MLB play - could it be different in softball?

[Tru_in_Blu]

Saw a video of this play described below - it's on most of the baseball sports sites.

Obviously, we don't use replay in softball, but say an umpire saw something clearly in the same situation, could there have been a different outcome?

================================================== ======

OAKLAND -- Another wrinkle was added to Major League Baseball's instant replay system following a series of bizarre events during Thursday night's game between the A's and Blue Jays.

One missed call at first base set off a chain reaction that led to confusion in both dugouts. Before it was all said and done, Blue Jays manager John Gibbons challenged that his own player should have been called out, a call was overturned, a run scored and the A's tried to play under protest.

All in all it was a strange night at O.co Coliseum and the play in question likely will be debated in the coming days as MLB looks to perfect the system it implemented prior to the 2014 seaon.

"Replay's a new dimension to this game and there's going to be quirks and funny plays like this that happen," crew chief umpire Bill Miller told a pool reporter. "Unfortunately it happened to us."

The incident happened in the top of the second inning with the bases loaded and one out. Blue Jays outfielder Anthony Gose hit a sharp grounder to first base. Nate Freiman fielded the ball cleanly and attempted to make a tag on baserunner Munenori Kawasaki before throwing home.

First-base umpire Vic Carapazza ruled that Kawasaki avoided the tag and immediately made the safe sign. That meant the force play at home was still in order and catcher Stephen Vogt recorded the out when he caught the ball while stepping on the plate.

Gibbons then came out of his dugout and took the unorthodox approach of suggesting that Kawasaki should have been ruled out. He challenged, and when the play went to a review, it was determined that Kawasaki had been tagged.

That prompted the umpires to overturn the ruling on the field. Kawasaki was called out and as a result, Edwin Encarnacion was ruled safe at home because the force play was no longer in effect.

"When replay came back, our hands are tied," Miller said. "There's only so much we can do. We can't put runners back ... We have to go with what happened on the field, and what happened on the field was the guy tagged home plate but he did not tag the runner. Unfortunately that was in direct relation to the call on the field at first base, and that's something we just can't explain."

When the Blue Jays were credited with a run, A's manager Bob Melvin tried to play the game under protest. His argument was that the rules were not being correctly interpreted and that it should be up to the umpire's discretion whether Encarnacion was called safe at home.

In this particular case, that would have resulted in Encarnacion being called out because he was still at least several feet from home plate when the throw arrived. The call didn't end up having an impact in the game because Oakland went on to win 4-1, but afterwards Melvin was still scratching his head.

"That's probably the first time that's happened in that fashion," Melvin said. "My understanding now is you can't protest anything that has to do with replay, so I don't know that it was a legitimate protest or not. And you're going to come up with plays like that over the course of the season based on replay being brand new, and you're gonna find some ones that are some tweeners. They did the best they could with it."

[IRISHMAFIA]

To answer your question, no.

There is no question, it is a force out. Then again, I'm not sure what you believe the umpire would have clearly saw

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

To answer your question, no.

There is no question, it is a force out. Then again, I'm not sure what you believe the umpire would have clearly saw

Really? This isn't a situation where an umpire's reversal of a decision put the defense in jeopardy? As to what the other umpire would see it would be the tag, but I can't imagine any scenario where that's realistic. Anybody?

[Dakota]

This is exactly the type of situation that many of the critics brought up before MLB expanded their replay. MLB's replay has to be the worst implemented in all of professional sports, with the most screwed up rollout.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by youngump

...As to what the other umpire would see it would be the tag, but I can't imagine any scenario where that's realistic. Anybody?

Me, either.

