Joyce misses one

[collinb]

Why is it that all the umpires could not have gotten together and got the call right. I have been on both sides of a kicked call in two umpiring.
I'm not to proud to reverse the call that everyone and my partner see as an error in judgement.
I believe an umpire should never call an out if he does not see it.
So if you did not see it what's wrong with calling safe and getting together with your partners and making a determination on the right call.
If it's bang bang then you leave the call as is.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by collinb

Why is it that all the umpires could not have gotten together and got the call right. I have been on both sides of a kicked call in two umpiring.
I'm not to proud to reverse the call that everyone and my partner see as an error in judgement.
I believe an umpire should never call an out if he does not see it.
So if you did not see it what's wrong with calling safe and getting together with your partners and making a determination on the right call.
If it's bang bang then you leave the call as is.

Joyce believed he had the call right, and besides, this is not a play in which you go to your partners.

[johnnyg08]

Longtime Minneapolis sports writer Sid Hartman calls Jim Joyce a "Stupid imbecile."

Videos from Minneapolis, St. Paul, the Twin Cities area and Minnesota I StarTribune.com

Seems a bit harsh in my opinion. Easy to talk about umpiring from the press box.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

Longtime Minneapolis sports writer Sid Hartman calls Jim Joyce a "Stupid imbecile."

Videos from Minneapolis, St. Paul, the Twin Cities area and Minnesota I StarTribune.com

Seems a bit harsh in my opinion. Easy to talk about umpiring from the press box.

It was also stupid.

[greymule]

As he came off the base, the ball slipped deeper into the glove = not a catch (?)

I can see ruling a bobble if the ball is rolling around in an open glove or is otherwise unsecured, or (obviously) if the fielder has to make some sort of move with his hand or arm to secure a ball loose in the glove. But calling a bobble when the ball simply moves down from the top of a closed glove toward the palm of a closed glove—that's a tough one.

Can you see Joyce explaining, "The ball was in the glove before the runner reached 1B, but just after the runner crossed the bag, the ball slid down toward the palm of the glove"?

Number of Major League perfect games from May 1, 1922, to October 7, 1956: zero.

Number in the past month: two (plus one).

Joyce's call was actually a rather routine bad call. We've all seen far worse, even in the World Series, that are now forgotten. It was the element of the possible perfect game that made it stand out.

[cviverito]

I keep reading comments about how the ball was bobbled or that it was not controlled before, during or after the base was tagged. As far as I've read and watched these interpretations are completely wrong. From what I see I have no doubt that the catch, the solid grip during the tag, and the natural re-grip of the ball all constitute displayed control. Why? At no time did Gallaraga's actions display a loss of control over the ball. He had secure possession on the tag and simply re-gripped the ball after the tag.

I know we all work very hard to get it right all the time...and I understand how this can be interpreted as a bobble. BUT...I think that is a smitty interpretation of the rule.

For the doubters, let me ask you this...do you think Gallaraga was bobbling the ball or do you think it was secure for the tag and Gallaraga simply re-gripped it in the style of a master after he believed he completed the out?

Before answering ask yourself one thing: Did he appear to have control before he re-gripped?

Or ask yourself this: If he did not re-grip, would you have control? If yes, why does it change with the re-grip? It would appear that the only sufficient answer is "because he lost control of it".