What is going on with ML baseball umpires
 

Last nights games

1. Rays vs. the Angels

In the 8th inning Bj Umpton of the Rays hit a chopper down the first base line. He beat the play but for some strange reason 1BU Jerry Meals called Upton out saying that he made an attempt to go to second base.

For those that watch the ESPN highlight show perhaps the myth exists meaning if you turn to the left or even wink there automatically means you attempted to go to second base.

IMO, a horrible call and if a LLWS umpire made that call the Boards would be buzzing today.

2. Phillies vs. Nats

Our old buddy Joe West at it again.

The Nats F2 attempted a pickoff attempt of R1 and threw the ball into right field where the Phillies runner ended up on third base.

However, TIME was called by Joe West who ruled Umpire interference and sent the runner back to first base. In looking at the replays Joe needs to lose some wait.

These were 2 important games and if any of these type plays happened in game 6 / 7 of the World Series Don Denkinger could rest.

In Summary: If these plays happened in any amateur level game that was televised the boards would be BUZZING and the bashing would begin.

FWIW IMO the umpire union should not have asked Joe West back. He seems to be in the middle of just about most contoversies in major league baseball today. Also, I hope the Umpires take a long look at the rediculous call made by umpire Jerry Meals and give someone who is busting his hump in the minors a chance at the show.

Pete Booth

He was called out for "not returning immediately to first base." Watch it again. Absolutely correct call.

About West: You must be kidding. You're blaming West's umpire interference on his "wait?"

I watched the game live. I am one of the biggest Phillies fans alive. I didn't, for a second, blame West for this. Neither did Charlie Manuel, who was a bit confused at first, but accepted the decision without even coming close to getting angry. It's the reason the rule exists -- the umpire that's up in the slot can not be expected to get out of the way of such a thing. It's happened to me once in 20 years, but I enforced it and nobody said a thing other than "I didn't know there was such a rule."

West returned to baseball, was named a crew chief, and has been a WS crew chief and on some of the biggest games in baseball the past few years. So on this, you just have some personal hard-on for Joe, but you're way off base.

wow, is there a clip of this? I don't think I've ever seen a play like that...

It's happened twice in the past two days. Joe West called a Mets player out for the same thing on Monday...and also ejected the manager (Jerry Manuel) afterwards.

[QUOTE]

Rich here is the link.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=280819130

He was called out because Meals said he made an attempt to go to second base. Upton can over-run first base. If he didn't touch the base originally then I can perfectly understand the call. I guess we have a difference of opinion on this one. I have NEVER seen this call in all my years of watching baseball.


No I do not have a hard on for Joe but he does seem to be in the middle of most controversies - Just ask the coaches and players union what they think of Joe.

Pete Booth

[QUOTE=PeteBooth]Ugh. I don't see a quote from Meals in the article. You're taking the word of a sportswriter? You should've heard the Phillies announcers speculating as to the UI call last night. At first they thought Victorino must've interfered with the throw to first. Ha. Ha.

The rule (7.08c) clearly says he must immediately return. He didn't. He hesitated while thinking about making an attempt to advance, stopping for a few seconds. That puts him in jeopardy.

Pete,

As per MLB Rule 7.08(c), a batter-runner is only protected from being tagged out when returning to first base after an overrun if he does so immediately; because Upton just stood down the line from first for a few seconds before returning, the call was correct.

As for West, he really doesn't miss very many calls. He was right on this one, and where do you get off judging anybody by their weight? Weight is a personal matter, and should be left that way. As long as West can get to his calls, which he does quite well, thank you, then his weight should be off-limits to discussion. I've seen quite a few umpires that could stand to gain a few pounds, but I don't comment about how anorexic they look.

Joe West is a crew chief. He is bound to get in the middle of any controversy that happens to his crew. He has only 4 ejections this year, which is quite average for MLB umpires at this time of year, and far fewer than the ejection leader has.

Please provide some direct quotes from coaches and players concerning Joe West. I've never heard that he was disliked at all. I've only heard good comments, even from umpire-bashing announcers. He always seems to be talked about in a positive light.

His bosses, apparently, think the world of him. If I were him, that's all that would matter to me -- not what the rats think. Why would he care about that?

bad timing?
 

Now, Steve, read Pete's post carefully. He said Joe needed to lose some wait. I thought he meant Joe's timing was too slow; i.e., his wait was excessive. If Joe had made the call quicker, using proper timing, there would have been no discussion of his excessive wait.

Now that's funny and I don't care who ya are!
 

Good thing I wasn't drinking coffee or you would owe me a keyboard! LMAO! :D

Joe, who I can say I will soon be a fellow alumnus of Elon University with, does have a reputation.

