Umps reverse foul/fair call in Friday’s A’s/Royals game...

ren0901 · #1 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 12:32am

...have never seen this at any level, so very surprised this would happen at the MLB. You can watch the video here but I’m stumped as to reason why the call was reversed and why the batter-runner was awarded second. There was an observation that since the fielder picked up the ball and tossed it into the stands, he made the ball dead and thus the two base award. Look forward to hearing your thoughts...

johnnyg08 · #2 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 12:54am

Wow, as some have posted earlier about these things..."A Brave New World."

They gave him a double because that's probably where we would've ended up.

I don't think throwing the ball in the stands had anything to do with where they placed the B/R.

There's my .02. good post.

GA Umpire · #3 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 07:02am

I agree that he probably would have gotten to 2B. However, I thought it could only be changed if the call had no affect on how the play developed. It clearly did here b/c Crisp stopped running and the defense stopped play on the ball.

Also, I guess there is no "get your own calls" anymore. I am really beginning to dislike some of the precedences being set by MLB. I understand he was moving out of the way. But, he was about 2 feet from the ball. HP was about 110 feet away. Whose call is it?

It should have been left as a foul ball. The batter didn't even think about arguing the call. He was getting ready to hit again. I guess there weren't any EJ on the other side.

bob jenkins · #4 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 07:19am

It seems to be consistent with the new rule. As I posted elsewhere, someday this will bite them in the a$$. I agree that they have gone too far (imo).

jicecone · #5 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 09:48am

Lets see here , the manager decided he should come out of the dugout to try and show up U1.

Was it Fair or Foul?

I think when an official is able to put his self-ego aside and correctly make a ruling by the book rather than some preconceived macho idea of how he is being perceived, then he truly understands what he is out there for.

If the ball was truly fair, and it could be confirmed, then this was the right call for this situation.

Stu Clary · #6 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 12:19pm

If this wasn't the first batter of the game, the call would not have been reveresed. What I mean by that is, the field was still perfectly groomed, and all parties could clearly see the ball mark on the line.

Another point: The Oakland manager and firstbase coach DID NOT protest vehemently or "show up" the umpire. Not at all. In fact, they were low-key and professional about the whole thing.

The correct call was made. Great job, Blue.

Steven Tyler · #7 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 03:56pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It seems to be consistent with the new rule. As I posted elsewhere, someday this will bite them in the a$$. I agree that they have gone too far (imo).

When you make the big leagues you can obviate your opinion to all whom it may concern. As long as they are consistent, I don't see where there is any problem at all. My thoughts and opinion are (deleted).

JRutledge · #8 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 10:39pm

This is the reason baseball is going to the dogs. This is ridiculousness to make this call and arbitrarily decide that a runner would had been. What do they do if there were runners on base, just decide who what have been there on a missed call. This has nothing to do with ego, this has to do with common sense. Because who is to say the runner would not have made third.

Peace

DG · #9 (**permalink**) Sat Jul 17, 2010, 11:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Because who is to say the runner would not have made third.

Every right fielder in ML baseball.

yawetag · #10 (**permalink**) Sun Jul 18, 2010, 03:18am

Quote:

Originally Posted by g3464123

Excellent list! I've learned more from this forum in about 2 days than I have at any other forum community.

Odd. A spammer, but no spam link.

Edit: Oh, there it is. In their profile.

Fan10 · #11 (**permalink**) Sun Jul 18, 2010, 09:45pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is ridiculousness to make this call and arbitrarily decide that a runner would had been.

I don't know what you think they do on spectator interference.

johnnyg08 · #12 (**permalink**) Sun Jul 18, 2010, 10:19pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fan10

I don't know what you think they do on spectator interference.

Yes, but it's two completely different plays...changing a play from foul to fair on a non-homerun ball is unprecedented.

JRutledge · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 19, 2010, 12:32am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fan10

I don't know what you think they do on spectator interference.

Not the same situation at all. Spectator interference involves the time of the infraction and what the play prevented from happening. Calling a foul ball and then deciding that it would have been a double is just plain silly. Actually I think the NF got this one right, because if you are going to call a foul ball in that code you cannot take it back. They created that rule because to do would be chaos. This to me just went too far and assumes a lot of things.

Peace

MrUmpire · #14 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 19, 2010, 12:34am

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

Yes, but it's two completely different plays...changing a play from foul to fair on a non-homerun ball is unprecedented.

Are you sure?

johnnyg08 · #15 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 19, 2010, 12:45am

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Are you sure?

no

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fair/foul call	jmkupka	Softball	50	Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:56pm
Odd Yanks-Royals call today	greymule	Baseball	23	Mon Aug 18, 2008 06:08pm
who should call fair or foul?	Illinois blue	Softball	17	Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:47am
reverse call on over and back??	MJT	Basketball	4	Tue Jan 11, 2005 08:50am
Fair/Foul..Change call Pro Game	gsf23	Baseball	3	Wed May 21, 2003 07:30am