2013 World Series Thread

[PeteBooth]

Last night's play is a BIG reason why IR is needed. IR will actually speed up the game not take away from it.

You had John Farrell the Red Sox skipper come out and argue the call. Then the umpires huddled, call reversed and out comes Matheney and the umpires have to explain why they reversed the call. This took at least 10-15 minutes (maybe longer I didn't have a stop watch). If IR was used - 2 minutes tops as this was a no brainer of a call reversal.

Also, IMO if the game were played in St. Louis perhaps the call would not have been reversed. I doubt the Cardinal contingent would have replayed the play on the BIG screen like they did in Boston.

IMO, one of the umpires looked at or least glanced at the replay and saw that the call was blown BIG time.

IR is needed.


Pete Booth

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Last night's play is a BIG reason why IR is needed. IR will actually speed up the game not take away from it.

You had John Farrell the Red Sox skipper come out and argue the call. Then the umpires huddled, call reversed and out comes Matheney and the umpires have to explain why they reversed the call. This took at least 10-15 minutes (maybe longer I didn't have a stop watch). If IR was used - 2 minutes tops as this was a no brainer of a call reversal.

Also, IMO if the game were played in St. Louis perhaps the call would not have been reversed. I doubt the Cardinal contingent would have replayed the play on the BIG screen like they did in Boston.

IMO, one of the umpires looked at or least glanced at the replay and saw that the call was blown BIG time.

IR is needed.


Pete Booth

But will that play be subject to review? I don't think it should be. Replay should be used for points of fact - fair/foul, out/safe, catch/no catch. Yes, there is judgment in an out/safe, but at its heart it's still a point of fact. Release or not is pure judgement, like obstruction/interference, etc. The football equiv is using replay for catch/no catch but for pass interference.

I don't think it's the end of the world if this is open for review, but I don't think it's as clear cut a candidate as other calls. Still, if they must review it, I do agree that it could actually take less time than the argue/counterargue cycle.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Also, IMO if the game were played in St. Louis perhaps the call would not have been reversed. I doubt the Cardinal contingent would have replayed the play on the BIG screen like they did in Boston.

They DID?? I always thought that it was MLB policy that stadiums would not replay bangers, disputed calls, etc., on scoreboards. I know that's always been the case in every pro game I've attended, even when the call goes in favor of the home team.

Are you sure it was shown on the screen, Pete? I never saw Farrell point to the scoreboard during his argument with Demuth as if to say, "Dana, they just showed the play up there, and it's clear you missed it!"

[nopachunts]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I never saw Farrell point to the scoreboard during his argument with Demuth as if to say, "Dana, they just showed the play up there, and it's clear you missed it!"

That would have punched his ticket to the locker room. I know they gave him a long leash but not when you say something like that.

[ozzy6900]

Yes, they huddled, we need IR, yadda, yadda, yadda.

How about this, Get the damn call right to start with! The play was right in front of DeMuth and he simply blew the call, horribly.

I normally do not jump on the "big boys" but in this case, I really can't see why DeMuth thought that there was voluntary release. I tried to play it from every angle and I just cannot see it.

[PeteBooth]

Ozzy I'm starting to lean more on the "dark side" and maybe umpiring schools need to change with respect to getting help.

We were "brainwashed' or whatever you want to call it when it came to asking our partner for help. Except for once in a while, it was blasphamy to request help. I'm sure "back in the day" you worked with guys that would not even look at you meaning DON'T ASK ME.

Let's take last nights game. Why should we have to wait for DeMuth to request help. Football officials gather almost all the time and discuss the situation yet in baseball you have to wait for the umpire who made the call to request help on his own, which IMO is ludicrous. Suppose DeMuth actually refused to get help and stuck with the call. There is nothing no-one could do at that point no matter how blatent of a miss.

My brother-in-law is a FED football official and they work in crews and I think it's great. Nothing is perfect but as mentioned above I am now leaning more towards the "dark side" then I used to.

Perhaps with IR umpiring schools will now teach / instruct etc. officials to work as team rather then as individuals and then of coarse the rules need to be re-written which would not be a bad thing.

Pete Booth

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Ozzy I'm starting to lean more on the "dark side" and maybe umpiring schools need to change with respect to getting help.

