Humorous what's the count exchange

[teebob21]

Oh....no.....

I know a couple of these umpires personally. They are sure going to feel sheepish in postgame and/or when they watch the video. I also know the Houston coach is not always good at saying the right thing when her team's been slighted. She had to be PISSED.

[BoomerSooner]

I'm curious as to how this happened. I mean that from an analyzing the situation perspective, not a critical one. I've tried breaking it down, and I'm just confused.

The only thing I can think of is that everyone got distracted by the
action surrounding the stolen base and missed the strike on the swing. Personally, I feel like the swinging strikes are the easiest to remember, but if that were the case in this situation, then the "forgotten" call would be the last pitch, which should also be pretty easy to remember.

Like I said, I'm not trying to be critical or assign blame. Mistakes happen. I just like coming at things from an analytical standpoint to try to determine the cause and how to prevent it.

[Andy]

Here is the backstory from one of the umpires in the video.

First pitch, swinging strike. PU basically gets caught up in the runner stealing and does not see the swing and calls the pitch a ball. Next pitch is a called strike and the PU gives the count as 1-1....this is when the confusion starts.

Defensive coach questions the count, PU goes to U3, then to coach, offensive coach then comes out, finally all four umpires get together.

The first pitch was ruled a ball...by rule this is a call that can be appealed due to the swing, but the appeal must happen before the next pitch. It didn't. Once the next pitch was thrown, that first pitch is forever a ball. This is what the offensive coach was saying. Once all four umpires got together, they reached the same conclusion. By rule, there was nothing they could do about the first pitch, since another pitch had been thrown.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Andy

Here is the backstory from one of the umpires in the video.

First pitch, swinging strike. PU basically gets caught up in the runner stealing and does not see the swing and calls the pitch a ball. Next pitch is a called strike and the PU gives the count as 1-1....this is when the confusion starts.

Defensive coach questions the count, PU goes to U3, then to coach, offensive coach then comes out, finally all four umpires get together.

The first pitch was ruled a ball...by rule this is a call that can be appealed due to the swing, but the appeal must happen before the next pitch. It didn't. Once the next pitch was thrown, that first pitch is forever a ball. This is what the offensive coach was saying. Once all four umpires got together, they reached the same conclusion. By rule, there was nothing they could do about the first pitch, since another pitch had been thrown.

EXCEPT - only the PU thought is was a ball. No one else thought it was a ball. Look at the TV status display - it shows 0-1. The batter knew. The coach knew. The other umpires knew. There was no perceived need by anyone in the park to appeal so why would there be one? Sometimes you gotta fix things.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

EXCEPT - only the PU thought is was a ball. No one else thought it was a ball. Look at the TV status display - it shows 0-1. The batter knew. The coach knew. The other umpires knew. There was no perceived need by anyone in the park to appeal so why would there be one? Sometimes you gotta fix things.

The problem is that you can't fix it because it wasn't called in the first place. It was a mistake by the PU.

This is why PU's should always give a count after a non-standard play when the ball isn't put in play, such as a steal or passed ball. This not only allows the PU to make sure his/her fellow umpires are on the same page, but also allows the defense (or offense) to question the call on the pitch.

Once the second pitch was delivered, they couldn't go back and appeal the original call which was a ball despite the swing and miss on the pitch. Had he indicated a count of 1-0 after the steal, then I'm sure Houston's coach, the catcher or the pitcher would have questioned it and the rest of the exchange would be non-existent.

[chapmaja]

I see this did not hurt the crew too bad. The PU is working a Super this weekend as is the U3.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

I see this did not hurt the crew too bad. The PU is working a Super this weekend as is the U3.

Wonder if he carries an indicator on the bases? J/K

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

EXCEPT - only the PU thought is was a ball. No one else thought it was a ball. Look at the TV status display - it shows 0-1. The batter knew. The coach knew. The other umpires knew. There was no perceived need by anyone in the park to appeal so why would there be one? Sometimes you gotta fix things.

