Lets see how MLB handles this one....

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

The 'expected call' fans will probably claim that this was a horrible call. Dinosaur baseball.

I don't think this fits the "expected call" classification at all.

[kylejt]

The "expected call" on the "neighborhood play" is one where the infielder just steps around the bag on a pivot to first. That was not the case here. He was pulled off by the throw, thus the need for a proper call.

[yawetag]

Cards fan here!

He was off the base. Good call.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by yawetag

Cards fan here!

He was off the base. Good call.

Ditto... make a better throw, Skip.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't think this fits the "expected call" classification at all.

Sure it does, that is why Theriot was upset. That is why Larussa jumped on the call postgame, saying he thought his team was robbed of what others get.

While the throw was high and out, he was still in the neighborhood and some dinosaurs think that it is acceptable to ring that up. Most 'neighborhood' plays have wide throws - either by design to give the receiver a better pivot angle or are simply missed throws. There are a few dozen examples of the Theriot play resulting in outs available in online archives. A few years ago, arrogance allowed these to be called outs. They were and are not.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

A few years ago, arrogance allowed these to be called outs. They were and are not.

Its obvious you didn't understand the alleged arrogance of yesterday, and still don't.

[lawump]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

A few years ago, arrogance allowed these to be called outs. They were and are not.

A few years ago professional umpires (including myself) were TAUGHT by their bosses (re: PBUC supervisors) to call the neighborhood play. Since I wanted (at that time) to advance "up the ladder," I did what I was instructed. I do not know how my doing what I was told equates to arrogance.

Even in those dark times full of umpiring arrogance , there was a subtle but understood difference between a middle infielder being "in the neighborhood" while turning a double play and the requirement placed on the middle infielder to hold the bag (like a first baseman) when the only play attempted by the defense was the attempted force at second base.

Since the advent of HD instant replay from 18 different freakin' angles, the "neighborhood" has gotten a lot smaller; the neighborhood's shrinkage has nothing to do with the elimination of purported umpiring arrogance.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by lawump

A few years ago professional umpires (including myself) were TAUGHT by their bosses (re: PBUC supervisors) to call the neighborhood play. Since I wanted (at that time) to advance "up the ladder," I did what I was instructed. I do not know how my doing what I was told equates to arrogance.

Even in those dark times full of umpiring arrogance , there was a subtle but understood difference between a middle infielder being "in the neighborhood" while turning a double play and the requirement placed on the middle infielder to hold the bag (like a first baseman) when the only play attempted by the defense was the attempted force at second base.

Since the advent of HD instant replay from 18 different freakin' angles, the "neighborhood" has gotten a lot smaller; the neighborhood's shrinkage has nothing to do with the elimination of purported umpiring arrogance.

Forgive Mike, he's just using this to climb back up on his soapbox.

I thought it was a great call, but what I don't understand is why players go nuclear over a single call. The play at the plate the other night where the catcher went nuts is a great example -- the catcher had no clue whether the tag beat the foot onto the plate and yet he still went nuts and got run (and the talking heads said the umpire had a quick trigger, even though it was clear this would be an ejection at any level of play).

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Forgive Mike, he's just using this to climb back up on his soapbox.

I thought it was a great call, but what I don't understand is why players go nuclear over a single call. The play at the plate the other night where the catcher went nuts is a great example -- the catcher had no clue whether the tag beat the foot onto the plate and yet he still went nuts and got run (and the talking heads said the umpire had a quick trigger, even though it was clear this would be an ejection at any level of play).

Rich, it is funny that you used that phrase. Being on a soapbox used to be a good thing, one was exercising his/her right to speak. Apparently, around here, there are some who believe you are only allowed to write "+1" in reference to their posts while others take pleasure in ridiculing anyone who takes on the status quo.

The arrogance involved in 'expected calls' is sad. The arrogance I spoke of is being defended as what was expected by the powers that be. Hoistory is filled with examples of those who did what they knew was wrong only to impress others. If you were taught to ignore the proper call, live the dream. As has been stated prior, professional umpires and many amateur umpires have adopted a different set of standards. Whether instant replay caused it or introspection, it doesn't matter. Umpires used to be able to m-therf-cker a player or coach, act as if they were too good to hustle, take the field out of shape and make calls that made players, fans and managament cringe in disbelief. Thank goodness that the arrogance they once displayed is giving way to an attempt to get the calls correct, even at the risk of ridicule. I'm glad to work with guys who put the game ahead of their careers. If some are upset at my use of 'arrogance' to describe making an improper call solely because it is expected, too bad. The exepected call legion is dwindling, thankfully.