We were "brainwashed' or whatever you want to call it when it came to asking our partner for help. Except for once in a while, it was blasphamy to request help. I'm sure "back in the day" you worked with guys that would not even look at you meaning DON'T ASK ME.

Let's take last nights game. Why should we have to wait for DeMuth to request help. Football officials gather almost all the time and discuss the situation yet in baseball you have to wait for the umpire who made the call to request help on his own, which IMO is ludicrous. Suppose DeMuth actually refused to get help and stuck with the call. There is nothing no-one could do at that point no matter how blatent of a miss.

My brother-in-law is a FED football official and they work in crews and I think it's great. Nothing is perfect but as mentioned above I am now leaning more towards the "dark side" then I used to.

Perhaps with IR umpiring schools will now teach / instruct etc. officials to work as team rather then as individuals and then of coarse the rules need to be re-written which would not be a bad thing.

Pete Booth

I hear you Pete. In our day, you put your butt on the line with each call and you better not ask the other guy to do your job. That's all changed now and it is because schools and clinics have stopped putting the onus of the call on the umpire and instead, put it on the "team". Back then, the onus was on youto get the call right or die with the call. The youngster of today don't understand this and argue with it because they were never taught this way (unless they were taught be me). They never experience being all alone out there with a bad call and no one to "help". That is what made us the officials we were because we didn't want to be hanging out to dry. Times change an sometimes not for the better.

My advice is simple; get the call right and you won't need "board meetings" and IR. You'll still have disagreements but the calls will be solid.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

I hear you Pete. In our day, you put your butt on the line with each call and you better not ask the other guy to do your job. That's all changed now and it is because schools and clinics have stopped putting the onus of the call on the umpire and instead, put it on the "team". Back then, the onus was on youto get the call right or die with the call. The youngster of today don't understand this and argue with it because they were never taught this way (unless they were taught be me). They never experience being all alone out there with a bad call and no one to "help". That is what made us the officials we were because we didn't want to be hanging out to dry. Times change an sometimes not for the better.

My advice is simple; get the call right and you won't need "board meetings" and IR. You'll still have disagreements but the calls will be solid.

I see a lot of umpires who don't work hard to get in the right position to make calls. The attitude for some of them is, "I have a plate umpire to help with the swipe tag or pulled foot -- I don't *need* to bust my a$$ and get across and get the best possible look." I simply call those guys "terrible umpires."

Times have changed -- I see the value in having the occasional conversation when things go sideways and there's indecision or additional information. But it shouldn't be the normal thing -- this particular situation is newsworthy because it's so damned rare.

[JRutledge]

I am glad they got the call right in the end, but that was one of the worst calls I have ever seen on an initical play. It was not close and I am glad the crew got together to get it right. It would not be hard to see how bad that call was and give help even when you have other things to watch.

This is why they need to do something about the MLB Umpiring program IMO to get better guys either working the playoffs or fire guys for these kinds of mistakes. If this was in NFL and and an official called a completed pass with simailar possession I am sure they would be downgraded even if they had replay to overturn this call.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am glad they got the call right in the end, but that was one of the worst calls I have ever seen on an initical play. It was not close and I am glad the crew got together to get it right. It would not be hard to see how bad that call was and give help even when you have other things to watch.

This is why they need to do something about the MLB Umpiring program IMO to get better guys either working the playoffs or fire guys for these kinds of mistakes. If this was in NFL and and an official called a completed pass with simailar possession I am sure they would be downgraded even if they had replay to overturn this call.

Peace

Dana DeMuth is one of the best umpires in baseball and has been in the league for a very long time. You using one missed call to question his selection or his career even is surprising coming from you.

Even the best miss calls. Very few get to do it on a stage like that, though.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

Dana DeMuth is one of the best umpires in baseball and has been in the league for a very long time. You using one missed call to question his selection or his career even is surprising coming from you.

Even the best miss calls. Very few get to do it on a stage like that, though.

