Officiating and the Crowd

[Kevin Finnerty]

Geez, what did Scioscia say?

I'm as big an Angel follower as I can be, and I was never more disappointed in a game all year. And I have to say, all that's on Fuentes. I can't think of another Angel I've detested more than him in all the years---not even Jose Guillen. He is an accident waiting to happen and a malcontent and a loser when things go wrong.

Scioscia was heartbroken that a close pitch cost him a ballgame, and if it missed, it dodn't miss by much and could easily have gone either way. But he didn't pop off like you hear others pop off, AND when the umpires went to walk off the field, Mike herded Butcher and some players away from them so they could go up the runway without being berated in public.

Scioscia is as classy a baseball man as you'll find. I thought he held onto it pretty damned well after losing one like that.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Geez, what did Scioscia say?

I'm as big an Angel follower as I can be, and I was never more disappointed in a game all year. And I have to say, all that's on Fuentes. I can't think of another Angel I've detested more than him in all the years---not even Jose Guillen. He is an accident waiting to happen and a malcontent and a loser when things go wrong.

Scioscia was heartbroken that a close pitch cost him a ballgame, and if it missed, it dodn't miss by much and could easily have gone either way. But he didn't pop off like you hear others pop off, AND when the umpires went to walk off the field, Mike herded Butcher and some players away from them so they could go up the runway without being berated in public.

Scioscia is as classy a baseball man as you'll find. I thought he held onto it pretty damned well after losing one like that.

What did Scioscia say? He said to the PU after the game, "what's the count now, 3-4?" The umpires have gone on record that they were verbally abused following the game by the Angels coaching staff. He should have been yelling at his lazy a$s left fielder for not diving for that ball to save the game. If he would have dove, he probably would have caught the ball. It looked like he just gave up on it with the game on the line. Easier to blame the umpires, I suppose.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

What did Scioscia say? He said to the PU after the game, "what's the count now, 3-4?" The umpires have gone on record that they were verbally abused following the game by the Angels coaching staff. He should have been yelling at his lazy a$s left fielder for not diving for that ball to save the game. If he would have dove, he probably would have caught the ball. It looked like he just gave up on it with the game on the line. Easier to blame the umpires, I suppose.

All right, we're talking about almost two different subjects. I thought Rivera should have laid out for that ball. It would have not been as sure a grab as you hinted at---more like a near-miracle grab.

The pitch that tied the game was definitely disputable, and a pitch right before that appeared to be missed. The zone was pretty unpredictable all night, so there was bound to be tension.

I'll tell you one thing, I would respect Scioscia a whole lot less if he wasn't upset by calls like those, or the one that ended the game in particular. What are you a baseball manager for?

Defending umpires is fine, but going after a guy like Scioscia isn't necessary in order to defend the umpire's right to call a borderline pitch a ball instead of a strike to end a ballgame.

And if you knew more about the guy, you would know that he would never blame one of his players for anything. He blames himself and/or the whole team. Last night, he said that they should have never been in the position to lose the game like that, and pointed out the two innings when they didn't cash in, and the two mistakes on defense during the Sox's big inning. That's customary. He said the same thing after that Doug Eddings fiasco four years ago.

Umpires wished more catchers were like Scioscia when he caught and they wish more managers were like him now.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

All right, we're talking about almost two different subjects. I thought Rivera should have laid out for that ball. It would have not been as sure a grab as you hinted at---more like a near-miracle grab.

He caught the ball on one hop. If he had laid out for it he probably would have at least drawn leather on it. It would have been far easier than a "near-miracle." But he didn't try for the ball, which is the whole point.

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

The pitch that tied the game was definitely disputable, and a pitch right before that appeared to be missed. The zone was pretty unpredictable all night, so there was bound to be tension.

The pitch looked low to me. I don't trust the network's pitch track. As Tuss said, it is subject to where it is drawn on the screen and is used for comparison purposes only, not as the actual strike zone of a hitter. I looked to me like the pitch was similar to where Reed had been calling it a ball all game long. I also think that Kellogg, in real time without slowing it down on a replay, got the check swing call right. I think the batter held up. And Timmons got the dropped ball call right in my estimation as well. It looked like Aybar never controlled the ball and that it dropped from his glove as he reached in for it, which I'm sure is what Timmons told Scioscia. It wasn't "on the transfer.," he just clanked it..

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

I'll tell you one thing, I would respect Scioscia a whole lot less if he wasn't upset by calls like those, or the one that ended the game in particular. What are you a baseball manager for?

Well, he can get upset, but he should have been more upset in how his team managed to choke the game away.