In a poll (I believe it was SI)among players in MLB, perhaps from 4 years ago, several questions were asked. Two of them included "Who is the umpire you want doing a big game" and "Who is an umpire you DONT want doing a big game".

Guess who was in the top 10 answers for both questions :D

Seriously though, all that matters is what the big wigs think of him; they are really the best to judge such a thing. And they seem to like him just fine.

I have no problem with the call (I just saw it on SportsCenter).

Upton clearly started turning to second but stopped when he realized the ball was fielded cleanly on the overthrow. I have made this call a few times and it is clear to me that Angels' fielder thought the very same thing and that is why they tagged him.

I do not care what media members and coaches think about this. This is something I do not see high school players do.

Peace

I may be wrong but I thought he went to East Carolina, like me...

J O E W E S T
CREW CHIEF
MAJOR LEAGUE SERVICE TIME: 26 Years
CAREER: Joined the major league staff in 1978...has worked
the All-Star Game (1987), Division Series (1995, 2002), League
Championship Series (1981, 86, 88, 93, 96, 2003) and World
Series (1993, 97)...previously umpired in the Western Carolinas
League (1974), Florida Instructional League (1974-76),
Carolina League (1975-76), Southern League (1976), American
Association (1976-77) and Puerto Rican League (1977).
PERSONAL: Joseph Harry West...born on October 31, 1952 in
Asheville, NC...currently resides in Weston, FL...married Jean
Jo Mason... designed and patented Wilson Sporting Goods
umpire equipment for Major League Baseball...attended East
Carolina and Elon College...inducted into the South Atlantic
League Hall of Fame in 2002...Quarterback of the Elon College
football team, MVP in his senior year...elected to the Elon
College Sports Hall of Fame...singer/songwriter, Joe has performed
with Merle Haggard, Bobby Mackey, Bonnie Owens,
Mickey Gilley, Box Car Willie, T.G. Sheppard and Charlie McCoy
and the Hee Haw Band at the Grand Ole Opry.



TUSS WINS!

i see a tie. if tuss was the runner, then he wins.

We're both right, I mentioned he graduated from Elon, Emp. Ump. said he went he was a Pirate.

Both are true... :D

Joe West is originally from Asheville, NC--attended East Carolina and graduated from Elon---He was quarterback for 3 years at Elon and led them to the NAIA bowl game in Shreveport, LA in 1973 where they lost to Abilene Christian 42-14. Joe Worked the Western Carolina-Carolina League in 1974-75 with Drew Coble, another Elon College Graduate who was in the American League(Crew Chief) and was fired in 1999 as he was home nursing his wife who had terminal cancer even though he never signed any papers whatsoever. Judge Symonic reinstated Joe West and Drew Coble because they had been unfairly terminated, and Drew Coble decided he had enough and retired while Joe continues to this day. Joe was named Crew Chief upon his return (pretty darn good for a guy who is so terrible and was fired). He worked the 2005 All-Star game, Division series and World Series.

The above is all on the internet in various places, including the trials from 1999-2002 strike and firings although I might be hard pressed to find them now.

Joe was one of the last umpires who did not work a full AA season before being called up to AAA in 1976 (Tim Tschida is one of the others)(Montague and McSherry skipped AA altogether) and also worked his first NL game in 1976. Joe worked AAA and NL in 1977 before signing with NL in 1978.

MLB has plenty of time to scout and evaluate every umpire in AAA for their compentency as a MLB Umpire, so Blake Cullen or whoever was National League President in 1978 was never forced to hire Joe as a NL Umpire.

I'm sure Joe's umpiring reputation and no-nonsense style was known long before he was hired and I'm sure that style fit well with umpiring supervisor Al Barlick (Hall of famer) at the time, along with his outstanding plate and base work on the field. So, when the National League hired Joe, they knew what they were getting and therefor condoned all phases of his umpiring and competency or they would not have hired him, and this is true for all the AAA Umpires that are hired by MLB.

Sir, there's no gambling at Bushwood....and I never slice

Where do I sign up for the Pete Booth school of "never making mistakes"?

With all due respect, guys, I believe Meals kicked that call. I've seen batter-runners do worse than that and never get called out when tagged. Meals making that call is splitting not hairs but the atom. To put it bluntly, I think it was a terrible call.

gambling is illegal at bushwood, sir.

It looked as if Upton was trying to avoid the rolling baseball and never attempted to go to second.

If one paid attention to Meals comments on the field, you can easily see that he said, "...made an attempt."

First, there's no way Upton made an attempt. Second, the "return immediately" aspect of overrunning first base rarely ever is invoked when tagging a B-R because it's so vague and so nonspecific. I've tried every way I can think of to justify the out on Upton because he didn't "return immediately," but I can't. The fact that that was not the reason Meals called him out is even more puzzling.

Oh well, on to the next bizarre situation.

How about a Fresca?

