3B Coach Interference Ends Game

[JRutledge]

If you touch the player you likely will get their attention. If there was contact this was a good call in my opinion. I do not have a dog in the fight, but can see how touching a player will assist them.

Peace

[BoomerSooner]

My opinion was that There wasn't any physical assistance. 3B ump came in pointing at the coach and made a pushing motion to explain the call. There certainly wasn't a push involved. The other issue is the Michael Young had already thrown on the breaks and to me it looked like the contact was merely a result of Young stopping and turning back to third combined with the coach putting his hand out cause he was about to get steamrolled.

That said those are all opinions biased by my love of the Rangers. What I think we could argue that is more facually based is the number of articles with quotes attributed to umps, coaches, players, etc that have said some version of "no contact at all, that's the rule". We all know that isn't the rule. If in the argument that followed the play any umpire said anything to the effect of "all that matters is contact", one could argue very strongly that an appeal is in order.

As a Rangers fan, would I love to see the game completed from that point? Sure I would. Knowing they're 8 games up, the cost of flying the team back to Minnesota for potentially 1 out, and the attention it would call to the umpires who bust their hump and have already taken a ton of flack this season, do I want an appeal? Absolutely not. But it does highlight the critical element of most appeals...if they had said judgement call and left it at that all is well. Explain something beyond that, you have to know the wording of the rule not just the intent.

[jkumpire]

Sorry, I believe it was a great call, as I stated before.

First, as I looked at the tape, the 3B umpire was looking at the play, how could he not make the call if he didn't see anything? You think he's making a call out of whole cloth here?

Second, in this case with all the yelling the 3B coach was doing to the runner, and the fact that it was still a wacker back at 3B, it seems rather obvious that even a small bit of contact would be helping the runner as per the rule. MLB guys get paid to make judgment calls and get them right; to me that is a great call by as great umpire.

Third, this is another proof that other than obvious misses like at the LLWS, replay is an awful idea; it only gives eyes a review of the play, not other things that give context to a judgment call like this.

[aceholleran]

I had no INT on this play.

Ace

[nine01c]

IMO, 3rd base coach backs away as the runner is approaching him. If there was contact (not obvious) it certainly did not assist the runner. The umpire is not looking at the coach, he is looking at the defensive player double-clutching and getting ready to throw the ball. His call was based on what he "saw" in his peripheral vision (his best guess of what hppened). If he really knows and believes there was an assist, good call. If he isn't sure or there really was not an assist, not a good call. I believe the latter applies.