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Defending umpires is fine, but going after a guy like Scioscia isn't necessary in order to defend the umpire's right to call a borderline pitch a ball instead of a strike to end a ballgame.

I didn't go after Scioscia, I just reported what was said and that the umpires publicly stated that they were verbally abused following the game by the coaching staff. I like Scioscia. He was a helluva catcher and a really good manager.

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

And if you knew more about the guy, you would know that he would never blame one of his players for anything. He blames himself and/or the whole team. Last night, he said that they should have never been in the position to lose the game like that, and pointed out the two innings when they didn't cash in, and the two mistakes on defense during the Sox's big inning. That's customary. He said the same thing after that Doug Eddings fiasco four years ago.

Well, good. He should take the blame for that and for the Eddings game, if he doesn't want to blame the boneheaded mistakes his team made.

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Umpires wished more catchers were like Scioscia when he caught and they wish more managers were like him now.

I agree with you on that one. I wish I would have had Mike in front of me on Saturday and Sunday!

[johnnyg08]

IMO, Kruk is one of the biggest rats out there. Anything that comes out of his mouth regarding umpires is dead to me.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Kruk is a deadpan, and most of his angst is part of his schtik.

[gordon30307]

[QUOTE=Kevin Finnerty;625998]Geez, what did Scioscia say?


Scioscia was heartbroken that a close pitch cost him a ballgame,


Yikes, One call cost him the game. New one on me. I've kicked my share and saw them kicked I've never seen a call cost a team a game. Too much happens before that that would have made the seemingly "bad call" a moot point.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Ahem ...

I had to clear my throat.

Yours is a specious argument that is common, if not forthcoming in every debate of this basic nature.

If the pitch was called a strike, the Angels win. If the pitch is called a ball, the game is tied and the bases remain loaded and the Angels may not go on to win. But, I repeat, if the pitch was called a strike, the Angels win.

The Angels did not win. If the pitch was called a strike, the Angels win.

One call goes one way and the Angels win. The same call goes the other way and they are still alive, but they lose. So it's not a direct loss, but very close.

[mattmets]

The Angels don't give up any one of the 7 other runs, the Red Sox don't tie the game. Juan Rivera makes an effort to catch the ball, they may not lose. In a 9-8 game, there's plenty of blame to go around, none of it to Rick Reed.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Ahem ...

I had to clear my throat.

Yours is a specious argument that is common, if not forthcoming in every debate of this basic nature.

If the pitch was called a strike, the Angels win. If the pitch is called a ball, the game is tied and the bases remain loaded and the Angels may not go on to win. But, I repeat, if the pitch was called a strike, the Angels win.

The Angels did not win. If the pitch was called a strike, the Angels win.

One call goes one way and the Angels win. The same call goes the other way and they are still alive, but they lose. So it's not a direct loss, but very close.

Who put the Angels in the position where one pitch mattered? How many hits, stikeouts, strikes, bases on balls, catches, dropped balls, instances of bad baserunning, and cases of stupid game strategy did the umpire have?

One pitch called either way does not by itself win or lose a game. One pitch cannot be isolated from the other 249, except, of course, by disgruntled managers, spoiled players and fanboys.

[NFump]

Originally Posted by mrumpire

who put the angels in the position where one pitch mattered? How many hits, stikeouts, strikes, bases on balls, catches, dropped balls, instances of bad baserunning, and cases of stupid game strategy did the umpire have?

One pitche called either way does not by itsefl win or lose a game. One pitch cannot be isolated from the other 249, except, of course, by disgruntled managers, spoiled players and fanboys.

clap, clap, clap, clap,clapping clapping some more, more clapping, standing up and clapping, whistle here, clapping.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Who put the Angels in the position where one pitch mattered? How many hits, stikeouts, strikes, bases on balls, catches, dropped balls, instances of bad baserunning, and cases of stupid game strategy did the umpire have?

One pitch called either way does not by itself win or lose a game. One pitch cannot be isolated from the other 249, except, of course, by disgruntled managers, spoiled players and fanboys.

You have a prejudice and a defamatory name or reference ready at all times, don't you?

I have a vastly more thorough knowledge of this game and how it works than you allow for.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

You have a prejudice and a defamatory name or reference ready at all times, don't you?

I have a vastly more thorough knowledge of this game and how it works than you allow for.

Nothing I posted is intended to be in reference to your vast and thorough knowledge of this game.

Many of those with superior knowledge of the game are fans.

[Kevin Finnerty]

And you have a defamatory name for them ready at all times.

I haven't really felt like a fan for a long time, but I have had plenty work that involved watching games, and I think there's room for the viewpoint of anyone who loves the game and has something worthwhile to contribute. They shouldn't be dismissed with such swiftness.