The problem is the rules don't allow the fixing of the thing that was screwed up in this sequence. For that first pitch to be changed to a strike it would have to be appealed prior to the release of the second pitch, which likely you said, there was no reason to because everyone in the park (I suspect except the batter who never saw the strike call on her swing and miss). This is why, IMHO, any time there is a steal, passed ball, illegal pitch or other out of the ordinary situation, the PU should give the count. Had he done this, Houston likely appeals the swing and miss and the count would be 0-1.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

The problem is the rules don't allow the fixing of the thing that was screwed up in this sequence. For that first pitch to be changed to a strike it would have to be appealed prior to the release of the second pitch, which likely you said, there was no reason to because everyone in the park (I suspect except the batter who never saw the strike call on her swing and miss). This is why, IMHO, any time there is a steal, passed ball, illegal pitch or other out of the ordinary situation, the PU should give the count. Had he done this, Houston likely appeals the swing and miss and the count would be 0-1.

Disagree. It was not a missed call or erroneous judgment call. Everyone in the place had the correct count prior to the second pitch except the PU. And how can anyone question an error if it was not apparent until after the following pitch? After all, the scoreboard had the strike and even the talking heads had it right.

The only thing needing a correction was the PU's indicator.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Disagree. It was not a missed call or erroneous judgment call. Everyone in the place had the correct count prior to the second pitch except the PU. And how can anyone question an error if it was not apparent until after the following pitch? After all, the scoreboard had the strike and even the talking heads had it right.

The only thing needing a correction was the PU's indicator.

The problem was that the strike WAS NOT CALLED on the first pitch. Therefore everyone in the park except the plate umpire was WRONG by having a 1 strike count. Since a strike was NEVER CALLED on the swing and miss it isn't a strike.

What part of this are you not understanding about this. If it is not called a strike it can't be a strike.

Yes, the PU screwed up by not calling it a strike, but it was never called a strike, so it can't be a strike, therefore when the first pitch was delivered the correct count was 1-0, even though everyone in the park, except the person who has to have the count right thought it should have been 0-1.

I completely understand that it should have been 0-1, but the RULE doesn't allow them to simply go back and say it was a swing and miss on the first pitch, so now it should be 0-2. The proper procedure was followed after the second pitch even if it did screw the defensive team.

You CAN NOT go back and change the call on the first pitch after the second pitch. This was what the Texas coach was arguing and why the count had to be 1-1. That is also why the U2 can be seen telling the Houston coach "That's the rule."

They got everything correct after missing the swing and miss on the first pitch. You guys may not agree, but the rule book is pretty clear about that.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

it would have to be appealed prior to the release of the second pitch, .

I repeat: There was no perceived need by anyone in the park to appeal so why would there be one?

Sometimes you have to fix things.

[bigdogtx]

I guess since he called a ball on first strike, the “official” book would have to have listed it that way. ? Even though the next pitch was thrown, couldn’t the official book be considered??

Shouldn’t the first base umpire have checked swing responsibility as well and have corrected the count at the umpire conference?

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

I repeat: There was no perceived need by anyone in the park to appeal so why would there be one?

Sometimes you have to fix things.

There are rules about fixing things and when this error (not calling the strike on the swing and miss) was discovered, it was after the second pitch was delivered therefore it could not be corrected.

If everyone in the ball park thought a runner was out, but the umpire called them safe are you going to change the call after a pitch was delivered to the next batter?

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Oh....no.....

I know a couple of these umpires personally. They are sure going to feel sheepish in postgame and/or when they watch the video. I also know the Houston coach is not always good at saying the right thing when her team's been slighted. She had to be PISSED.

I thought she handled it pretty well. I think the crew did a good job of explaining what happened and that they (the PU) had screwed up. You can see the U2 telling her "that's the rule" which has to apply to the fact she could not appeal the swing and miss after the second pitch was thrown. Coaches may not be happy, but they tend to at least understand when a crew screws up and admits they screwed up, which I really think is why she didn't put up more of a fuss than she did.