WTF Just Happened at 3rd NY vs LAA

[cookie]

Tim McClelland's response in his own words (select "Umpire Blunders in 4th Game")....

New York Yankees vs. Los Angeles Angels - Recap - October 20, 2009 - ESPN

Did no one (Angles) ask Tim if he would get help from his partners? I would have done so if I felt I was screened from the tag in a situation like this...

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I hate the idea of instant replay. I would just like to see calls like this that aren't even close get called right.

Originally Posted by UMP25

How about better umpiring?

I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying.......

I've attended alot of MLB games and it used to be if there was a close play they wouldn't show the replay in the stadium to "incite the fans." Now, it seems like the thing to do...... Rough night.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by cookie

Tim McClelland's response in his own words (select "Umpire Blunders in 4th Game")....

New York Yankees vs. Los Angeles Angels - Recap - October 20, 2009 - ESPN

Did no one (Angles) ask Tim if he would get help from his partners? I would have done so if I felt I was screened from the tag in a situation like this...

Quicker link: 2009 ALCS: Three umpire errors in Game 4 of the ALCS point to the need to expand instant replay -- MLB Playoffs - ESPN

[grunewar]

Juggler - the article is spot on and pulls no punches. As it states, we'll have to see what changes are enacted this winter.......

[David B]

Originally Posted by jkumpire

I posted this on another thread, I wonder if this is what happened on the play at 3B:

Third, on the play at 3B, IMO two bad things happened.
A. he got straightlined by Posada when he steeped off 3B. There was little chance he could see the 2nd tag from where he was. Should he have moved further? Maybe, but at least he had the guts to call what he saw and assumed something happened that he didn't see.
B. The problem with his call on the whole play may be something all of us can learn from. Since I am not God, I cannot go into Tim's mind to find out what he was thinking. But I would almost be willing to bet that he assumed a certain normal call he has called hundreds of time was going on. Instead, there was a call that happens, what, once in a career?

The teaching point is that you can never assume what will happen at a play, you have to try and keep your mind focused on what is going on in front of your eyes.

I know a lot of us veterans will at times assume something like this: We think this pitch will be off the plate, so we mentally call the pitch a ball. But, then the pitch hits the corner, but we assumed it was a ball, so we ball it anyway.

How many times will anyone see that call in their career on the MLB level? Once, maybe. It was a weird play, and I'll bet you dollars to donuts he either didn't see Posada get tagged, or he made a mental mistake in assuming only R2 would vacate 3B when R3 returned.

Great play by the F2, he was on the ball, and U3 missed it.

BTW, the conversation with Sicosia and Jerry Lane was enlightening too, but I wish Fox had not broadcast it. That kind of inside baseball needs to be left on the field, and Lane was dead on right to let the Anaheim F2 know he needed to give a look.

The later commentary by McCarver about it was nuts, some of the most stupid stuff I ever heard him say. "Yeah, F2 is thinking about what the HP umpire said, so he ends up misplaying a ball for a passed ball. Right.

Comments?

I can see your points, but watching it on ESPN this morning, the bottomline is that he called something that he did not see. They even showed his eyes and he was 1)way too close to the play, (did not hustle at all), and 2) he was looking at the catch and never looked at the runner.

His comment was what was horrible, when he said "I thought in my heart that he left early, but according to the replay I was wrong"

Even amateur umpires are and should be taught, only call what you "see", not what you thought you saw especially on a play like this.

Umpires looking really bad this fall in postseason, they just showed the play at second also on the pickoff and he was out by a foot. Again the umpire was too close to the play. I know they are the MLB's best and I am not, but mechanics are the key no matter what level.

And of course, the "replay idiots" are having a big time with this as we know there is no way replay will ever work in baseball.

But based on what I'm hearing, it might be forced into implementation, and that is sad.

Thanks
David

[mbyron]

Worst play ever? Doug Eddings is glad you have a short memory.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by grunewar

I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying.......

I've attended alot of MLB games and it used to be if there was a close play they wouldn't show the replay in the stadium to "incite the fans." Now, it seems like the thing to do...... Rough night.

They still are not supposed to show replays of extremely close or controversial calls in the stadiums. I don't know why they are violating this policy.

[JR12]

I too get calls from friends and family about rules and calls when they are watching a baseball game. Usually the missed calls are easy to defend when you have to watch it in slo-mo, from 4 different angles. However this post season anyone (even the guy with the Bob Uecker nose bleed seats) can see these blown calls aren't even close. I am usually the guy who defends these guys. They are the BEST. I am not close to their level, but what is going on in these 2 series???

YouTube - Bob Uecker "Mr. Baseball" - Beer Commercial

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by LDUB

All of you guys have also said it all before many times. Worst call ever, inexcusable...it goes on and on every time there is a missed call. Are the calls actually getting worse? It is sort of odd how the "worst call ever" always seems to be the latest missed call.

Yep, he obviously got the play wrong. One can see how he could have missed that R3 was not on the base. We all know that missed calls happen. What makes one missed call excusable and another inexcusable?