[bigsig]

I had a different situation with similar results a few years ago in a Varsity game. I was BU. 2 outs, no runners. Line drive hit to F3 who caught it on one hop. PU immediately called it a catch for 3rd out. BR stopped running, F3 just started to run off the field without touching 1B. OC asked PU to get help. He came to me and asked if I had a catch. I told him the ball had been clearly caught on a hop. PU asked what should we do? We decided to stick with the original call and call it a catch and 3rd out. I don't know if that was correct or not but didn't know how to fix it.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bigsig

I had a different situation with similar results a few years ago in a Varsity game. I was BU. 2 outs, no runners. Line drive hit to F3 who caught it on one hop. PU immediately called it a catch for 3rd out. BR stopped running, F3 just started to run off the field without touching 1B. OC asked PU to get help. He came to me and asked if I had a catch. I told him the ball had been clearly caught on a hop. PU asked what should we do? We decided to stick with the original call and call it a catch and 3rd out. I don't know if that was correct or not but didn't know how to fix it.

The way to "fix" this is to determine (as well as you could) what would most likely have happened had the call been correct immediately. In this case, it seems to me the most likely outcome if PU immediately ruled no catch, would be for F3 to simply make the easy play at first. Same result.

In the OP, if it happened in softball (or in baseball without replay), and we changed our call at first, the most likely outcome (had the call at 1st been made accurately and immediately) would be for the play at home to have been a tag. Had F2 known a tag was necessary, there was plenty of time for F2 to have executed that tag. I now have 2 outs on this play.

[Andy]

I have a hard time awarding two outs on the play based on the replay reversal.

I can see reversing the safe call and declaring the runner from first (R3 in softball nomenclature) out. Yes, it is likely that F2 would have made a tag if he had realized he needed to, but it is also likely that R1 could have stopped and attempted to retreat to third since he is not now forced.

My opinion....declare R3 out, return R1 and R2 to third and second respectively, award BR first.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Andy

but it is also likely that R1 could have stopped and attempted to retreat to third since he is not now forced.

And at any decent level of ball, they're almost definitely going to get that out too.

[bsnalex]

MLB should have, along with instant replay, implemented a policy dictating replay may NOT be used to argue your own player should have been called out--lest you end up with clusterf*cks like this.

The umpires' hands are tied, aren't they?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by bsnalex

MLB should have, along with instant replay, implemented a policy dictating replay may NOT be used to argue your own player should have been called out--lest you end up with clusterf*cks like this.

The umpires' hands are tied, aren't they?

I disagree. It is the "play" that is reviewed and the manner in which it is changed should be irrelevant. The idea of "replay" is to get it right, not offer an advantage or disadvantage to either team.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

Really? This isn't a situation where an umpire's reversal of a decision put the defense in jeopardy? As to what the other umpire would see it would be the tag, but I can't imagine any scenario where that's realistic. Anybody?

Really! Where in the OP does it note as to what the "other" umpire may or may not have seen?

BTW, in the OP in a softball game, which umpire is going to see anything different from their position?

Here is the play

Is it a tag, could be. Like U1's view, the replay call is based on a two dimensional view and only the runner is the only one who knows if the tag is made.

The talking heads talk about a base path violation, but I would disagree with that as at the time of the attempted tag, the runner did not venture more than 3' out of the path he established when trying to avoid an INT call which is perfectly legal.

U2 had no view of the attempted tag as the runner's body was between Miller and the tag.

You might also notice that the runner never hesitated in continuing to 2B. Many, if not most, tagged runners almost immediately begin to check-up.

I'm surprised a judgment call like this is permitted to be reviewed, but it appears the crew chief actually suggested going to the review.

Personally, I don't think the catcher would have made an attempt to make a tag regardless, he was going for a force and I doubt he made the adjustment from one set-up to another in the less than one second. The catcher came out and immediately set up with his back to the runner.

But if you want to get back to the possible jeopardy, the automatic reaction would be to call the runner out, return runners and award BR first base.

Here is my issue: If you can use the replay to change the call, the crew should be able to WATCH (not listen to somebody in NY) to determine award/return/position of the runners.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Really! Where in the OP does it note as to what the "other" umpire may or may not have seen?

BTW, in the OP in a softball game, which umpire is going to see anything different from their position?

Here is the play

Is it a tag, could be. Like U1's view, the replay call is based on a two dimensional view and only the runner is the only one who knows if the tag is made.

