Phillies protest IR ruling

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The ball seemed to be near the top of the wall, and any ball that a fan can interfere with might be a home run. Therefore, it's legitimate to use replay to determine whether it was a home run. I predict that the protest of the use of replay on this call will fail.

Moreover, based on the replay, it seems the crew got the call right. The fan reached over the field of play and touched the ball. That's spectator INT, and the crew can award outs and move runners at will. If the protest concerns the details of this call, it will fail on this account as well.

The details are unimportant -- judgment calls are never subject to protest.

It's whether West can use replay here or not.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

The details are unimportant -- judgment calls are never subject to protest.

It's whether West can use replay here or not.

Ball near the top of the wall - why not?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Ball near the top of the wall - why not?

Because the rule does not include this case. That's why not.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Because the rule does not include this case. That's why not.

Disagree. A ball near the yellow line might be a HR and so reviewable.

I believe that MLB declared that IR was used improperly in this case, but I don't see why.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Disagree. A ball near the yellow line might be a HR and so reviewable.

I believe that MLB declared that IR was used improperly in this case, but I don't see why.

Because it's their rule and they get to decide when it applies - we don't.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Disagree. A ball near the yellow line might be a HR and so reviewable.

I believe that MLB declared that IR was used improperly in this case, but I don't see why.

I guess I'm having trouble understanding why you (and only you, apparently) think this could have been a home run. Did you see the video?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I guess I'm having trouble understanding why you (and only you, apparently) think this could have been a home run. Did you see the video?

If the fan was behind the wall and hit the ball knocking it back in, we'd have a home run, no? So if you were 200 yards away and didn't have a good sense of whether the fielder reached into the stands or the fan reached into the field, you might need replay to determine if it was a home run. (And the replay was clear it was the latter but I gather nobody got that great a look at it live.)

[MD Longhorn]

The difference here is that it was not ruled a home run. The ball hit the glove, and was apparently ruled as such. And it was Florida's manager that came out initially. For some reason I'm thinking he's not coming out asking them to check and see if it was a home run. the rule doesn't say, as you state, they can check on any ball that's close to the yellow line.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by youngump

If the fan was behind the wall and hit the ball knocking it back in, we'd have a home run, no? So if you were 200 yards away and didn't have a good sense of whether the fielder reached into the stands or the fan reached into the field, you might need replay to determine if it was a home run. (And the replay was clear it was the latter but I gather nobody got that great a look at it live.)

200 yards? Joe West should've been no more than 200 *feet* from the ball. He was the U1 and it was his ball since there was a runner on first base. I'd love to see how far out he got on it. I already know the answer to that.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Disagree. A ball near the yellow line might be a HR and so reviewable.

I believe that MLB declared that IR was used improperly in this case, but I don't see why.

Yes, that is what the rule says. IR may be used to determine if the ball is a home run, not simply to say it isn't so. The MLB directive on that mechanic is crystal clear.

" Instant replay will apply only to home run calls-whether they are fair or foul, whether they have left the playing field, or whether they have been subject to fan interference. The decision to use instant replay will be made by the umpire crew chief, who also will make the determination as to whether or not a call should be reversed."

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

Yes, that is what the rule says. IR may be used to determine if the ball is a home run, not simply to say it isn't so. The MLB directive on that mechanic is crystal clear.

"Instant replay will apply only to home run calls-whether they are fair or foul, whether they have left the playing field, or whether they have been subject to fan interference. The decision to use instant replay will be made by the umpire crew chief, who also will make the determination as to whether or not a call should be reversed."

This "rule" (ie: guideline which does not appear in the rule book) has been regurgitated over and over again in discussions about this call.

But this is really just a cut & paste quote from a three year old MLB press release. We don't know the entire content of the material presented to the umpires or teams, how they have been instructed to interpret it or if the "official" guidelines are more in-depth than that.

Somehow, it just seems to me that an "official" league document covering such a highly controversial subject, where the outcome could have a profound effect on the game, might have something more to it than the two sentence blurb that keeps getting quoted.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by BretMan

This "rule" (ie: guideline which does not appear in the rule book) has been regurgitated over and over again in discussions about this call.

But this is really just a cut & paste quote from a three year old MLB press release. We don't know the entire content of the material presented to the umpires or teams, how they have been instructed to interpret it or if the "official" guidelines are more in-depth than that.

Somehow, it just seems to me that an "official" league document covering such a highly controversial subject, where the outcome could have a profound effect on the game, might have something more to it than the two sentence blurb that keeps getting quoted.

I used the word "directive". There are hundreds of them issued by MLB and rarely are they in the rule book. The mechanic for handling a need to employ Instant Replay does not need to be stated rule. Mechanics are not rules.