Finally saw a replay. RichMSN wins.

I never said I didn't make mistakes. My point which perhaps I didn't make clear was thiis.

If we saw both those calls made by say a LLWS umpire on TV or an other amateur umpire on TV, for the most part they would have been bashed.

I have been watching baseball a long time and have NEVER seen the call that Meals made especially in the BIG LEAGUES.

I make mistakes all the time but I also do not get paid 6 figures.

Pete Booth

If you have not noticed, most people that come here bash whomever they are talking about. Even if the games are not on TV. That is the nature of this board and that is the nature of the internet. And MLB Umpires get bashed all the time on this site about plays they miss or make. LLWS Umpires only get criticism at a certain time of year. And this year little has been said about the LLWS as in past years.

Peace

IMO, Meals blew that call. I seen it on sports center. There was no attempt to go to second what so ever.

I don't agree with some of your interpretations that the runner didn't "immediately" return to first. What the runner did should not have been in violation of the rule. Calling an out here for not returning immediately, IMO, is not what is intended by the rule and is pretty OOO.

Meals blew it. Upton doesn't have to turn around and sprint back to the base as fast as possible. That is never called, especially in the majors. Quit trying to justify it just because he's an MLB umpire.

I don't recall anyone saying that's what he had to do.

Nor do I recall anyone saying it was justified because it was the majors. It would have been an accurate and refreshing call at any level. Watch the video. Upton clearly made a motion towards second.

Crew chief Darling said, "I've called out guys for less."

I don't think we'll ever know the reason unless we hear it directly from Meals or the crew chief Gary Darling. By rule, he could have been called out for not returning to the base immediately. I'll defer to someone with more rules interpretation experience than me but I have never called anyone out for not returning immediately and have never seen it done.

Some of you that have attended the JEAPU have heard Jim Evans talk about the special rules that apply to first base (running lane, overrun ability) and I think I remember Jim indicating if he had his way there would be changes in regards to these rules ( can't remember the specifics).

Lawrence

Here ya go.

From the AP:

Crew chief Gary Darling told a pool reporter Upton "made an attempt to run to second," then added: "I've called guys out for less."

Personally I do not care if this was a game in the backyard and the umpire was a drunk from the neighborhood. I think it was the right call and it was clear to me. I have made this call several times and Upton stopped going to second when he realized the fielder got the ball cleanly and he would not have a chance. You can disagree, but that is not my concern. And I am sure Meals feels the same way.

Peace

I agree completely. Absolutely the right call. You can't overrun the base, then just stand there and decide if you should go to second or not. A hesitation after turning towards second is making an attempt. The runner needs to find out what happened with the baseball and make his decision to go for second before he turns that way, or else risk being tagged out.

If you are going to turn towards second base after overrunning the base, you must do an about-face and return immediately. Anything else is construed as an attempt. I agree with Darling, I've called runners out for less.

My .02. Out as well for an "attempt" for second. Was pretty clear to me after watching the replay for the first time.

can anybody post a link to the video replay? i only seen it on sportscenter and from what i saw there, it was a bad call IMO.

Toucheeeee

I think that is exactly why this guy gets six figures, to have the balls to make that instant of a call without the luxury of instant replay...

Says who? I've heard about being technical, but your comments are beyond technical. They're downright incorrect.

So it takes balls to make a bad call? It never ceases to amaze me how some here think MLB Umpires can do no wrong, even when one kicks a call like Meals did.

I can tell you this much: your opinion of Meals's call is not shared by all MLB Umpires. There are at least two who have privately said they did not agree with his call.

And no, I'm mentioning who these are. I'm not going to share my friends' information.

If the runner turns toward second base (and I don't mean just turns to the left and comes back, which of course is perfectly fine) thinking the ball is overthrown and with every intention of going to 2nd, and then decides to come back to 1st base, only after he sees the ball fielded cleanly, then he did not immediately return to the base, as per 7.08 (c).

I don't care if the runner stops to adjust his helmet, or his wrist bands or something and then returns to the base. That's fine. But stopping to see the disposition of the ball after turning towards second? You're okay with that? You are in the minority here.

Who knows, maybe your "friends" are wrong too.:rolleyes:

If you're not willing to identify your "friends", why mention them ? Their opinion of this play is meaningless to any of us unless we know who they are.
This smacks of name-dropping, without the names.

Chuck

16 of my friends say that they could beat up your friends in a back alley.

:rolleyes:

I love it.

First someone says: "I don't think we'll ever know the reason unless we hear it directly from Meals or the crew chief Gary Darling."

So a direct quote from Darling is posted.

Then someone says: "This means nothing, what else is Darling going to say,"

This is the equivalent of putting your hands of your ears and singing LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA.....VERY loudly.