[GerryB]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

Rich, it is funny that you used that phrase. Being on a soapbox used to be a good thing, one was exercising his/her right to speak. Apparently, around here, there are some who believe you are only allowed to write "+1" in reference to their posts while others take pleasure in ridiculing anyone who takes on the status quo.

The arrogance involved in 'expected calls' is sad. The arrogance I spoke of is being defended as what was expected by the powers that be. Hoistory is filled with examples of those who did what they knew was wrong only to impress others. If you were taught to ignore the proper call, live the dream. As has been stated prior, professional umpires and many amateur umpires have adopted a different set of standards. Whether instant replay caused it or introspection, it doesn't matter. Umpires used to be able to m-therf-cker a player or coach, act as if they were too good to hustle, take the field out of shape and make calls that made players, fans and managament cringe in disbelief. Thank goodness that the arrogance they once displayed is giving way to an attempt to get the calls correct, even at the risk of ridicule. I'm glad to work with guys who put the game ahead of their careers. If some are upset at my use of 'arrogance' to describe making an improper call solely because it is expected, too bad. The exepected call legion is dwindling, thankfully.

I don't know if I cringe more at the arrogance of this quote or the misspellings.
Actually, you've received a reasoned discourse on why some things in baseball came to be. You on the other hand insist on labels and talking down. Why advocate for players, fans and management as well? If the legion is dwindling it is not the "status quo" by the way.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by GerryB

I don't know if I cringe more at the arrogance of this quote or the misspellings.

Sorry, I typed my response on a DroidX while watching my son's football drills. It's nice to know that the spelling police are on patrol though.

Actually, you've received a reasoned discourse on why some things in baseball came to be.

No, I saw a couple people say that they were taught to ignore the rules and call what was expected in order to appease a few arrogant soles and improve their ratings.

You on the other hand insist on labels and talking down.

No, it always makes me smile when others think that being criticized for doing wrong is demeaning. I am not talking down to you unless you feel inferior. Anyone who has lived through pro school knows that criticism helps make you better. Thicker skin will serve you well too.

It is arrogant to do what you know is wrong, simply to improve your place in this world. An umpire is tasked with following the rules, not simply the ones that expedite their promotion. While PBUC advocated this a while ago, it is not done now and for good reason. If you cannot see that, I am truly sorry. It is not a superior stance, it is knowing what my job is - do my best to get the call correct.

Why advocate for players, fans and management as well? If the legion is dwindling it is not the "status quo" by the way.

I have suggested it before, try reading Linda McMeniman's 'From Inquiry to Argument'. Your attempt to mislead the board by misrepresenting what I wrote is contemptible. My comment about the status quo regarded the way this board often operates, not the dynamics of umpire development. Some here feel it necessary to ridicule anyone who deviates from ad populum tact. All I did was point out how professional umpiring no longer embraces 'expected calls' and that it is dinosaur officiating to continue to do so. Around this area, the better umpires emulate what the best in the business do currently. I prefer to work with guys who share the challenge of following the rules and calling what they see, not what helps get them a higher rating.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't think this fits the "expected call" classification at all.

+1

To get the expected call, you need to make the expected throw.

[Jay R]

Stop the video at 1:42 and you'll see Theriot foot is in contact with the bag.

Doesn't excuse his tirade.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Jay R

Stop the video at 1:42 and you'll see Theriot foot is in contact with the bag.

Doesn't excuse his tirade.

Before he has possession of the ball. Stop the video when it's clear he has possession of the ball and the foot is no longer in contact.

I think the call is outstanding, myself, but I never was fond of giving the pivot guy anything on a bad throw.

[greymule]

To me, this isn't a "neighborhood" play. When a fielder is pulled off the bag by a wide throw, how much he's pulled off is irrelevant.

I always considered the neighborhood play to be one in which the fielder simply makes the pivot with his foot close enough to the bag (perhaps behind it) that you can't quite be sure, or maybe he swipes his foot and well, did he get it or not? As long as he's not drawn off, you don't have to see a foot directly on the base to call the out.

I had a rhubarb a few years ago when F4 set up obviously straddling the bag, each foot on the ground at least 12 inches from the base. He simply received the ball from F6 and threw to 1B, without even a "swipe" of a foot toward the bag. I called the runner safe at 2B, and from the reaction you would have thought I murdered a child.

"Aw, come on! You gotta give me that one!" F4 readily admitted he wasn't touching the bag but claimed "that call is automatic." Oddly, it was F7 who ended up getting tossed.