Baseball: a rant, and a question.

It seems that everytime i go to a baseball game, i find something to complain about. Still love the game, though.

First, the rant.

So, i’m at the Orioles/Blue Jays game at Camden Yards yesterday. My girlfriend had scored a couple of good seats from someone at her work, $40 seats in an area known as the Field Box. We were in Section 58, and if you go here you can see where that is (click on the section and you’ll get a view of the diamond from the seats). As you can see, that section is just outside third base, and we were about 25 rows back.

Now, sitting in those seats, one gets a side-on view of the pitch. If the batter is right-handed, we are looking straight at his back; if he’s batting from the left, we are looking straight at his chest. So tell me, all you whining, moaning, arm-chair umpires in my section, how the fuck can you tell when it’s a strike and when it’s a ball?

We can, of course, see the height of the ball. But if the height is OK, there’s no fucking way you can tell, from 150 feet away and side-on, whether the ball painted the outside corner, or whether it was wide. Of course, we get a few hints from things such as the catcher’s position, and we can also infer some things from the batter’s actions. For example, if the batter suddenly rears backwards way from the plate, chances are that the ball was inside. But this happens rarely. And yet you parochial idiots spend the whole fucking afternoon complaining every time the umpire calls a ball on Oriole pitching, and every time he calls a strike on Toronto pitching.

Now, i’m not some impartial purist who goes only to see the best possible game and doesn’t care who wins. I cheer strongly for Orioles hits, and sigh deeply when they throw away yet another game. And i was as pissed as anyone with the blown call at first base that was a major factor in yesterday’s defeat. But give me a break. You lose all credibility when you just sit there all afternoon whining about almost every pitch.

That was a rather mild rant, i know, but such one-eyed, irrational fans give me the shits.

And now to my question:

As i mentioned above, a blown call at first base had a major effect on the game. It was tied at 3 in the top of the tenth, there were two Blue Jays out and no-one on base. All Baltimore needed was one more to get out of the inning. Batter grounds hard to short-stop, who makes a good snag and a looooong throw to first. The ball beats the runner by half a step (as replays conclusively prove), but the umpire calls the runner safe. Toronto goes on to score the two winning runs in that inning.

When the call is made, Orioles manager Mike Hargrove comes leaping out of the dugout and engages in a huge argument with the first-base umpire that gets him tossed from the game. The crowd is booing like crazy.

There was also another very close call at first a few innings earlier, in which Baltimore’s Jeff Conine was called out. The crowd booed that one also, but i thought the umpire made the right decision, and replays later proved this also.

Just about every play made during the whole afternoon was shown in replay on the big screen at the ground. But neither of these two controversial plays was shown in replay. Is this some sort of policy to prevent umpire abuse (or lynching :))? And does it only happen in Baltimore, or is it common practice throughout the major leagues?

It is common for the replay official not to show up the umpire so to speak. How would you like your work to be put on display for 40,000 people to judge? As far as booing the balls and strikes, that just seems to be the fans way of thinking they are influencing the game, hoping that subconsciously the umpire will make more favorable calls to be cheered by the crowd rather than jeered.

It is major league policy not to replay controversial calls. Has been for years.

Yep. And if violated the umpire can eject the scoreboard operator (I’ve seen it done) or order the big screen shut down for the remainder of the game.

Well, there you go. You learn something every day. I’ve been in the US three years now; another 20 or so and i’ll have a pretty good working knowledge of baseball’s ins and outs. :slight_smile:

Can i just say that, although i sort of understand the rationale behind it, i think that is one of the most ridiculous policies i’ve seen in a lifetime of watching sport on three continents? Tree Boy asks “How would you like your work to be put on display for 40,000 people to judge?” Well, that’s exactly what happens to every umpire, and every ballplayer for that matter, every time they take the field. Being judged by large numbers of people is an integral part of their job.

Ballplayers have to put up with being booed when they blow a play; why not umpires?

Is it hockey where they now have replay judges, and can hold off making the call until they check the replay ? That makes a whole lotta sense to me.

Even as a Jays fan (sorry, mhendo - but how could a Torontonian not be, with the way they’re hitting?) I think it makes much more sense to make the call as it happened, rather than as the umpire first saw it.

mhendo, loved your link – I got to sit in the cheap seats again like I did for a couple of seasons. (I’m English, spent some time in MD.)

What struck me then was not the level of partisanship and umpire-“hungry”-crowd-frenzy, but in fact, just the opposite. People we’re plied with alcohol and their emotions raised by triumphalist rock-riffs* that punctuated the plays.

Criminy, you should get to an English football (soccer) match some time. (Bring body armour and lucky rabbit’s foot.)
*they’re not still using that riff from Gary Glitter’s Rock ‘n’ Roll are they?

Partially because umpires very credibility in their job resides in the fact that they will make a call consistently regardless of team, situation, or fan uproar. If an umpire has called a couple of close, questionable calls against the home team and those plays are shown on DiamondVision, the fans will be even louder and angrier. The next time the ump has to make a quick call on a play, he doesn’t need to be thinking about what the play might look like to fans.

Hey, i actually have a real soft spot for the Jays. I was living in Vancouver when they won their first World Series, and celebrated their win against the evil Americans (:)) with the rest of Canada. I only really picked up the Orioles as “my” team when i moved to the US a few years ago.