The talking heads talk about a base path violation, but I would disagree with that as at the time of the attempted tag, the runner did not venture more than 3' out of the path he established when trying to avoid an INT call which is perfectly legal.

U2 had no view of the attempted tag as the runner's body was between Miller and the tag.

You might also notice that the runner never hesitated in continuing to 2B. Many, if not most, tagged runners almost immediately begin to check-up.

I'm surprised a judgment call like this is permitted to be reviewed, but it appears the crew chief actually suggested going to the review.

Personally, I don't think the catcher would have made an attempt to make a tag regardless, he was going for a force and I doubt he made the adjustment from one set-up to another in the less than one second. The catcher came out and immediately set up with his back to the runner.

But if you want to get back to the possible jeopardy, the automatic reaction would be to call the runner out, return runners and award BR first base.

Here is my issue: If you can use the replay to change the call, the crew should be able to WATCH (not listen to somebody in NY) to determine award/return/position of the runners.

As to the baseball stuff: yes it's a tag. You're the first person discussing it I've heard suggest that replay isn't conclusive.
Most reviews are whether tags were made or not or if they were in time so I'm not sure where you're going with that.

As to the softball stuff: you've given me an idea for a semi-realistic way this could happen. Here's the play. 3-ump game, bases loaded and on the hit toward first U3 breaks toward second and gets a fair angle on the base path [because he's confused]. There is no tag on this play because the runner at first dodges out of the base path to avoid it. U1 is so focused on seeing if the tag is made that he doesn't think about the runners deviation. U3 doesn't call it because it's right in front of U1. F3 fires home to F2 who has plenty of time to tag the runner but doesn't because she believes it's a force. (I realize that isn't the MLB play as I'm not sure F2 had time for the tag and this runner wasn't out of the basepath.) Now, after play the OC comes out and asks the U1 to ask for help on whether his runner left the basepath on the grounds that if she did his runner at home would be safe.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

As to the baseball stuff: yes it's a tag. You're the first person discussing it I've heard suggest that replay isn't conclusive.

Unless you have a three-dimensional view, you don't know it is a tag for sure, even from the replay. Sure, it looked like it could be, but neither you, me, the umpire or camera really knows for sure.

I find it hard to believe you have never seen a player reach out and it looked like a tag from your angle, but it was still questioned. Happens more often than you might think, but the umpire must make a judgment call based on the information available.

Most reviews are whether tags were made or not or if they were in time so I'm not sure where you're going with that.

Going with what, the fact that I'm not a fan of a review of a judgment call? And, to be real, to me it seems the baseball review seems to make the call, not provide more information as done in other sports

[AtlUmpSteve]

As long as all of this is opinion and speculation, here's my .02.

I believe I see a tag; and I think U2 saw it clearly enough. He asked for the review to dump this stinking sack on someone else. I also think it is clear enough for the review official to rule according (although I also agree with my good friend Irish that there are many times the angle is deceiving, but I believe I see the tag bounce back off the runner's butt).

The runner was never out of the established base path in attempting to avoid the fielder fielding the batted ball; red herring. Ignore all related to that argument.

Now, if you look again, the safe signal by U1 starts AFTER F3 throws the ball. There is NO WAY F2 saw the "safe", and no way jeopardy was created by the "safe" or reversal of the "safe". He saw his F3 apparently tag R3, but made no effort to tag R1, even though it looks like he had enough time. I am convinced he simply screwed the pooch and didn't realize there would be no force; or wasn't watching what F3 did until he threw the ball, simply assuming F3 would take the force at home on the play.

And F3 screwed the pooch even worse; he NEVER saw the "safe" behind him, if he KNOWS he made the tag, he's just steps away from the easier step on first than throwing home. He's the one defensive player that HAS TO KNOW there was no force at home anymore, so why throw there?

I think this was the correct ruling in this play; and the one that I think I would reason out, NOT put the runners back if/when getting together (the most a softball crew would have) put R1 out on reversal. It is the outcome I would have expected, based on what I see in the replay, if U1 signaled an out immediately; so no reason for the umpire crew to change that.