Tossin' 'em at Camden!
 

Did you see Wiggington get wigged out? Darling and Hohn are bagging and taggin'!!!

Yep...Darling missed the call, but man did he blow a gasket on Darling.

Then they must have gone back to the clubhouse to watch the replay leading to the other EJ's.

Good times!

Wiggington is 100% wrong to bump the umpire and obviously will/should get fined. In addition to that, something has to be done about these crap calls on obvious calls.

Is it just me or are they missing an amazing number of EASY calls? How does he miss this call? The tag was on the hand closest to Darling (left hand) and he got him by a lot.

To name a few other horrific ones in recent days

This one was almost as bad as the one from a couple of weeks ago where the Giants 3B taqgged a guy out from the Mariners that had given up and stopped running(the seeds sticking out of the pocket incident)

The Tigers had Josh Hamilton out diving into first-his hand slid right into the first baseman's shoe a few days ago.

A couple of nights ago, the crew in the Dodgers game did not know the rule about two visits in an inning. I knew the rule watching that game live and, oh by the way...I am not a professional umpire. MLB umpires should literally have the book memorized.

So his hand was on F3's shoe (and not the base) when he was tagged? If I mis-read your post, I apologize -- I don't know of this situation.

I know you're arguing principle, so I hesitated writing anything...but I think that call went against the Twins not the Giants...but there may have been another play you're referring to.

I think the "all of the missed calls" is a myth. The camera coverage and the media coverage is better so it seems like there are more misses. There have always been missed calls

That's what makes MLB umpiring so difficult. Every single call you make gets replayed over and over again in super slow motion and the regular fan who's never umpired thinks you're terrible because they "saw on replay that he was clearly safe"

Stupid.

Back in the old days, before every play had 20 replays and angles, Darling would've just called the runner out regardless of whether there was a tag and life would've gone on. Like many of us do in our games now.

Sure, he missed it. But the only reason they have to see whether a glove gets a finger is because they get flambeed every time they make what used to be an expected call if that call isn't "right."

Kevin Blackistone said it well (below).......

"The crowd of 20,108 issued a loud chorus of boos for several moments following the play and the tension continued to build at Camden Yards."

Actually, a pretty nice sized crowd for Camden Yards.......and usually not that much excitiment or anything to cheer/boo about.

Not to mention that only the bad calls are shown over and over.

I did not explain it all that well.


It was a line drive to ss and t they had him doubled off. He dove back and the replay f(even at full speed) showed Hamilton being tagged because his hand was on the 1B 's foot.

And he was called safe, I presume? Now that re-read your initial post on it, it makes sense. I originally thought you said "He was called out, but his hand was on the foot."

”No, no, no!” Mattingly heard plate umpire Adrian Johnson shout. ”You can’t go back.”

By then, however, Mattingly had covered the two steps back onto the mound.

Sounds like they were on it to me. Alot of the confusion was over if it was an emergency as defined in the rulebook to allow for as many warmup pitches as deemed necessary.

Johnson nailed that. Mattingly heard him, but probably didn't have time to process it in the 2 steps it took him to get back to the dirt. Or he just ignored it.

IMO, that's not bad at all for a fill-in who had already had an extremely rough night (pitchers hitting batters, warning dugouts, tossing Joe Torre, etc.).

I'm a Twins fan, but that's a horrible call. I can't believe MLB stands behind these guys when they miss calls like that !!!

What does that mean?

How should MLB respond to these terrible travesties?

Shoot them?

That's right, you must do everything perfectly every time at split second speed or you get fired from your job too. Ridiculous statement sir. Nothing a human does will ever be perfect every single time...ever.

Move out of your glass house. Yes, it sucks to miss calls, we all agree on that. What fun it was to watch the $hitstorm that ensued though. (As a spectator anyway)

The Blue got this totally right! You can't go back, or it's considered a second visit. They nailed it, and more importantly, he had the balls to call it....He got it right!

You do know that MLB publically admitted that the umpires got it wrong, don't you? what else should they do?

The rule states that Mattingly is tossed, the pitcher pitches to that batter then is removed. They kicked it. How could they not know this rules?

I guess it's you that didn't know the rule then. Mattingly left the mound which FORCES the pitcher to pitch to the next batter. The 2nd visit doesn't trump that. The pitcher not only CAN keep pitching, but by rule MUST pitch to this batter. THEN he has to come out - after this batter.

