Jim Palmer trying to match Tim McCarver

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

This is incorrect. You can be certain of what you saw and still have seen it incorrectly. There's no law of the universe that says we always see things the way the actually happen.

And at any rate, I think he was safe.

1) He was obviously not safe. If you think so in spite of video evidence, I don't think we can help you here.

2) You're missing the point. You don't overturn a call because you THINK it was wrong - you can only tell your partner he missed a pulled foot if you KNOW it. If you can be certain of something that didn't happen, again, I question whether you should be out there at all. If you are not POSITIVE, you don't change the call.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

1) He was obviously not safe. If you think so in spite of video evidence, I don't think we can help you here.

2) You're missing the point. You don't overturn a call because you THINK it was wrong - you can only tell your partner he missed a pulled foot if you KNOW it. If you can be certain of something that didn't happen, again, I question whether you should be out there at all. If you are not POSITIVE, you don't change the call.

1) I can't tell for certain when he gloves the ball, only when it disappears from view. It disappears from view as he foot leaves the bag. Therefore the runner should be safe. Your mileage obviously varies, but that's just another example of why replay doesn't solve everything.

2) You're missing the point. Even assuming the PU was wrong, that doesn't mean he was uncertain. He can be positive and wrong. It's not mutually exclusive. The PU KNEW F3 pulled his foot, even if he was wrong about it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I agree with all of this. I just giving the PU the benefit that he was certain he was right.

I am sure he was certain too, that is why he came his partner. But I am not sure I would have been certain on a play like this. I am just saying we have to let partners live with their judgment. Only video in this case would change my mind and if that is the case I would rather stay out of the play. We cannot save every bad call.

Peace

[REFANDUMP]

It's debateable whether or not the first baseman had the bag or not. I don't think he did, but I wouldn't have overruled on that play unless I was 100% sure. My question is, why is the 1st base umpire so far out onto the infield to make this call. This is the same position Welke had earlier in the year when the pulled foot was missed in the Rockies game. I typically only venture 2 (maybe 3) steps onto the infield from the "A" position on a play at first, and I always have view of the bag on this type of play, and also a better look at a swipe tag. I think the base umpires positioning is the biggest problem here.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by REFANDUMP

It's debateable whether or not the first baseman had the bag or not. I don't think he did, but I wouldn't have overruled on that play unless I was 100% sure. My question is, why is the 1st base umpire so far out onto the infield to make this call. This is the same position Welke had earlier in the year when the pulled foot was missed in the Rockies game. I typically only venture 2 (maybe 3) steps onto the infield from the "A" position on a play at first, and I always have view of the bag on this type of play, and also a better look at a swipe tag. I think the base umpires positioning is the biggest problem here.

It is once again that stupid old mechanic if you ask me where for some reason umpires want to be what used to be called 90 degrees to the throw. I thought MLB or most of the umpires would get rid of that thinking years ago. Especially in a 4 man mechanic where there is no need to be there. I think it is possible he guessed and was screened from a better angle.

Peace

[JR12]

good point Rut..... One or two steps into fair territory is better and it's a luxury of a 3 or 4 man crew.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by REFANDUMP

It's debateable whether or not the first baseman had the bag or not. I don't think he did, but I wouldn't have overruled on that play unless I was 100% sure. My question is, why is the 1st base umpire so far out onto the infield to make this call. This is the same position Welke had earlier in the year when the pulled foot was missed in the Rockies game. I typically only venture 2 (maybe 3) steps onto the infield from the "A" position on a play at first, and I always have view of the bag on this type of play, and also a better look at a swipe tag. I think the base umpires positioning is the biggest problem here.

I have watched this video at least 10 times and I still don't think it was ever debatable. Out! Would I have said that if I was at HP, who knows? But I agree I probably wouldn't have overruled the play. Then again, if I was at HP!!!!!!! aint gong to happen..

I also agree he was not only too far away from the line, (more than 90, for Rut's sake), but locked hisself in by being on one knee.

[David B]

Originally Posted by jicecone

I have watched this video at least 10 times and I still don't think it was ever debatable. Out! Would I have said that if I was at HP, who knows? But I agree I probably wouldn't have overruled the play. Then again, if I was at HP!!!!!!! aint gong to happen..

I also agree he was not only too far away from the line, (more than 90, for Rut's sake), but locked hisself in by being on one knee.

I agree completely. The umpire had a horrible angle, went on one knee which is bad, but he probably got the call right.

I'm with you, if I'm PU, i ain't changing the call. In the article he said he saw daylight, but also from his angle PU couldn't see when the ball actually was in the glove so he was IMO "not certain" as he said of the play. Should have kept his mouth shut.

Thanks
David

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by jicecone

I have watched this video at least 10 times and I still don't think it was ever debatable. SAFE!

Fixed that for you.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Fixed that for you.

Do you write political ads for a living? You should, your very good at having no opinion but, trying to turn everyone else's around.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Do you write political ads for a living? You should, your very good at having no opinion but, trying to turn everyone else's around.

Really? My "opinion" wasn't obvious?

Here, I'll type slowly:


F3 was off the bag when he gloved the ball.

The runner was safe.

The umpires got the call right.

[briancurtin]

What if there was running lane interference?

*grabs popcorn*

[LMan]

Originally Posted by briancurtin

What if there was running lane interference?

*grabs popcorn*

That's U3's job.

[David B]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Really? My "opinion" wasn't obvious?

.

Obvious?

I don't think there is anything "obvious" on this play ...

Thanks
David

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Really? My "opinion" wasn't obvious?

Here, I'll type slowly:


F3 was off the bag when he gloved the ball.

The runner was safe.

The umpires got the call right.

In your opinion!