Jim Palmer trying to match Tim McCarver
 

Listen to him rant. "how can another Umpire have a better look?"
"they can't eject Reynolds for throwing his glove" "I wonder if Buck will protest?" He's a Moron!!!
Reynolds, Showalter ejected from opener vs. Tigers | MLB.com: News

Buck Showalter made Earl Weaver proud!

Jim Palmer, "Let's at least get part of this right." :rolleyes:

Guys, it was a clear equipment malfunction! :rolleyes:

The way these guys were speaking, it's as if they've never seen a game of baseball, much less MLB, in their lives.

They were obviously both correctly dumped.

My question is why did the Home Plate Umpire say pulled foot if he was not certain.

No clue. He was wrong, though.

Where did he say he wasn't certain?

If he was not certain, he should have given no opinion.

Maybe he was certain?

This is where "get it right" gets it wrong. It was so close and I think the original call was correct. Oh well, welcome to MLB.

Peace

No, he guessed wrong. There is no way he clearly saw the foot off the bag before the ball was in the glove...because it did not happen.

Unless I clearly see that my partner is wrong, there is no way I am going to be a party to him changing his call.

In this case, there is no way that he clearly saw that he was wrong because he was not wrong.

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.

So now he guessed? Where do you get all of this information from?

It has got to be right if you give that kind of information. I know I had doubt when the call was made live. It cannot be kind of right or what you think it might have been, it must be RIGHT. We all have judgment calls and those judgment calls will be wrong. I think he was out but at first glance I thought the call was incorrect. Sometimes we just have to live with the close ones. I even think if replay was involved this would have stayed the same way.

Peace

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

Did anyone see a view from the CF camera that showed the ball in the glove? 'Cause I'm not sure F3 had complete control of the ball throughout the play.

Not that PU could have seen that either.

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

What if there was running lane interference?

*grabs popcorn*

That's U3's job.

Obvious? :D

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

Thanks
David

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

In your opinion!

Well, DUH.

My opinion is what you claimed was missing. Glad to see you figured it out this time.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :rolleyes:

PBUC is teaching their umpires on the AA level (the first time professional umpires work 3-man crews) that they want their umpires going at least to a 90-degree angle and, if time allows, a step beyond that point.

Not posting this to argue with you JRut...just putting "it out there" what is being taught to tomorrow's major league umpires the first time they are working on the professional level with more than a 2-umpire crew.

As an attorney, I have seen numerous law journal articles about eyewitness testimony. There are numerous studies addressing the reliability of eyewitness testimony. Without going into all the details, the general gist is that there are numerous studies that have shown that eyewitnesses can be "certain" as to what they saw, and as they are questioned more and more about what they saw their mind makes them "more certain" as to what they saw. The problem? In these studies what these eyewitnesses saw was also video recorded and what these eyewitnesses were "certain" they saw simply did not happen as shown on the video tape.

People can be "certain" as to what they saw all the time and the idea that they may be "guessing" never enters their mind. Yet, they are still wrong. I've even heard persons say "I don't care what the videotape shows, that's not what I saw!"

I am "certain" (LOL) that the home plate umpire was "certain" that F3 had pulled his foot. I'm sure as the argument escalated on the field, he became more and more certain in his mind as to what he saw. The only problem is that the video tape does not corroborate what PU was certain he saw.

Huh? F3 definitely came off the bag. PU definitely saw that. The question is whether he controlled the ball prior to that time.

You know dog gone well that he was not talking about the foot just coming off the bag, but coming off the bag without the ball and making the catch.

Either way it was not clear that he was right, it was very very close and that is not a play you come in and save IMO.

Peace

Exactly