And there are 60 MLB umpires who are close personal friends who think he made the exact correct call. And, nope, I can't mention their names. They made me promise not to, honest.:rolleyes:

That is, of course, your judgment, but a ridiculously technical and extremely overly literal interpretation of the rule, and one that Meals didn't use to make the call. He banged Upton because of the so-called and nonexistent attempt he made toward second.

It's obvious that you think that everything in B&W in the book is to be interpreted literally. That is a dangerous and incorrect approach, especially because there is archaic language in OBR that is not to be taken literally.

Batter-runners can stop and see the disposition of the ball without penalty because it depends on what they do. Intent is to be considered when any kind of an "attempt" is made toward second. Too many here are taking the Little League approach to this rule. It's unnecessary.

This describes what I'm trying to say:

From Jaksa/Roder:

2. A Batter-Runner over-running first base who subsequently takes a single step (or steps) toward second base with intent to advance is no longer over-running and can be tagged out while off base. Simply turning toward second base after over-running first does not necessarily show an attempt to advance.

e.g.; A third baseman fields a grounder but throws errantly past first base. The Batter-Runner pivots toward second and commits one step in that direction before realizing the errant throw has been backed up by the catcher. He chooses to walk back to first: such B/R has shown intent to advance and is out if tagged off base.

Jim Evans also says that there is no penalty for turning left, provided the runner immediately returns to the base. If the runner stands around deciding whether or not to run constitutes an attempt. That's why the rules and interpretations say that the runner overrunning first must immediately return to the base. What part of "immediately" is unclear here? Do you think the word is just placed in the rule arbitrarily? Words mean things, and in this case the word "immediately" clearly suggests that you can't stand there for several seconds deciding your next move. Either take off for second, or return immediately to first.

Personally, I've never had any trouble distinguishing an attempt from an immediate return. And considering that less than 5% of the games I worked were of the Little League variety, I don't think I used a "Little League" approach.:rolleyes:

Your citation above contradicts what you had said earlier, which doesn't help your case. I have always looked at a batter-runner's intent, which is why I've never called him out when he took a step toward second as some kind of impulsive reaction when it was clear he had no intent to go.

As far as "immediately" goes, yes, its very meaning is arbitrary, for just what does it mean? Do you give him one second? Two? Ten? One tenth of a second? Using your logic, a batter-runner who overruns first base, slows down some 20 feet beyond it, turns, stops for a second or two--perhaps to catch his breath--then proceeds back to first base can be out if tagged.

No frickin' way am I going to call that guy out if he's tagged. Did he "immediately" return? No. Did he make an attempt to advance? No. So which part of the rule does one follow? Answer: the advance part.

As was explained to me at umpire school (Jaksa and Roder happened to be the classroom instructors), the "immediately" part of the rule is considered to be analogous to abandoning his base (before reaching first it's called desertion). One should not call out a B-R just because he's slowly returning to first base, or even if he stops or pauses before returning. That interpretation is way too literal. To take a specific amount of time into consideration incorrectly changes the intent of the rule itself. Moreover, it should be noted that it was suggested by them that the entire phrase dealing with "immediately" ought to be stricken from the rule book precisely because it was misleading and extremely vague.

It doesn't contradict anything I said, it clarifies what I said, or what I intended to mean. How can you say you wouldn't call the runner out if "he took a step toward second as some kind of impulsive reaction?" That little impulsive step toward second is what defines an attempt. A runner can't take an "impulsive" step toward second, how can you tell he had no intent to go? Are you the Amazing Kreskin? Carnac the Magnificent? No, you judge intent by the runner's actions, which if he takes an "impulsive" (just to use your term) step in the direction of second, most certainly indicates intent as far as I'm concerned.

Wow, how anal. When did I say he couldn't stop for a second or two? As a matter of fact, I said I have no problem with a runner stopping to adjust his helmet or his wrist bands, and that courtesy would extend to "catching his breath" as well. I don't have a timetable, that would just be asinine. But if a player waits a considerable length of time just contemplating whether or not to go to second base, then I might consider that an attempt to advance. It's strictly a judgment call, which Meals made and West made the day before. Two days in a row, same call in two different games, by two different umpires. MLB umpires. Umpires who judged an intent to go to second base and that the runners waited too long to "immediately" return to first.

Didn't he make an attempt to advance? The umpire said he did. I'm going with that explanation.

I would never call a runner out for slowly returning to first, or for pausing before returning. I never said there was a specific amount of time to return. Any undue delay, as well as an attempt to advance, should be obvious to even a rookie umpire. It is a judgment call, as as such, is subject to individual interpretation.

And maybe "immediately" should be stricken from the rule book. Perhaps you can start a grassroots movement to do so. Until then, just use your own judgment on how to interpret the word.

You should run for office, because your flip-flops and contradictions are dizzying.