Maybe that is the case, but that was horrible. And when you assign the World Series on a rotation of some kind and not necessarily the best guys each season, you get these kinds of situations. Sorry, but he might be very good but that was awful and I still think MLB handles their umpires worse then any other professional league. My comments are not about a single call, they are about the fact that these kinds of plays keep happening and these guys never can be fired or replaced no matter how fat, number of bad call or just inconsistency they are apart of during the season. I did not even need to see the replay to know that was very bad. It is one thing to miss a call that is a bang, bang call, but this was not even close. I expect that from a Little League or youth Umpire, not a MLB guy. I would not expect that from a small college guy in a 2 man game. And if the call was completely in the glove and then some issue of the ball coming out on the transfer took place, then I could also understand. But how do you not see the fielder catch the ball in this case? How?

Again, just an opinion. And I am a Cardinals fan too. And I was glad when that call was made right by the crew, even with the fact it hurt my team in the long run.

Peace

[Mountaincoach]

I guess the question becomes when does doing the right thing and getting the call right become more important than age-old precedents, traditions, don't want to step on somebody else's toes, which plays are reviewable and which are not, the fear that every single close play will become a huddle among umpires, it will slow the game down if we actually talk about it or (Heaven forbid) look at an instant replay, let's not embarrass our colleague, etc. etc.?

Let's face it. Names like Welke and Joyce have become household names for the wrong reasons. That umpire last night will probably not obtain such legendary status, because the situation was corrected before it got out of hand and the sports and news media got hold of it.

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Mountaincoach

, it will slow the game down if we actually talk about it or (Heaven forbid) look at an instant replay, let's not embarrass our colleague, etc. etc.?

IR will NOT slow the game down. IMO, it will speed up the game.

Let's take last night

First Farrell comes out and argues (3-5 minutes)

Now the umpires huddle (another 3-5 mintes)

Call reversed

Out comes Matheny (another 3-5 minutes)

If IR was used - 2 minutes tops as it was a no brainer.

Remember the skippers will get challenges just like football and they will not waste them on close plays. This was obvious

Forget about being traditional All sports now have replay and it's about time baseball joins the rank and file.

Pete Booth

[Jay R]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;908632]

IR will NOT slow the game down. IMO, it will speed up the game.

Let's take last night

First Farrell comes out and argues (3-5 minutes)

Now the umpires huddle (another 3-5 mintes)

Call reversed

Out comes Matheny (another 3-5 minutes)

If IR was used - 2 minutes tops as it was a no brainer.

Remember the skippers will get challenges just like football and they will not waste them on close plays. This was obvious

Forget about being traditional All sports now have replay and it's about time baseball joins the rank and file.

Pete Booth

I went back and watch the sequence on my PVR. From the time of the play to the next pitch was 4 minutes and 30 seconds exactly. Farrell arguing, the umpires huddling and Metheny arguing took 4 and a half minutes. I don't think instant replay will be much faster. It will result in more correct calls however and that's good.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Mountaincoach

I guess the question becomes when does doing the right thing and getting the call right become more important than age-old precedents, traditions, don't want to step on somebody else's toes, which plays are reviewable and which are not, the fear that every single close play will become a huddle among umpires, it will slow the game down if we actually talk about it or (Heaven forbid) look at an instant replay, let's not embarrass our colleague, etc. etc.?

Let's face it. Names like Welke and Joyce have become household names for the wrong reasons. That umpire last night will probably not obtain such legendary status, because the situation was corrected before it got out of hand and the sports and news media got hold of it.

And who made them household names? The press and the fans. You don't hear or read of other umpires bringing up their names and saying Joyce and Welke should go down in infamy. But you just might hear them say Demuth opened up a huge Pandora's Box.

Yeah, they are age-old traditions and precedents. But unless the union decided that those traditions must change for the 2013 World Series, why now? Why not at the start of the post-season? Or the start of the 2013 regular season?

Until real change is formally put into effect (e.g., the use of instant replay), you go with what is expected of your trade, no matter how old. If what Demuth did is considered correct by those who REALLY matter (and, to me, the press and fans don't matter here; it's the fellow umpires who matter), I would really like to know.

You ridicule how every close play will now get reviewed. Well, guess what? That is now the standard. Heaven help the umpire of this crew who doesn't give in to the whines of the manager. Heck, I'm guessing that the expectation is for umpires to come running in like their NFL and NBA counterparts to "help" their partner get the call right even before the manager steps out of the dugout.