The ejection portion of that rule is for a manager who deliberately deceives the warning to not go back to the mound. The warning and Mattingly going back to the mound occurred at basically the same time. How could Mattingly deceive a warning he didn't know he was going to get until he steps on the mound and simultaneously hears the warning with 30,000 fans in the stands? To EJ w/o a warning, would also not be following the rule.

An EJ there would not have been appropriate and IMO a misinterpretation of the rule.

The crew's only mistake was not requiring Broxton to pitch to the next batter.

That penalty exists when the coach is warned not to back and defiantly does so. McClelland has stated that the crew did not believe that the "No, No" that the PU managed to get out before Mattingly crossed the mound was sufficient for that penalty.

The umpires knew the rule and the different penalties and made a decision. You may disagree with how they interpreted the situation, but you cannot accurately claim they did not know the rule.

I can. I claim they did not know the rule. Or if they did, they chose to ignore it. Broxton MUST pitch to that batter - they removed Broxton from the game instead. Kind of leads me to believe they didn't know the rule (or forgot it at least).

I agree re: the non-ejection.

PS - johnny ... what the heck does "deceive the warning" mean? How does one deceive a warning? I'd call it a typo but you said it twice.

If you tell somebody to not do something and they do it anyway, wouldn't that be deceiving?

Um... no. Got a dictionary?

Obviously not. :-)

"Disobey?" "not listen to"

Again, according to McClelland, the crew's interpretation is that the requirement of the pitcher to pitch to the current batter comes into play when the manager ignores the warning. They did not believe the manager ignored a proper warning. Thus they did not require Broxton to pitch.

And again, you may disagree with their interpretation..their supervisor did...however they continue to maintain their interpretationis correct.

They knew the rule. Once again, you may disagree with their interpretation of enforcement for that situation, but they knew the rule and chose that enforcement for that situation.

I have not heard that they said that. if they did, that's even worse. It does not make any sense at all that whether the manager ignores the warning or not would have any effect on which pitcher is required to pitch. If they really said that - I seriously question their abilities to digest the rules. That's not what the rule says, nor could it be stretched to mean what you say they said. I don't buy it.

From 8.06 Comment:

In a case where a manager has made his first trip to the mound and then returns the second time to the mound in the same inning with the same pitcher in the game and the same batter at bat, after being warned by the umpire that he cannot return to the mound, the manager shall be removed from the game and the pitcher required to pitch to the batter until he is retired or gets on base.

I'm pretty sure that there's something in MLBUM/PBUC/NAPBL/JR/Evans that says that if, for some reason, the manager isn't warned that he isn't ejected / removed, but that the penalty still applies to the pitcher (pitch to the current batter and then be removed).

Not in JEA, but could be elsewhere.

My only intent is to illustrate thre rule as written. In the MLB release, McClelland states this is the first time in his career this rule has come up in one of his games, and with a call up at the plate at that. I think remembering the rule as written and taking the time to attempt to enforce it fairly deserves more credit that what some here have posted, especially those who themselves do not know how the rule is worded.

I note that after taking the time to talk with the supervisor, McClelland still believed they enforced it properly as do several other MLB umpires.

bob,

It's the MLBUM:

JM

What happens if the pitcher who has to stay in the game decides to rant and rave at the umpire and gets ejected. Does he still have to pitch to next batter?

Day game or night game?

He won't get ejected until ball four on that batter.

Mr. Johnson isn't a fill-in... he's a full-time ML umpire - hired at the beginning of this season.

At the beginning of the season, MLB announced that three AAA umpires would be promoted to full time MLB positions to replace retiring umpires and that the fourth, Adrian, was replacing an umpire who was taking a year's leave due to an inury.

It was acknowledged that the umpire on leave would not be returning and that Adrian would remain in his spot after his official retirement, however, that retirement would not officially take effect until the end of the season.

Has this changed?

So we're supposed to believe that the intent of this rule was that if a manager visited a pitcher, requiring to finish the current batter, and then changed his mind, all he had to do was go out there again? Um ... I think that's absurd and these guys are just CYA.

Well...not according to this article.
Four new umpires appointed; four new crew chiefs named | MLB.com: Official Info

It was my understanding that Chuck Meriwether's (on the DL) spot would be filled by a AAA fill-in and another appointment would be made at the beginning of next season.

Maybe not; however, according to that press release, Johnson is on the full-time staff.