Bud Black EJ

[zm1283]

Hmm, I guess I've always spelled it "judgement" and no one has ever said anything, college or otherwise.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

The dropping of the first "e" was decided by one man.

Yes, but the man happened to be Noah Webster.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Yes, but the man happened to be Noah Webster.

Not a bad defence, Steve.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

No, I've blown lots of calls, but not one like this. I know. I don't umpire in a fog. I know what calls I kick and which ones I don't. And then there are the ones I thought I got right but may have missed. But again, not one like this. Not that it won't happen, just that it hasn't.

What he said.

And to add to that: Have I missed seeing a guy touch a base? Sure. Have I missed a guy missing a base? Sure.

Would I ever DREAM of calling a guy out unless I SAW him miss a base? No, of course not. THAT makes this call SO much worse. He called a guy out because he thought he missed home. This is one of the worst calls I have ever seen. It is similar, but even worse than this: 7-8-06 Cardinals @ Astros - The Official Forum

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

You do not call a guy out for missing a base unless you KNOW he missed the base-PERIOD.

Maybe the PU was 100% sure that he missed the plate. How would you know that without mind reading? Did he tell you that he guessed?

[cc6]

You know, you both don't look very wise for fighting over nothing. Same goes for the countless other people who have been flaming recently. The p1ssing contests make everyone look very immature.

[johnnyg08]

Yeah, let's try and move past this crap...the board has been pretty dead the past few weeks probably because of this stuff. While I'm nowhere close to some of the vets on here...we all have a lot more to offer this board than what's been going on here the past few weeks.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by LDUB

Maybe the PU was 100% sure that he missed the plate. How would you know that without mind reading? Did he tell you that he guessed?

If you look at Merriam Webster Dictionary online, the 4th definition of SURE is:

4 a : marked by or given to feelings of confident certainty b : characterized by a lack of wavering or hesitation

There is a pretty good chance that this PU was SURE. However, he did not become sure by actually SEEING the guy miss the home plate-because he did not miss it.

[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.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

What he said.

And to add to that: Have I missed seeing a guy touch a base? Sure. Have I missed a guy missing a base? Sure.

Would I ever DREAM of calling a guy out unless I SAW him miss a base? No, of course not. THAT makes this call SO much worse. He called a guy out because he though he missed home. This is one of the worst calls I have ever seen.

What he said!

[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!

[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.

[kylejt]

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