By whom? You obviously. If I believe the B-R had no intent to go to second, I'm not banging him out, and I'm not going to go beyond splitting hairs to splitting the atom in order to justify what was a terrible call at the major league level. Those guys screw up, too, you know.

As asinine as you saying that he has to immediately return and that you'd call him out for turning, stopping, then continuing on? Your own posts above said this, and now you're flip-flopping.

Wow. Just wow.

I think the immediately part is analagous to the rule in softball that once the pitcher has the ball in the circle the player has to make up their mind as to what they are doing, advancing or returning.

If the ball get overthrown and the BR overruns the bag, and then stops 20 ft down the line and just stands their, looking at the ball, but not making an attempt towards second. Then i think he becomes fair game. If he becomes stationary in a "play threatening postition" then all bets are off. If he becomes stationary and takes a breath, etc, etc. he's fine.

If you are ruling intent, then that is clearly a judgment call. And this is clearly what Upton did in my opinion. Just because you disagree does not make the call incorrect. The umpire saw the same thing I have seen many times before.

The bottom line is we are giving opinions that mean little or nothing. Even if he did not call Upton out, someone would have made a claim that he should have. At the end of the day it really means nothing. And I do not give a damn that the umpire was in the MLB. I do not see MLB umpires as the best of the best. They are people that took a route and accomplished that route. It sounds to me like you are more concerned at who these people are than some of us here that agree with this call. I also know some high profile officials and you can always find someone that disagrees with a call. That is not hard to do.

Peace

With rare exception, MLB umpires are, indeed, the best of the best. Like every profession in life, some may have gotten there due to politics, but MLB umpires are the top umpires in the world. Sure, there are some top notch amateur guys at various levels, but as I said, MLB guys are the cream of the crop when it comes to umpiring.

They're just not perfect or immune to making mistakes. Some here on this board have never criticized a call and have instead rushed to defend everything MLB umpires do.

I disagree with that because of how the process to assign MLB Umpires in the first place. Major League Baseball hardly ever gets rid of umpires based on performance like other leagues and the process to get to that level is so narrow minded, that you cannot tell me the people that make it are by far the best umpires. And when some of the current umpires are there because someone was able to pick their successor, how many good umpires were passed over and later got out?

That may be true of some here, but I am not one of them. I have a philosophical problem with going out publicly and criticizing someone that makes a mistake I have made or could make very easily. But I have seen many mistakes by MLB Umpires that I wonder why they are never replaced. I have seen non-pros get fired or suspended from leagues for a lot worse than I have seen MLB Umpires ever get in any trouble. They can make big time mistakes and they are in the playoffs.

Peace

I never said this. I believe you have misread what I said. If he merely stops, turns to his left, and stops again to do whatever, like catch his breath (he must be really out of shape if 90 feet takes his breath away), or some similar act, he is just fine by me. Only if he takes a hard turn or false step toward second do I consider what he does an attempt. If he stands there like a track star putting his feet in the blocks as if he would go to second, then that's what I call an attempt. In other words, he is giving an indication that he was going to go to second, but changed his mind. Once you appear that you are going to go for second, you are in jeopardy of being tagged out.

Most runners look over their shoulder at the wild throw and decide then whether or not to go to second. They don't usually wait until they stop, turn around, then stand there and decide if they want to go. I agree, if a runner merely overruns the base, turns and then gives no indication whatsoever that he is contemplating making an attempt to second base, he is perfectly within his rights to do so.

I'm still going to take Darling's, West's and Meals' word on the ruling over your vast MLB experience. I'll go out on a limb and say that their interpretation of 7.08 (c) is the more popular among MLB umpires.

That had better be a strong limb because I agree with UMP25 about you flip flopping throughout this thread..........;)

I'm new here. I see people are asking for the video.

Here's a link. Click on the thumbnail below the video on the far right side.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/index...namlb_tbamlb_1

Well, this is the first time I have viewed the play. Meals apparently felt Upton was making an attempt when he began to round the base and then thought better of it when he saw the ball being fielded. Upton did make a move that indicated he was about to take two on the play as the ball was bouncing up the line, then just after his little move he saw the ball fielded. Judgment call. The ejection on the other hand was priceless. What a jackas$ Maddon is.

Then I watched the Joe West call on Reyes. Reyes most definitely made a move toward second, then stopped when his first base coach told him to get back on the bag. A lot more cut and dried than the Meals call.

Earlier this evening I asked a ML umpire, who agreed with Meals' call, if this was a good call, why wasn't it made more often. His reply: "Damn few fielders are smart enough to apply a tag. It'll get called more often when the play is made more often."

There are different levels of disagreement. One can disagree with the Meals judgement. One can disagree with the rule as written. But if you accept that Meals perceived what he says, then it is hard to disagree with his ruling.

