Lets see how MLB handles this one....

[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.

[Tim C]

Thanks MrUmpire, we see exactly the same thing.

T

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Thanks MrUmpire, we see exactly the same thing.

T

Yup, same thing.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Thanks MrUmpire, we see exactly the same thing.

T

Likewise

[treydawgmt]

I see the same thing with his foot on the bag, and then not when he has the ball. The announcers agree eventually too.

[RadioBlue]

I see the ball going into the glove when his foot is on the bag, but by the time the ball is IN the glove, the foot is off the bag.

[ASA/NYSSOBLUE]

Two games for Theriot, plus a fine:

Ryan Theriot receives two-game suspension | MLB.com: News

Meh

[Tim C]

I look at umpiring as equal parts art and science.

Not unlike the laws of our land sometimes "stuff" is decided by tradition and common sense. Kingfield explained it very well in "The Paper Chase."

If we call games and only consider the written word we would be considered, at best, an overly officious oaf.

While I can respect the "high road" as taken by Mike Strybel it is altruistic in what has become a game based more on tradition.

"Old hides", such as myself, are seeing a game (and a way of officiating) that is changing to fit modern times and it drives us crazy. We hold onto traditions because that is where our comfort lies.

The science of umpiring comes from knowing all the rules and mechanics so they become second nature. The art comes from knowing where to draw lines (no NOT those lines) and take a written rule and understand what it really means to the game.

As umpires we have one basic responsabilty: make sure that there is a level playing field.

Even Mike would agree that we, as baseball umpires, are not robots (leave that to the softball side). Every umpire will have his own strike zone -- not to appease ANYONE -- just because we are all different.

While it would be impossible for anyone to convince me to call a strike on a pitch that passes through the zone but kicks up dust as caught I have learned that things such as the neighborhood play have probably passed to the grave.

As a retired umpire I look at things with a little different tint than when I worked. While I hate the direction of umpiring at the highest level I think that umpiring at our level (high school and college) is better than ever.

T

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by Tim C

I look at umpiring as equal parts art and science.

Not unlike the laws of our land sometimes "stuff" is decided by tradition and common sense. Kingfield explained it very well in "The Paper Chase."

If we call games and only consider the written word we would be considered, at best, an overly officious oaf.

While I can respect the "high road" as taken by Mike Strybel it is altruistic in what has become a game based more on tradition.

"Old hides", such as myself, are seeing a game (and a way of officiating) that is changing to fit modern times and it drives us crazy. We hold onto traditions because that is where our comfort lies.

The science of umpiring comes from knowing all the rules and mechanics so they become second nature. The art comes from knowing where to draw lines (no NOT those lines) and take a written rule and understand what it really means to the game.

As umpires we have one basic responsabilty: make sure that there is a level playing field.

Even Mike would agree that we, as baseball umpires, are not robots (leave that to the softball side). Every umpire will have his own strike zone -- not to appease ANYONE -- just because we are all different.

While it would be impossible for anyone to convince me to call a strike on a pitch that passes through the zone but kicks up dust as caught I have learned that things such as the neighborhood play have probably passed to the grave.

As a retired umpire I look at things with a little different tint than when I worked. While I hate the direction of umpiring at the highest level I think that umpiring at our level (high school and college) is better than ever.

T

Tim, this is not about altruism. MLB, the NCAA and Fed have all taken major steps to change the way that the game is umpired. A long time ago, I remember reading about a plan to get the call right. The old guard screamed to high heaven that they would not change the way they worked. Some claimed that messing with tradition was sacreligious. Others wrung their hands over any attempt to step on their authority. The anti-get the call right crowd figured they would keep on keeping on. How'd that work out?

Umpiring has evolved. We just saw an NCAA tournament where the committee wanted the games called according to the words in the rule book. Yes, there are inconsistencies in the book and common sense sometimes helps amateur umpires survive. Sticking with what is in the book is always a good shield though. As stated prior, I respect that some umpires have to appease assignors, some coaches and even partners with expected calls. I'm just happy to see that the best in the business are abandoning that effort. Try smiling, sighing is too much work on a hot day (100 here).