will always make the correct call, even if you are 12 to 15 feet away or more, or more, or more!

always!

And that being said, I'd still rather be close to a tag play and farther away for a force play. I can get the calls right watching on TV, but I would rather be on the field. I can get the calls right with a great angle, but if I can get right in there on a tag play (without losing sight of the whole play), I will.

Update:

Back home. Fire (San Miguel) came within a mile of our neighborhood. Others of course not as lucky unfortunately:( .

Thanks once again for all the prayers and concern from all you great brother umpires. We can fiercely argue back and forth on this forum, but at the end of the day we stick together in times of trouble.

Haven't been to PBUC lately, have you?

Formerly Chuckfan1
 

I think he just missed it. Nothing to do with "ball beating the runner". Sometimes those headfirst slides are tricky. Arms outstretched. Tag coming down between those arms. BU trying to see if the hands hit the base first, or the tag applied first. Especially if the tag is not being laid on the hands. Where to look? At the hands on the bag? At the point of tag? Cant watch em both. Unless, maybe he is back a few feet.
Im in the camp that he is too close. I like being closer also on a tag play, but not this close. Back up a bit, and maybe get a wider shot of that tag vs hands hitting the bag.

Not relevant. Add one to ignore list.

GarthB
 

sorry buddy, I'm from Toronto Canada!

We were postponed witrh navy as BUMED is sending tons of folks and funds to SD. Couldn't be a better reason, we're inconvenienced, you're endangered.

I'm late to the party, but I believe what Garth was alluding to is PBUC's recent emphasis on distance being on at least a parity with angle, if not more important at times.

After reading his article, I chatted with some Single A umpires locally and heard the same explanation for some of the little changes I noticed in mechanics.

Mr. Ump
 

I hear where you're coming from, I try to do both--get as close as possible and get the best 90 degree angle!