As for as the claim that some posters never criticize ML umpires, just check out any thread involving Joe West, or better yet, Angel Hernandez.

This call was a no-brainer. He did make a faint toward second base and it was a very good call. I don't understand how ANYONE can say it was not the correct call except the announcers that do not know the rules. Some of you are showing your incompetence and lack of judgement as umpires. Please do not argue something as simple as this call, you sound like a manager.

Please watch the 3rd(1:48) and 4th(2:03) replays that are shown on the MLB site given by TNO. The 1st and 2nd replays cut off right at the point where it is harder to tell the outcome. The 3rd and 4th replays continue the whole play through and give a much better picture. This makes Meals correct call much more obvious.

Why is a runner who is clearly going to his right in the grass suddenly end up in the dirt at the end? Why not continue to the right in the grass area to slow down? Because he sees the ball cross in front and he makes the attempt by turning and stepping (big) back to his left, and then decides against going to 2nd because the ball is not far enough away for him to make 2nd before a fielder could pick the ball up and throw him out.

Bet this would look doubly more obvious if the camera had been right on the 1st base line behind home plate like it is on the playoffs. Meals call was easily correct and Darlings statement about calling this type of play for even less, is just as correct.

And yes, Tim Tschida admitted making a mistake on the tag play in the playoffs, so the umps know they are not infallible as do all of us.

To call that "attempt" is incredibly picky or OOO or whatever you want to call it.

Everybody has the right to my opinion! :)

For those of you that do not consider this an "attempt," I would like to know what you consider an attempt? And for one poster, how do you judge a player's intent without considering his actions? Maybe with these two questions answered I can be an even better umpire.

:rolleyes:

Just saw a 5-ball walk in the Phillies/Dodgers game. I went back and verified using my DVR. TV and the scoreboard in the park had it right, Jerry Layne didn't.

Amazing thing is the Dodgers didn't have it either and the batter didn't say anything at all.

EDITED TO ADD: They just mentioned it and replayed the sequence. I should work for ESPN.

Check out Meals body language arms crossed implying "don't mess with me I'm unapproachable" Umpiring 101 not a recommended way to defuse the situation.

And you've been here the whole time commenting on Meals's call when you hadn't even seen it??? Unbelievable.

I rest my case.

I was commenting on the correctness of the ruling in general. I read reports of the play stating that the call was correct. Based on how the play was described, I supported the ruling. After viewing the play, I can still see how Meals ruled the way he did. The video shows Upton make a move toward second base, and he wasn't just turning around to come back. Then he tried to play it off like he meant to return to first all along. It was a judgment call, and those who don't agree are free to do so, but it doesn't make his call wrong.

Sorry, but you can't get yourself out of this embarrassing mess now. You never saw the play. You came here not even having seen replays of it, spewing comments about making an attempt to advance, then flipped to the "immediately" returning side of the rule, then flopped back to the attempt, added the "J" word (judgment), then admitted you never saw it.

Nice try. The case remains closed. In fact, it's dismissed due to lack of standing on the arguee's part.

i just saw the play for the first time, and i have to admit that is a tough call. i'd have a real hard time judging that a move toward second. there was no direct step toward second, which is what i look for in a case like that. to call that is incredibly picky.

Now whether the call is right or wrong, it doesn't matter, because BJ Upton admitted that it was a mental lapse on his part. He took the blame for not returning to the base immediately, whether or not he made a move to second.

I did watch the replay, I judged that an attempt was made and feel the right call was made.

You apparently watched the replay, judged that an attempt was not made and disagree with the call.

I am still curious as to what you consider "an attempt," or are you just going to claim victory over one poster and ignore the rest?

Please don't just go home with your ball screaming "I win, I win."

You need to learn to read better. I never "spewed comments" about Upton specifically making an attempt, I merely commented on "a runner" making an attempt, as in defending the rule, not the play. Look carefully. The only thing I said about the play itself was in my original post, which I had gleaned from an article in an ejection website that said that the call was correct. In my other posts, I said I trusted Meals' and Darlings' judgment. Not one time did I ever say, "hey, I saw the play and......." I never claimed to have seen the actual play itself. When I did, I posted that fact, and now you have used that against me. I didn't think, and still don't think, that my not having seen the play really matters, because I did not argue the specific play, only the ruling.

The case only remains closed in your mind. I think some other folks might think differently.

You can call it an embarrassing mess if you want to. I'm not embarrassed, nor do I have anything to feel embarrassed about.

Perhaps his Verbal Judo skills are lacking.

Just wonder what Al Barlick, Bruce Froemming, Bill Haller, Richie Garcia would say about Verbal Judo when you had Stengel, Durocher, Martin, Weaver screaming in your face. I have a feeling they would tell you to stick that Verbal Judo where the sun doesn't shine.

