Thanks. Looking into the rules, the issue seems to be not where the ball is caught, but where fan interference occurs.
From the Comment section on Rule 3.16:
So if the spectator’s hands had been over the wall, it would be interference. If they were inside the wall, it wouldn’t have been interference. In that case it would have been a home run since the ball crossed the wall, even though it bounced back onto the field.
As far as I can see, theseangles show that the ball hadn’t crossed the line of the wall when the interference occurred.
Not unless it’s a 3 run game. He was totally bailed out by Boston’s amazing outfield, which by the way, is there a better trio in baseball? Betts throws out Kemp to lead off the 8th on a hit that when you see it rolling down the line you think it’s a gimme double. Can’t believe Betts got him on that one. And then Benny’s catch to end the game, yeah that may have saved the series. We’ll see.
That’s some pretty confident proclamations for what is, in my opinion, a much closer call than you are making it out to be.
I didn’t see the AL game yesterday, because I had to work, and when I heard about the interference call, I went online to watch it. Having watched a bunch of slow-motion replays from every angle they have, I still think it’s too close to call.
I was actually surprised at how close it was. I expected the arms of the fans to be clearly out over the fence, and in the field of play, but they weren’t. It looks to me like the glove and the hands and the ball all meet almost exactly at the plane of the fence. The only way to make a definitive call would be to have a camera perfectly in line with the fence, preferably from above.
I agree that there was insufficient evidence to OVERTURN the on-field interference call, but I don’t agree, taking the video alone, that it was clearly fan interference.
Following up on the Brewers’ pitching machinations, FiveThirtyEight put out an article that provides a little more analysis. It would be interesting to see how differently teams start constructing their rotations if this really becomes a thing, and consequently, how they’ll start constructing their offensive lineups in response.
Look at the stills I linked to. The ball is above and in front of Betts’ shoulder, and his shoulder clearly can’t be over the wall. In the first one in particular, you can see that the fans’ hands are in front of his glove and therefore over the wall.
I mean, I’ve seen a lot of pictures and none contradict the idea the ball was over the fence, and several make it look like it was over the field. An analysis of where the fans are and where their hands are tells me the ball isn’t yet over the fence. There’s a lot of evidence the call was right and I have seen none that it was wrong. I’m pretty confident. Wouldn’t bet my house on it, but I’d bet a hundred bucks.
Asimovian’s first link shows the ball touching the outside of Betts’s glov. This shot is from after contact, but watching in slo mo, Betts’s glove remains in the same place in the air throughout while his body moves underneath it. The ball ticked off his glove first and then hit the orange jersey guy in the hands; his hands were in the same position as Betts’s glove, hence interference. you can see there that his glove is pretty much directly above his shoulder, which is six to twelve inches from the wall. I don’t see how the ball could have gone over the fence if its maximum reach was his glove and the fan’s hands.
It WAS close, and I don’t understand why ballparks do not have multiple cameras lined up in perfect position to capture these things, specifically to do exactly that. Joe West got the call right purely by luck; from his position he couldn’t really have reliably made that call.
That the fans interfered is indisputable; the only question is where the interference happened. I think the replays strongly suggest this occurred in front of the wall (though definitely not by much).
One piece of evidence is the fan to the right of the ball, with his left hand grasping the wall & using this support to allow him to reach out with his right hand. Most of his extension is to his right, but I think it’s clear than some of it is forward of the left hand, over the wall.
So that proper credit is given, Colibri is the poster who provided what I agree is the most conclusive shot.
Given the curvature of outfield walls, I wonder how many cameras you’d actually have to place in order to have the “perfect” angle available at any given point?
And one other thought that doesn’t appear to apply to this specific scenario. A lot of stadiums, though not all, have outfield walls with some give to them. So, is it interference if a fan’s reach does not extend past where the wall normally is, but the momentum of the fielder’s body moves that border six inches so that the fan’s hands are now beyond that point? To be clear, I hope like hell we never need to figure out the answer to that, especially in a meaningful game.
Boston has been an offensive machine. They’ve taken 2 pretty good pitching rotations and slapped them around the yard. Assuming Boston can close out Houston, I don’t like the NL’s chances.
As an aside, it occurred to me that this is 2018, the 100th anniversary of the year that Boston last won the championship before “the curse.” Just like 100 years ago, Boston had enjoyed a nice run of success up to that point, winning in 1903, 1912, 1915, 1916, and 1918.
Will Boston win it 2018? Will Larry Luchino & Dave Dombrowski trade away Mookie Betts and start the next curse?
In a perfect world, Boston would be one out away from winning this game and then Kimbrel would give up a grand slam. And then they would lose the next two games at home.
But hey, win or lose, people in Boston still have to live in Boston. Losing is just in their DNA.
Been a while since I’ve seen a pitcher craft a game like Price has tonight. He knew he had to be perfect against the 'Stros and he has been completely dialed in. Hope he stays out there for the 7th but I bet Cora pulls him.
