Sox/Angels tag at third in 9th

[soundedlikeastrike]

Pool night, juke box playing, but I caught the blown squeeze attempt outta the corner of my eye, only saw it once; but it looked like the end result was safe:

Here's why I disagee and agree:

Safe call; nobody bats an eye, per definitions above. I'd almost agree with that..

Out: sure, and what he called. F2 made the tag, gathered himself (like he thought he missed him) and made a "second" (unessacary lunge and tag) which was then followed by the drop, seems "long enough" was the call.
And from what I saw, blue, called the out when he saw "F2 gather himself".

So what's "long enough" looks like, if you have the ability to "re-tag an already out runner", that's long enough.

[Rich]

Regardless of how we feel, the call was verified by the MLB head of umpiring (Leppard) and a new standard was set that (for better or worse) we'll be expected to uphold cause everyone will remember this play.

I like the call. It was two distinct motions -- he held the ball securely during and after the tag and only then did he fall and have the glove bang on the ground. I always felt J/R was pissing into the wind on this particular play anyway.

[mbyron]

I agree with Rich. Welke was right on top of this, and judged that the ball was held long enough. Replay demonstrated two distinct motions, the tag and then the fall.

I didn't like the call in live action, but it looked right on replay.

[BretMan]

The most refreshing aspect of the play:

Hearing the announcers (I believe it was Eckersley), after numerous replays, say something along the lines of, "Was that the right call? I don't have any idea. I've always wondered about something like that".

So much better that the made-up playground rule myths many announcers pass off as "expert" commentary!

One announcer even noted that, "Unlike football, the ground can cause a fumble".

Okay, I was half asleep when this play happened- actually had just woke up on the couch right after the play and during the replays- but here's what it looked like to me.

It looked like Varitek lunged and made a tag (at least, what the umpire could have reasonably ruled a tag from his position- the first swipe at the runner looked like maybe there was a couple of inches of air between the mitt and the runner), held onto the ball, then lunged a second time making, apparently, another tag (I wonder- just to be "sure", or because he knew he missed the first tag?).

After the second tag, the catcher's momentum carried him to the ground where the ball subsequently popped out after he hit the ground.

Sound about right? If the first attempt was ruled a tag, it seems that Varitek did have control throughout that initial tag (runner out), then lost it and the second swipe and ground contact (which would all be moot if the first tag was ruled valid).

But I do remember thinking that if the umpire had paused a second longer, "safe" could have been an easy sell! I haven't seen or read any follow-up discussions on this call since watching the replays with one eye closed last night.

[rulesmaven]

Originally Posted by BretMan

It looked like Varitek lunged and made a tag (at least, what the umpire could have reasonably ruled a tag from his position- the first swipe at the runner looked like maybe there was a couple of inches of air between the mitt and the runner), held onto the ball, then lunged a second time making, apparently, another tag (I wonder- just to be "sure", or because he knew he missed the first tag?).

I didn't see it that way. It looked to me like Varitek got him the first time and knew he got him. On the way to ground, he held the glove up in the air a bit to show that he had the ball. (He had been holding it in his hand to possibly throw it and transferred it just before the tag.) I don't think there was a second lunge, just a continuation of the action. It appeared to me that once Welke saw Varitek hold the ball up, he decided he'd seen enough.

[Kevin Finnerty]

I'm sorry to disagree, but Varitek didn't "hold the ball up." Did anyone else see it that way?

And then regarding what Dash said, if Welke never saw when or how the ball came loose, how in the hell did he get away with not conferring with the rest of the crew? If there was ever a call...

It is an interpretation of a rule on top of a tough, exploding play. It cried out for a conference.

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by rulesmaven

I don't think there was a second lunge, just a continuation of the action. It appeared to me that once Welke saw Varitek hold the ball up, he decided he'd seen enough.

Welke wasn't looking at Varitek after the tag, and never saw the ball come out. He was focused on the point of the tag the whole time.