I can't even begin to list the number of erroneous items in this typical screed-piece by a columnist:

http://www.tampabay.com/sports/baseb...icle778735.ece

Which is why I said with rare exception. Every profession has its employees who are less than excellent, MLB umpiring included. However, Major League Baseball umpires are the best umpires there are. I also happen to believe that they're the best of the professional sports officials.

[QUOTE]IMO, you cannot compare "other' professions with that of MLB

RE: When you attend law school or medical school while you might not be the top of your profession you can make a decent living.

In umpiring, until one makes it to the "show" for the most part you make peanuts. If you want to attract the best then you need a system that will attract the best.

There might be some excellent umpires out there but they may have a family etc,. and simply cannot afford a trip to the minors given the current pay structure.

Heck MLB has a "stink" whenever the minor league umpires do want a raise in pay or better living arrangements etc. as evidenced by the past strike.

What you have is a system that attracts those that can afford to work for peanuts not necessarily the best candidates available but those that are available.

Pete Booth

They are not the best in professional sports, by far. But if you want to drink the Kool-Aid go right ahead. As far as I am concerned you cannot be overweight and have problems getting from point A to point B then be the best in sports. And most of their calls are one thing or the other. When it gets complicated like making a real judgment call, they cannot even get that right. I respect the jobs that most of these guys do. They are working games most of us would dream to have, but to say they are the best is a stretch. And when you have guys that were hand picked only because their dad was an umpire, does not make you the best. ;)

Peace

Apparently you have difficulty discerning what the word "exception" means. I never said every single MLB Umpire is the absolute best (and I was thinking of Hunter when I first wrote that). Among the major professional sports, MLB Umpires are the best.

In the NFL I see far more blown calls than I do in baseball, and several guys are lard butts there, too. In hockey, they're darned good, perhaps giving MLB Umpires a run for their money. And the NBA? That's not even debatable. The officials there and the league--mostly the latter--are a joke. NBA Referees are, sadly, a shell of what they used to be quality-wise.

If one looks at all the calls made by officials in their respective games, I'd be willing to bet MLB Umpires come out on top in terms of their correctness.

Nice name drop.

And this is what JRut is talking about: Football, basketball, and hockey are all sports in which the players and their opponents are moving quickly around the playing surface and usually making contact with each other. Officials in these sports have the difficult job of deciding what is legal and illegal contact, among other decisions. These sports require a different kind of judgment than just ball/strike, out/safe, and fair/foul.

And who in the NFL is a lard butt? They all look in pretty good shape to me.
Maybe, but it's hard to classify some calls in those other sports as simply "correct" or "incorrect."

Apples to oranges.

Very rarely do we work in the "gray area"- either the ball got to the glove first or the foot got to the bag first.

In most other sports, there is that "gray area" - how much of a hold constitutes holding in football? How much body bump on a clean block in basketball is too much? In hockey, did that trip really cause the skater to fall, or was it a dive?

In JRut's opinion, it seems like MLB umpires can't be the best because of the sport they officiate - an overwhelming percentage of our calls are made when we are stationary, when we have plenty of time and space to get into position, and are "black and white" in nature.

There are some areas in which officiating different sports has similarities - game management, rules knowledge, confidence.

There are other areas where comparing is futile, and just wastes bandwidth :p

That's because it's true. Does anyone really think Hunter got an MLB job because he was some outstanding umpire? :rolleyes:

I am a football official. It is amazing how many of replay reviews in both college and the NFL that these guys get completely right. And in football there are no "phantom tags" or "unwritten rules" that have to be officiated. And NBA Officials are a lot better than any MLB Umpire. For one all NBA Officials are in shape and they get rid of officials that rate low. They do not keep a guy around or bring guys back if they cannot call the game properly. And as stated, MLB (or any baseball umpire for that matter), mostly has an either/or decision to make on the vast majority of plays. When they have to use judgment surrounding a series of factors, in your opinion they cannot even get those plays right (e.g. Upton play, Pierzynski play).

Well considering how many games have been decided at the MLB Playoffs based on some very bad calls, I would dispute that. Most of other sports I see where there are there are precieved bad calls, are often based on misunderstanding of the media rather than an actual bad call (e.g. Tuck Rule). These are not plays that the vast majority of the officiating community disagrees with. I see way more umpires disagreeing with big calls in games during the baseball season, then I ever do when people talk about the other sports.

Peace

Which is why baseball is much more difficult to work than you can understand. Perhaps you ought to work it some day. ;)


Puh-leeze! They're atrocious, as is the league these days.

I find it interesting that you seem to focus so much on an official's weight. Those officials who are overweight out there might not take kindly to this. (We'll see if they chime in.)

Oh, and I don't see any current or recently retired MLB Umpires spending time in jail for gambling/corruption, unlike some sport I know.

