Strange(False)Ending in MInnesota 3A semi-final

[Matt]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

I know one of the umpires in this video...when the storm calms a bit, I'll reach out to him and figure out what went down.

I'd hold off a long while. This is a sore subject right now.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Matt

I'd hold off a long while. This is a sore subject right now.

After watching this MLB video,

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | KC@STL: Matheny tossed as umps overturn triple play - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by Matt

I'd hold off a long while. This is a sore subject right now.

A long while...unless I can get the same info through another party...I'm not doing it to disparage anybody, but these guys are solid umpires (I know two of the three) it just doesn't make any sense that something like this would happened in one of their games. No sense at all.

We'll see.

[Steven Tyler]

I don't know why he thought he had to give the "no catch" signal. It was very obvious the ball was in the dirt. Overkill, IMO.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

I don't know why he thought he had to give the "no catch" signal. It was very obvious the ball was in the dirt. Overkill, IMO.

I agree, and it might have helped lead to the confusion that ensued. I only use the "no catch" when it's a trapped ball and not obvious to everyone that the ball is down.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I agree, and it might have helped lead to the confusion that ensued. I only use the "no catch" when it's a trapped ball and not obvious to everyone that the ball is down.

Disagree: it is not always obvious to EVERYONE that the catcher failed to catch the pitch legally. Often the BATTER does not know, which is crucial.

The standard mechanic, to signal and verbalize "no catch," is proper, even if it's obvious to everyone else. And even where the batter turns and looks, communicating your ruling clearly and decisively cannot hurt where players must make quick decisions.

[MD Longhorn]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see a tag. I see the catcher touch the batter with his bare hand, but it appears the ball is in the glove. Perhaps that is what was appealed.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see a tag. I see the catcher touch the batter with his bare hand, but it appears the ball is in the glove. Perhaps that is what was appealed.

Mike, watch it full screen, HD if you can. He tagged him with the ball.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The standard mechanic, to signal and verbalize "no catch," is proper, even if it's obvious to everyone else. And even where the batter turns and looks, communicating your ruling clearly and decisively cannot hurt where players must make quick decisions.

I agree.

This play is just...unfortunate.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Disagree: it is not always obvious to EVERYONE that the catcher failed to catch the pitch legally. Often the BATTER does not know, which is crucial.

The standard mechanic, to signal and verbalize "no catch," is proper, even if it's obvious to everyone else. And even where the batter turns and looks, communicating your ruling clearly and decisively cannot hurt where players must make quick decisions.

Exactly. This was supposed to be the big 'takeaway' from La Affaire Eddings.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Disagree: it is not always obvious to EVERYONE that the catcher failed to catch the pitch legally. Often the BATTER does not know, which is crucial.

The standard mechanic, to signal and verbalize "no catch," is proper, even if it's obvious to everyone else. And even where the batter turns and looks, communicating your ruling clearly and decisively cannot hurt where players must make quick decisions.

Why was the batter taking his eyes away from the ball? He missed the pitch, so why wasn't he tracking the pitch to the mitt/ground? Whenever I would strike out swinging, I checked to see if the catcher hung on to the ball.

[RKBUmp]

I have watched it numerous times on 24" monitor and I never can pick out the ball in his hand at the time of the tag. Later on in the video he does have the ball in his right hand when he is yelling at the umps and it is clearly visible then, but not when he tags the batter.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Why was the batter taking his eyes away from the ball? He missed the pitch, so why wasn't he tracking the pitch to the mitt/ground? Whenever I would strike out swinging, I checked to see if the catcher hung on to the ball.

You can't always see that. Swinging takes your head around away from the catch. By the time you look back, having it in the glove doesn't guarantee anything. If it's rolling around, of course you know, but not when it's in the glove.

And it doesn't matter whether F2 makes the catch, it matters whether PU rules that he did!