On the issue of replay judges: i think that i actually prefer a system without replays, in many ways. I like the idea that the umpires are only human, like the players, and that they can sometimes make mistakes. As long as they do their best, and avoid being partial to any particular team, i’m willing to live with a few errors. I still think that it’s silly, however, not to allow these errors to be replayed on the big screen at the ground.

Your point about the lack of real crowd frenzy is exactly why i don’t understand the rule about not replaying controversial plays. Sure, the umpire’s going to get booed if he’s seen to be wrong, but i can’t imagine the crowd storming the field and getting physical. I know there have been a couple of incidents in the past year or so in which fans jumped the fence and assaulted umpires, but they seem to have been deranged individuals who would have done this no matter what.

I have indeed been to a few Premier League matches. I lived in England for a couple of years in the early nineties, and managed to catch games at Anfield, Old Trafford and Stamford Bridge. I knew about football’s reputation for violent crowds, but i never saw any trouble in Liverpool or Manchester, and only a few isolated idiots at the Chelsea games.

And, yes, Gary Glitter gets still gets dragged out on occasion, especially for home runs.

Well, if their credibility rests on being consistent in the face of fan uproar, then surely the best test of their credibility is to let the crowd see the replay and boo or cheer accordingly. If, as you suggest, the umpire should be able to do his job whatever the crowd reaction, what difference does the replay make? If the umpire caves in to crowd pressure, then surely that just shows that he’s not really good at his job.

Oh! I guess you all know that his glitter is um,… a little tarnished?

Hm, it’s an interesting point about consistency. Baseball in particular has a lot of calls that are up to the ump’s judgement - some have strike zones that are bigger/smaller/higher etc than others, and as long as the strike zone stays in the same place, regardless of who’s at bat, it’s good.

So if you showed the replay on the screen, of course the crowd would boo a strike that looked like a ball if the home team was batting, but would not notice that that same pitch was called the same way when the other team was up.

Still not convinced re: safe/out calls, though. There is an objective referent there. I vaguely remember a really bad call re: Devon White in the Jays’ world series that was pretty significant.

(If anyone could refresh my memory, I’d appreciate it !)

Well, if you want to be literal about it, the strike zone is no less objective than the safe/out call. Major League Baseball’s website gives a rather specific definition of the strike zone, to wit:

You can scroll to the bottom of the linked page for a diagram. The page also shows the historically changing definition of the strike zone.

Now, while the strike zone changes from batter to batter, depending on his height and his stance, for each batter that strike zone is an area very clearly defined in the rules.

The fact that some umpires choose to expand or contract the strike zone may have become accepted practice, but just because an umpire stretches the rules consistently does not mean he isn’t stretching the rules. There should be consistency between umpires, not just within each umpire, IMHO.

Is the play you’re thinking of the one in the ‘92 Series that started with Devon White’s amazing catch against the centrefield wall, involved two Braves’ runners crossing paths and ended when Kelly Gruber got the relay in and made a huge dive to ‘tag out’ the remaining baserunner retreating to second? It seemed clear to everyone that he had just completed the first (only? has there been one since?) triple-play in World Series history except the umpire who claimed no tag was made. Video replays showed otherwise. I guess I’m a little bitter, but it didn’t really matter because the Jays still won it all :smiley:

The umpire was Bob Davidson, he did blow that call, and he admitted it afterwards. Toronto won that game though.

It’s worth noting that umpires blowing safe/out calls and SO rare that we remember almost every example in the World Series; Davidson’s call on the triple play, Don Denkinger’s call on Jorge Orta in 1985. Most Jay fans still remember the horrific call in the '92 Series were Robbie Alomar was called out scoring on a wild pitch, when the replay showed he was safe by a foot and a half. Cardinal fans still remember the non-obstruction call in 1991.

But the number of calls blown in an NBA championship game is so high it’s hard to remember them all from one game THE NEXT DAY. I would say without exagerration that an NBA ref crew will blow at least 20 calls a game, and that’s not even considering the subjective nature of the rules. They’ll call at least half a dozen fouls where there was no contact at all and miss 10 or more fouls where there was clear contact. They’ll usually miss 2-3 travelling calls a game and call at least one or two charging fouls where the defensive player was not in position, then blow 2-3 charging calls where he was. Rarely does a game go by when a 3-point shot, both feet clearly outside the arc, is called 2 points, or vice versa. If MLB ups blew that many calls in one game they’d be hanged by a screaming mob. Until they added the red light backboard, there would be a dozen games a year when a last-ditch shot was allowed that was clearly and unambiguously taken after the horn, and a few would be disallowed that clearly beat the horn. And the blown calls are shamefully, obviously biased towards A) the home team and B) the more famous player.

The NHL doesn’t even pretend to enforce the rulebook anymore.

NFL refs are better at making judgment calls but in recent years they have had an amazing number of cases of the refs not knowing the rules, something you NEVER see in baseball.

I certainly agree with you about officials in other sports. 2-3 travelling calls per game? I’ve seen some games where travelling seems to be rule, rather than the exception.

The NHL’s refusal to call holding is a constant source of frustration for me.

And you’re right, not knowing the rules is inexcusable. Although, i must say, that in a game with as much arcane and illogical law and lore as football, i can almost forgive a few lapses.