BTW, I have officiated football and basketball as well during my life.

In all fairness to Rutledge, he said "overweight and have problems getting from point A to point B." Hopefully, he was combining these two elements. If he was just capping on fat people, then he's wrong.

If you have problems getting from point A to point B, you shouldn't umpire baseball, whether you're fat or not. There are plenty of skinny-a$$ umpires who can't get around a ball field as well as some of us big guys can. Just because you are overweight doesn't mean you are slow, or can't hustle from position to position.

I might have lost a step or two from when I started umpiring (very slim and trim) to when I stopped (hungry, hungry hippo), but I was already 3 or 4 steps ahead when I started, so I ended up still way ahead of the curve.

Barney Deary's cousin did not make it out of the umpire school. Drew Coble's son was in the minors but did not make it. John Clougherty's son was in the minors (baseball) and didn't make it, however he has made it to D1 in basketball. Baseball didn't work out for Steve Javie either and Johnny Stephens was his god-father, although that case seemed to be about a problem over a promotion. Lenny Dykstra's brother did not make it.

So, Crawford, Wendlestadt, Runge have taken a whole 3 positions due to their father's, rather than their own ability, or so it seems from reading here. Glad Crawford decided to go for it since he is one of the best just like his dad was. What a shame if he had not been allowed to try just because his father made it.

I guess Joey Crawford made it because of Shag and Steve made it because of his dad Stan from NFL football. Seems like Joey and Steve have the NBA finals every year.

Baseball does fire many umpires that do not perform well. Check out the AAA guys who work several years up in the big leagues but do not make it. That is Baseball's system of weeding out and firing of new umps that do not make the grade. I do not see many veteran NBA refs get fired as both Bavetta and Nies are over 65 and in the NFL, Austin is also over 65 and all these guys are close to 70. The weeding out is in the first couple of years in all sports and baseball does this with the guys working up in the "show" from AAA.

Don't forget about Brian Gorman, son of Lou Gorman, Bill Welke, brother of Tim Welke, and Marty Foster, son in law to George Spelius.

There are alot of MLB umpires that have connections to the top due to where they are from or who they know.

I am not saying that any of the umpires mentioned didn't earn it though.

Brian Gorman's father was the legendary Tom Gorman, who played major league baseball and became an umpire after his playing career ended. Don't know who Lou is.

Sorry about that I mispelled Tom. lol

Perhaps you were thinking of the late Lou DiMuro, former MLB umpire who is father to Ray DiMuro and current MLB umpire Mike DiMuro.

My, my. I do believe I got my names mixed up. But you are helping make the point that nepotism is alive and well in MLB. It is generally this way in the real world though. My grandfather was a plumber, my dad was a plumber, I could have been a plumber.

He was a GM for the Mariners from 1977-80, and most famously for the Red Sox from 1984-93. Just got some baseball names mixed up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Gorman

Actually the DiMuro brothers received no assistance whatsoever from their father, as he had died years before they became umpires. I've worked games with both, and they were the real deal right off the bat.

I went to umpire school with Ray. Nice guy. It is a fraternity. You take care of your own.

Steve you are missing the point. The problem is there are a lot of MLB Umpires that if they had to go by the physical standards of other sports, they would never get those opportunities in the first place. And it is a lot easier to get from point A to point B in a baseball setting with 4 and 6 umpires on games than it ever is in a 1 or 2 person game (hell 3 umpires too). I know the NFL has suspended officials that are incapable of keeping their weight down and the NFL did not care if they could move well or not. In the NBA you would not even be considered if you did not look the part. I cannot think of any official that is not in great shape or clearly looks the part. You have to sprint from point A to point B all the time in basketball. You cannot afford to be complacent with a couple of steps.

When I see umpires at the MLB level that cannot make an easy call by taking a couple of steps, I know people wonder if they are physically capable to get in position. I know that is definitely the case when I work HS games with people and the physical abilities of my partners. Things have been said to me from coaches (many times well after the game) about how big someone is and how they cannot keep up. I know that goes through my mind when I work with someone that big or I watch someone that is that big. If someone credits me for my hustle and I barely ran down the line, I find that as a problem if you are comparing me to other umpires. There are umpires that get upset if you use proper mechanics because they have to run further so they say things like, "I am not running home to cover the plate when you are already there." But the mechanics clearly state that the BU comes back home to cover the plate in certain situations. I run more in any football game on just one play, not just one situation. I would have to consider giving up my other sports if running about 100 feet is a problem. If that is a problem, then you either need to get in shape or not take the damn game. I am sorry, your physical ability matters to not only me, but the people participating.

Peace

So, I was wrong in giving you the benefit of the doubt...you were just fat bashing. Okay.:)

No, I understand and see your point when comparing to other pro sports.