The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 20, 2010, 11:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 6
Double play?

Anyone see this? If the runner went to second because of the original 'no catch' call, and would have returned to first had it initially been called correctly, shouldn't you allow him to go back to first when you correct the 'catch' call?

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | OAK@MIN: Gardenhire ejected for disputing double play - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 07:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 1,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeremyGrey View Post
Anyone see this? If the runner went to second because of the original 'no catch' call, and would have returned to first had it initially been called correctly, shouldn't you allow him to go back to first when you correct the 'catch' call?

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | OAK@MIN: Gardenhire ejected for disputing double play - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia
The video doesn't show any call. U3 went out on it but that's all you can see. My guess is U3 called a catch (I thought it was a voluntary release) and the runner only saw the ball on the ground and took off for 2nd (oops).

Had the initial call been no-catch and subsequently changed, I am certain R1 would have been returned to 1st.

Last edited by dash_riprock; Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 07:04am.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 09:26am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
I didn't see the game, and you're right the replay does not show what is important (the umpire's initial ruling), but some people at the game say the umpire signaled "no catch" (which was Gardenhire's argument). OTOH, what fan watches the umpires, so I suspect that is something repeated instead of something actually seen...
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 09:39am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by dash_riprock View Post
The video doesn't show any call. U3 went out on it but that's all you can see. My guess is U3 called a catch (I thought it was a voluntary release) and the runner only saw the ball on the ground and took off for 2nd (oops).

Had the initial call been no-catch and subsequently changed, I am certain R1 would have been returned to 1st.
If U3 ruled it a catch, it raises a few questions:

1. First and foremost, why did U2 signal the runner safe at second? This fact alone leads me to conclude U3 ruled it a no-catch.


2. Why did Gardenhire keep making a "safe" motion, as if to indicate that's what U3 did? (Circumstantial to be sure, but persuasive when combined with the other observations.)

3. Why did the MLB Ejections site say both runners were originally called safe?

4. And not that the announcers are geniuses, but their initial call of the action was that it was dropped. Even the dopey announcers will usually notice if the umpire calls the batter out on a catch.

5. And now we hear some people at the game said it was ruled no-catch.

That's enough for me to conclude U3 ruled "no catch."
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 01:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by StLouBlue View Post
1. First and foremost, why did U2 signal the runner safe at second?
My guess is that he wasn't responsible for seeing if he tagged up.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 06:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by StLouBlue View Post
If U3 ruled it a catch, it raises a few questions:


3. Why did the MLB Ejections site say both runners were originally called safe?
The captions at MLB ejections are often erroneous and/or ridiculous. I've been told that they are sometimes just taken from statements made by the announcers.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 08:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by StLouBlue View Post
If U3 ruled it a catch, it raises a few questions:

1. First and foremost, why did U2 signal the runner safe at second? This fact alone leads me to conclude U3 ruled it a no-catch.
Possibly it was because the defense had not made an unmistakeble appeal yet. So, he was just ruling on the attempt to retire a baserunner.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 08:33pm
Stop staring at me swan.
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,974
search obstruction on MLB.com videos once...then search interference. nothing further your honor
__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 09:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Upper Midwest
Posts: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
Possibly it was because the defense had not made an unmistakeble appeal yet. So, he was just ruling on the attempt to retire a baserunner.
Looked pretty unmistakeable to me. He was standing on the bag for a few seconds and the tag was applied with the fielder looking at the umpire. Can't tell what was said, though.
__________________
"I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...and then I always get woken up to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?"
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 21, 2010, 09:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 6
Well, now I've read that U3 may have called catch immediately followed by the transfer mechanic which must have been misinterpreted by R1 (and apparently U2 and everyone else) as a safe/no catch mechanic. That appears to be what Gardenhire is arguing in the video, giving both mechanics together illustrating how similar they are and the confusion. So, I guess the right call might have been made initially, but it doesn't appear to have been clear to anyone besides the guy who made it.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 22, 2010, 08:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeremyGrey View Post
Well, now I've read that U3 may have called catch immediately followed by the transfer mechanic which must have been misinterpreted by R1 (and apparently U2 and everyone else) as a safe/no catch mechanic.
At a recent clinic, the instructors made a point to instruct us to do the "on the transfer" mechanic with your arm going upward, not outward.

As they explained it, especially with their back turned, it does look like a half-assed safe mechanic. Doing it upward, it looks like what it is, whether their back is turned or not.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 22, 2010, 09:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt View Post
Looked pretty unmistakeable to me. He was standing on the bag for a few seconds and the tag was applied with the fielder looking at the umpire. Can't tell what was said, though.
Could be. I only saw the play once on some highlight. I was just speculating as to possibilities.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 22, 2010, 12:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Racine, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,081
Wow...you can argue that the ball fell out before the fielder reached in his glove...make the fielder complete the play fully.
__________________
Every game is a big game
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 22, 2010, 12:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodwillRef View Post
Wow...you can argue that the ball fell out before the fielder reached in his glove...make the fielder complete the play fully.
The glove was closed on the ball. He opened the glove to make it possible to reach in to get the ball.
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 22, 2010, 01:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Racine, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives View Post
The glove was closed on the ball. He opened the glove to make it possible to reach in to get the ball.
I agree but I can see where the Twins manager had an argument.
__________________
Every game is a big game
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Double Play Mass Ump Softball 17 Wed Oct 28, 2009 02:42pm
Double Play or Not? mmtech Baseball 105 Mon Jul 06, 2009 03:38pm
Double play at first mydingding77 Softball 15 Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:49am
double play...or is it?? soonerfan Baseball 5 Tue Jun 24, 2003 02:56pm
Double play Whowefoolin Baseball 9 Wed Jul 25, 2001 12:37pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:35am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1