Bud Black EJ

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Good point. None of us remember doing that.

No one intentionally makes a call like that. No one intentionally calls a pitch in the dirt a strike. But it's done. A lot. And those who do it honestly don't think they did. "I would never call a pitch in the dirt a strike" umpires have said to me during post games evals. What they should say is "I would never call a pitch that I SAW hit the dirt, a strike."

Not until I show them my video do they understand that they really did. And they are usually stunned. The issue then becomes, "why", and our conversatiion turns to mechanics and proper use of the eyes.

I have had the same experience with tag plays.

None of us can say with 100% certainty that we haven't committed a gross error in our umpiring. But since we can go home and not see replay after replay we can continue to believe what we saw and did was correct.

MLB and many MiLB and NCAA umpires don't have that luxury. By the time they get to their hotel any mistake has been on Sports Center and is being cued up for the 11:00 news. They have the wonderful opportunity to see their error, again and again and unlike amateurs, they can't deny making it.

Regardless of what we think about MLB umpire X or MLB umpire Y, the fact is that by training and experience, they all are among the best umpires in the world. And here we are claiming that they screw up more than we do.

Trust me, if we had cameras at every game, we'd be singing a different tune.

I'm not excusing pros who screw up, I am saying that amateurs who like to claim that they never make gross errors should add, "that I know of" to such claims.

I have blown calls and I have called balls strikes. I have called guys out on swipe tags that may have been missed, and I have made rulings that I later realized were wrong. But I have absolutely never, ever had a guy wipe the entire width of the plate and called him out. Never, ever, for absolutely certain.

What you say has some validity, but not when it comes to a play like that. Never.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

But I have absolutely never, ever had a guy wipe the entire width of the plate and called him out. Never, ever, for absolutely certain.

And, like you, no major league umpire has ever called a runner out who he saw wipe the entire width of the plate prior to a tag.

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

And, like you, no major league umpire has ever called a runner out who he saw wipe the entire width of the plate prior to a tag.

I think you're missing the point.

He could not have possibly seen the miss, because, well, there was no miss. You have to clearly see it, to make this call.

The point of this whole conversation (hopefully) is to educate others. On a play like this, you have to be 100% sure that the plate wasn't touched. That wasn't the case here, obviously. He had to have been screened out by the runner's body. And when that happens, you can't assume the miss.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by kylejt

I think you're missing the point.

He could not have possibly seen the miss, because, well, there was no miss. You have to clearly see it, to make this call.

The point of this whole conversation (hopefully) is to educate others. On a play like this, you have to be 100% sure that the plate wasn't touched. That wasn't the case here, obviously. He had to have been screened out by the runner's body. And when that happens, you can't assume the miss.

So, this means Tim McClelland got the call on Holliday right, because there's no way he could have seen him miss the plate, so he must have been safe, right? You can't assume that he missed the plate if you're not looking at the play!

[kylejt]

His calls are so slow, I'm still waiting for it two years later.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by kylejt

His calls are so slow, I'm still waiting for it two years later.

How true!

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

How true!

I was gonna say, I know a lot of Padre fans still waiting for Holladay to touch the plate.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by kylejt

I think you're missing the point.

He could not have possibly seen the miss, because, well, there was no miss. You have to clearly see it, to make this call.

The point of this whole conversation (hopefully) is to educate others. On a play like this, you have to be 100% sure that the plate wasn't touched. That wasn't the case here, obviously. He had to have been screened out by the runner's body. And when that happens, you can't assume the miss.

No, you're missing my point, which is the umpire called what he "saw" as the correct call. MLB umpires do not intentionally make the wrong call any more than any of us do. He believed he got it right.

Then, he saw that he didn't on replay and admitted his error.

That's one difference between MLB and amateur umpiores they have replay to show them when they get it wrong, even when they think they are right.

We believe we get calls right, and thanks to not having contrary evidence played over and over, get to continue thinking that and then write posts on the internet claiming we've never made such a mistake.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

No, you're missing my point, which is the umpire called what he "saw" as the correct call. MLB umpires do not intentionally make the wrong call any more than any of us do. He believed he got it right.

Oy vey.

I have been wrong many times over the years on tag plays.

I have missed hundreds of balls and strikes in my 15+ years.

I have never called a guy out for missing a base unless I SAW him miss it.

If you BELIEVE a guy missed a base, you call him safe.

If you are SEE him miss definitely miss the base, you call him out(assuming proper appeal).

This PU did not SEE this runner miss home plate, he BELIEVED it.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

This PU did not SEE this runner miss home plate, he BELIEVED it.

You still don't get it. He did see the runner miss the plate. It is possible to see something that didn't actually happen.

Back from 2003..

"'Procedurally, I didn't handle it 100 percent right,' McClelland told The Post in an exclusive interview in the umpires' room in The Stadium. "But I'm sure it hit the pole."

When asked if McClelland saw if the ball hit a fan's glove and not the foul pole, the veteran ump was adamant that he saw the ball hit the pole. Television replays showed that it hit a fan's glove and dropped on to the field."

He saw the ball hit the pole not a glove. Replays showed that it hit a glove. What he saw wasn't actually what happened.

[jwwashburn]

I am not surprised that you believe that someone can SEE something that did not happened.