Mets / Braves - Top 5th
 

Anyone see the mess in the Top of the 5th?

What'd you think?

No...but this is why I paid for the MLB TV subscription on MLB.com...so I could watch archived games when there is a cluster...(which is what I'm assuming happened).

When the game is over (and the Final 4 is over (its halftime of game 1) ) I'll be checking it out.

Any details?

Bases loaded, 1 one out. Jose Reyes hits a diving line drive to Kotsay in CF. Kotsay traps the ball (it was pretty obvious to me on live TV) and Bruce Dreckman rules it a catch. Mets are fuming. Willie Randolph comes out to argue and the crew huddles. Note: The Braves got a double play because R2 did not tag up after he saw the ball hit the turf. Gerry Davis and his crew decided to credit each runner including the B-R with one base and allow one run to score. The kicker was that on the play the R2 passed R3 who stood on third thinking there had been a catch. Bobby Cox argued that the reversal of the call was OK but R2 should be called out because he passed R3. The umpires did not call R3 out.

All I can figure is that the crew realized that they had made a mistake and the only way to salvage it was to give each runner including the B-R one base.

Lawrence

To Old Guard:

Don't ever tell me agian that Replay doesn't have a place in baseball.

Now: The umpires got together, got the call right, put the runners where they believed they should be.

With instant replay: UIC would view the instant replay, the umpires would get together, get the call right and put the runners where they believed they should be.

Wow. What a difference IR would have made.

There are two things I find interesting about you Mr. Umpire. 1) Your ability to follow Deej and my posts, within moments at times...a testament to your predilection for crystal ball gazing, no doubt. 2) Your parallel ability to determine the Unknown. :D.

Both are exampled by your post above.

By "interesting" I do mean as in watching a a cat with a hobbled leg fall in a lake.

Hi Lawrence

It appears that MLB has adopted FED rule 10-2-3(l)

Rectify any situation in which an umpire's decision that was reversed has placed either team at a disadvantage.

Therefore, in the future there is precendent that in a game played under OBR rules we as umpires can "fix" it.

Pete Booth

I'm not saying you're wrong, Peter, but I'd hate to have a "precendence" set on one example, when we might never know whether the crew is "admonished" over what they did or praised.

Once we see other examples, we might know.

And, the general example (catch / no-catch with runners) is listed in NCAA as something that should not be changed.

Bob just to clarify

Are you saying that if the play in the Braves / Mets game was played under NCAA rules, then the DP would have stood?

IMO, that goes against what the NCAA has been saying meaning 'get the call right"

Bottom line: Give Gerry Davis credit. Even the infamous Bobby Cox didn't argue too much. His only "beef" was that he felt there should have been 2 outs (a runner passing another)

Also, IMO, even though it's only one instance it does set some kind or precedent in PRO ball to allow umpires to "fix" things.

I guess Rob Drake shut his site down just in time as IMO, his site would have over-loading with this play.

Pete Booth

On such plays, no, it doesn't have a place in baseball. This was a rather stupid example for you to cite. A better example would have been a ball that goes around the foul pole and was incorrectly called.

A question on mechanics with reference to this play:

Did the U3 (Dreckman) ask for help and therefore, there was a conference that ultimately led to a reversal of the call?

OR did the crew chief (I believe Davis) on his own call for a conference, and that ultimately led to the reversal (Dreckman changing his call)?

The report I read in the paper indicated that Davis called for a conference among the umpires first. If it did occur this way, is this an acceptable procedure for umpire crew (whether 2-man, 3-man, 4-man, or 6-man) to at least start a discussion?

Gentlemen,

Correct me if I'm wrong: But if I'm not mistaken precedent was set two seasons ago when a crew changed a "foul" call to "fair" (NOT on a homerun or ground rule double).

Up until that point, we had had reversals of "fair" to "foul" (which are easy to do because all the umps have to do is put everyone back to their TOP base and add a "strike" on the batter's count).

But I believe this play was the first time we had the opposite: A "foul" changed to "fair" (when the ball did not leave the playing field), all pursuant to the "get it right" mantra.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but if memory serves me correct, this was a big to-do two seasons ago.

If my memory IS correct...then I believe that game truly serves as the precedent in which MLB umpires told the world that, "we're gonna get it right...no matter what".

Indeed it happened in 2006, involving Randy Marsh, the Mets, and the Phillies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/29/sp...ll/29mets.html

Men,

Personally I thought the cat was out of the bag with the disputed run in the Baltimore-Cleveland game last year. Now it is get it right, no matter how many innings later....