[BretMan]

Okay. I finally had a chance to see the replay- fully awake this time!- and run it frame-by-frame on the DVR.

I think that what I was seeing as a "second tag attempt" was just Varitek's momentum carrying him forward and his arm whipping to the ground as his elbow hit the dirt.

Here's what I did see:

- Varitek lunges and tags the runner- right in the tooshkie- with the ball firmly held in glove, approximately six to eight feet before the bag.

- Umpire pointing to signal the tag and out right at that point.

- Ball still firmly held in the glove as Varitek's momentum carries him forward.

- Varitek's elbow hits the ground about even with the bag and that jars the ball loose. His mitt is actually about two feet past the bag when the ball pops out.

Sounds like a textbook "out" under the Evans interpretation.

[rulesmaven]

Originally Posted by BretMan

- Varitek lunges and tags the runner- right in the tooshkie- with the ball firmly held in glove, approximately six to eight feet before the bag.

- Umpire pointing to signal the tag and out right at that point.

- Ball still firmly held in the glove as Varitek's momentum carries him forward.

- Varitek's elbow hits the ground about even with the bag and that jars the ball loose. His mitt is actually about two feet past the bag when the ball pops out.

Sounds like a textbook "out" under the Evans interpretation.

That was my thought too -- looked like the ball came loose a good 9 to 11 feet after the tag. Under the Evans interpretation, it's no doubt this was an out, IMO. Under a voluntary release rule, it's much closer.

As for whether or not Varitek was showing the mitt to Welke or not, I stand by my original interpretation -- Varitek was clearly holding the mitt aloft for a moment, until his elbow hit the ground. Not sure that would matter under voluntary release interpretation, though. But if the right question is whether Varitek maintained control throughout the tag, I think they got it right.

[Tim C]

re-read RichMSN's post.

Steve Palermo just gave the "official ruling" (I am sure some of you can find it and post it) that said:

"At the instant of the tag the fielder was in secure possession of the ball and anything that happened after that is moot."

(My paraphrase from the sound bite I heard.)

This is dangerous territory as we know F2's are often in full possession and control when they are steam rolled at the dish YET if the ball comes loose traditionally the call has reverted to "SAFE".

I find this entire situation very interesting.

Regards,

[Rich Ives]

I'm thinking that the difference is that if the force of the tag is the cause of the ball coming loose - it's not a tag. Rationale: if the ball came loose you didn't have secure possession.

Getting steamrolled could therefore be looked at as the force of the tag causing the ball to come loose.

In the Varitek play the tag was over and subsequent action caused the ball to come loose.


Just my 2 cents.

[BretMan]

Rich, that has always been my understanding.

Ball comes out during tag = no control of ball/not securely held.

Ball comes out after tag = valid tag, as long as ball was secure during the tagging action itself.

[UmpJM]

Oddly enough, I had just posted the different Evans and Roder criteria for judging the validity of a tag on a thread on the umpire.org site just before this play happened last night.

To me, the Evans interp always made more sense and was more consistent with the actual text of the rules, and I thought Welke's call was correct.

I believe Rich Ives hits the key distinction in his post above - the tag itself did not result in Varitek (involuntarily) losing control of the ball. His lack of body control did.

But, since "voluntary release" is not a criteria for establishing the validity of a tag (unless you subscribe to Roder's hypothesis, of course), and Varitek clearly had "secure possession" of the ball before, during, and immediately after the tag, it's a good tag.

JM

[johnnyg08]

The video...I don't remmeber if anybody posted the link on here or not.

http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/media/v...00013&c_id=bos

[David B]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Rich, that has always been my understanding.

Ball comes out during tag = no control of ball/not securely held.

Ball comes out after tag = valid tag, as long as ball was secure during the tagging action itself.

That does make sense and seems to be what MLB is saying publicly at least.

Was watching the play over again on DVR and then listening to Showalter explain the play - basically he is right, they didn't execute.

And then trying a squeeze with a LHB is never a good idea.

Thanks
David