This is the worst call I have ever seen in a high-profile game for sure. Again, that's my opinion based on what is soon to become 45 years of following major league baseball. The worst.

What makes it inexcusable? Laziness and disinterest in a job that pays $400,000 per year with three months off and he can't put out. That's what makes it inexcusable.

It's pathetic. These games are important. And this profession is too dignified to have it be represented this way at what is supposed to be its highest level.

[Umpmazza]

Originally Posted by David B

I can see your points, but watching it on ESPN this morning, the bottomline is that he called something that he did not see. They even showed his eyes and he was 1)way too close to the play, (did not hustle at all), and 2) he was looking at the catch and never looked at the runner.



Thanks
David

Is he not suppose to look a the catch, if your lined up right you wont have to move your head, everything will be right in front of you to see....the catch, and tag up.. all right there in front...

Im not defending Tim, as he did have a bad night, but are you telling me that all of us amateur umpires on here never miss calls? Im sure you do, you just dont have 40 camera angles in HD to look at every single play to tell if they got it right on your LL field...... Yes football has a replay system, baseball does not need it.

This is the problem, we have become so used to replay that know it is hurting the umpires.. if you were at the game watching live the call at 2nd, you would have never known if it was right or wrong..and swisher leaving early you might have seen that... these guys are human and will make mistakes.

[jkumpire]

Originally Posted by David B

I can see your points, but watching it on ESPN this morning, the bottomline is that he called something that he did not see. They even showed his eyes and he was 1)way too close to the play, (did not hustle at all), and 2) he was looking at the catch and never looked at the runner.

His comment was what was horrible, when he said "I thought in my heart that he left early, but according to the replay I was wrong"

Even amateur umpires are and should be taught, only call what you "see", not what you thought you saw especially on a play like this.

Umpires looking really bad this fall in postseason, they just showed the play at second also on the pickoff and he was out by a foot. Again the umpire was too close to the play. I know they are the MLB's best and I am not, but mechanics are the key no matter what level.

And of course, the "replay idiots" are having a big time with this as we know there is no way replay will ever work in baseball.

But based on what I'm hearing, it might be forced into implementation, and that is sad.

Thanks
David

Here is Tim's quote: 2009 ALCS: Three umpire errors in Game 4 point to the need to expand instant replay -- MLB Playoffs - ESPN

McClelland, however, did not see what everyone else in the park and watching on TV saw.

"I thought Cano was on the base," McClelland said. "I was waiting for two players to be on the base, and then there was never the situation where both of them were on the base at the same time. When [Napoli] tagged Cano, I thought Cano was on the base, and when [Napoli] tagged Posada out, I thought Posada was out.

"[The replay] showed that Cano was off the bag when he was tagged. I did not see that for whatever reason. So obviously there were two missed calls. Obviously or not obviously, but there were two missed calls. And I'm just out there trying to do my job and do it the best I can."

He didn't see it because he assumed something was going to happen and it didn't. And he didn't do the things he should of to see the play because of it. That is a veteran umpire making a mental error.

So IMO, the instant replay expansion stuff is not a good idea. To err is human, no matter how much $$$ you get paid.

[rulesmaven]

Originally Posted by grunewar

I've attended alot of MLB games and it used to be if there was a close play they wouldn't show the replay in the stadium to "incite the fans." Now, it seems like the thing to do...... Rough night.

Maybe they felt the rules didn't apply last night, since the plays weren't close.

At least there's no more discussion about the neighborhood play, so that's something.

You never want to see an ump miss calls in such a high profile game, but the reality is that if it's going to happen, kicking a few in a situation where the calls had virtually no effect on the outcome is not a bad thing. You can bet that all of the crews will be hustling and alert from now on in games where it might matter.

The one that's befuddling to me is the appeal at third. Don't you have to be sure to make that call? I think the Angels sold that one big time.

[Kevin Finnerty]

To err is human. So is to be lazy and uninspired, even though you command an astronomical salary. It's inexcusable.

McClelland should have one word at the front of his mind: pension.

[rulesmaven]

Originally Posted by jkumpire

"I thought Cano was on the base," McClelland said. "I was waiting for two players to be on the base, and then there was never the situation where both of them were on the base at the same time. When [Napoli] tagged Cano, I thought Cano was on the base, and when [Napoli] tagged Posada out, I thought Posada was out.

This quote is actually a bit off. McClelland actually called "Posada" by his first name during the quote twice -- using "Jorge." He didn't ever refer to the Angels by name, though -- using pronouns.

This really struck me when I saw the replay of the press conference. I'm wondering what you guys think about this. I've never umpired baseball. I understand that baseball tends to have different conventions from other sports, and that given names are frequently used on the field between players, managers and umpires. You really wouldn't hear this in other sports, where officials would tend to use numbers or positions or simply "the defender" or something like that describe a play.

I found McClelland's use of the names during his press conference to indicate a level of informality. I'm sure his use of names for yankees but not angels was coincidence, but it's something for the conspiracy theories. I don't care for it, but again I understand baseball is unique in its conventions in this regard.

[kylejt]

I'm sure this has something to do with Jorge being a catcher.