Miami / St.Louis.....not a force at third

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bluehair

F2 has ball in rt hand inside of glove and tags R = out.
F2 has ball in rt hand contacting outside of glove and tags R, I still have an out.

Wow... I sure hope not.

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Wow... I sure hope not.

When I'm taking a rules test or playing rules gotcha with internet umpires, no.
When I'm talking practicality and I see a two-handed tag like in this play, you betcha.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bluehair

When I'm taking a rules test or playing rules gotcha with internet umpires, no.
When I'm talking practicality and I see a two-handed tag like in this play, you betcha.

That's really too bad. Making an incorrect call on purpose solely because no one else would notice doesn't make it any less incorrect. If it's wrong on a rules test, it's wrong on the field.

[bluehair]

What would really be too bad would be the ire incurred by the umpire crew (from both teams) if my partner OOO'd a safe call on a two-handed tag like this. YMMV

[bob jenkins]

It sure looked like a tag in real life to me the first time I saw the video and from the PU's perspective it would be even more difficult to tell. Having watched the replay just this morning, from the one view that's about 3BX it looks like a tag.

I would give the benefit of the doubt to the defense here and rule tag.

[jicecone]

I agree and the only person besides the PU, closer to that tag, was Molina. His call was immediate and sellable. Having 1000 monitors, with instant replay is nice but, not one of those monitors or couch umpires have to make the instaneous decision like the PU.

[MD Longhorn]

I don't think anyone really has issue with the safe or out call, whether right or wrong on replay ... it's the calling of the out and also the allowing of the out at third that is really the issue.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I don't think anyone really has issue with the safe or out call, whether right or wrong on replay ... it's the calling of the out and also the allowing of the out at third that is really the issue.

The mechanics were poor, but the end result was correct, imo.

And, yes, I've used that explanation before to coaches. ;/

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The mechanics were poor, but the end result was correct, imo.

And, yes, I've used that explanation before to coaches. ;/

What is your justification for the out at third, Bob?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by bluehair

What would really be too bad would be the ire incurred by the umpire crew (from both teams) if my partner OOO'd a safe call on a two-handed tag like this. YMMV

First off, there is no such thing as a "two-handed tag" in any rule book that I know of.

By definition, a Tag only happens when the fielder tags the runner with his glove/mitt, and the ball is secure in that glove/mitt. Or it happens when the fielder tags the runner with the ball or bare hand, and the ball is secure in that bare hand.

What you call a "two-handed tag" is when the fielder tags the runner with his glove/mitt, and the ball is either secured in the glove/mitt or the bare hand inside the glove/mitt. By the definition of Tag, a tag with the glove/mitt while the ball is being held in the bare hand inside the glove/mitt would not meet the criterion of a legal tag. But since there is no way an umpire can actually see the disposition of the ball--Is it being held by the glove/mitt or by the hand?--during the moment of the tag, the fielder is given the benefit of the doubt.

What you feel is a two-handed tag is nothing more than touching a runner with an empty glove/mitt. No way that's a legal tag.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by jicecone

What is your justification for the out at third, Bob?

See post #29. One of those two things would (likely) have happened.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by Manny A

No way that's a legal tag.

Go to the video tape that shows 3BX coverage!!!!!

I don't think it totally supports your findings.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

See post #29. One of those two things would (likely) have happened.

I disagree with your tag-out/tag-out first option. We did have a tag-out at home. It was clearly signalled by the PU. F5 should have seen that, should have known that the force was off, and should have turned to tag R2. Why should he be given credit for an out at third when he had an unobstructed view of the PU's signal? It wasn't as if the PU came up late with the Out signal; he banged it as soon as he judged the tag was made.

Your second option of force-out/force-out might be viable if a legal tag never happened on the BR at home and one of the umpires could confidently state that during an umpire discussion. But there was nobody on that field that could have seen that as it played out and convince the PU that that happened.

Sure, it should have been an easy DP. But the way it played out, I think the correct result should have been BR out on the tag, and runner at third safe since the force was removed. No way R2 should be called out for abandonment for reacting to U3's erroneous call.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Go to the video tape that shows 3BX coverage!!!!!

I don't think it totally supports your findings.

I'm not debating the actual play. I'm commenting on bluehair's assertion that a legal tag can happen when the bare hand holds the ball outside of the glove/mitt as the fielder touches the runner with the empty glove/mitt.

Or are you suggesting that this PU actually saw that, and still ruled the out? I seriously doubt it.

[Altor]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Two options: Tag out, tag out (what would have happened had there been a tag at the plate and all knew it). Force out, out at first (what would have happened had there not been a tag and everyone knew it).

You can't "protect" R2 from the abandonment and not "protect" F5 from getting the tag out.

And, I agree that the mechanics could have been better.

I guess I don't understand the reasoning of the statement in bold. F5 is looking at the plate and should see PU signal the out. R2 would probably not be looking at the plate once the "fair" signal is given. U3 signals him out, which he would see.