Hey, Zack! Welcome back to LA! Too bad you had to leave so soon - the other 4 guys in the lineup would like a homer off you too!
I think dalej42 nailed it; the Jeter/Rivera thing got a little embarrassing. They were great players and all but that was kind of strange; nothing like it had been seen for generations, and it was a bit mawkish.
Certainly there is great praise being heaped upon Ortiz for his hitting prowess over the years but the “let’s give an opposing player his own day and a bunch of gifts” thing was a bit uncomfortable during the Jeter/Rivera farewell tours.
AS to this, I commented on it there but will add here;
This sort of crap is going to continue because MLB does not have a process for ensuring it doesn’t. With regards to checked swings:
-
Nowhere in the rulebook does it say what does or doesn’t constitute a legal swing, and if you don’t believe me, go try to find it. Did Kipnis swing? It’s subjective.
-
MLB doesn’t have anyone whose job it is to make these calls. As noted in that thread, the first and third base umpires and not correctly positioned to make this call and are asked to do it solely because they are BETTER positioned than the home plate ump. Other sports will hire a person to stand there and watch one line the whole game, but MLB won’t hire a person to watch for checked swings.
So we’re talking about a call for which there is no definition for what the call should be, and no one assigned to the correct place to make the call. It will never get better until someone starts taking this stuff seriously.
Very modern pitching line for the Astros versus Cleveland - nine innings, 3 earned runs, 6 pitchers (the last 4 each pitching exactly one inning), a win.
Wish I could get back up to Toronto this weekend for the Sox/Jays series. Too bad Boston will be throwing their 2 weakest pitchers in the back end of that series, Ed Rodriguez and Buchholz.
The Indians have been the beneficiaries of some very strange bad calls in the last week. At least this afternoon’s call came courtesy of Jim Joyce, who truly owed them one. No video yet, so I’ll do my best to describe it.
The bases were loaded with two outs and Lonnie Chisenhall of the Indians at bat. Houston’s pitcher bounces a curveball in the dirt, and Chisenhall swings far enough that the ball hits his bat and shoots off to the left side of foul territory. Somehow, Jim Joyce doesn’t know (possibly because he was focused on whether Chisenhall had checked his swing, which he had) that the ball has been fouled off and treats it like a wild pitch. Lindor, Napoli and the runner on first (I’ve forgotten who, now) all come home to score while Houston’s catcher argues with Joyce instead of fielding the ball (which, you know, is understandable since he knew it had been fouled off).
Now it gets weird. Just before Napoli touched home plate, Jim Joyce calls time in the middle of his conversation with Houston’s catcher. First of all, if you as an umpire think the ball is live, HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU GRANT TIME??? Anyway, Joyce, by this time apparently realizing something was amiss, assembles the umpiring crew to discuss the play. NONE of them saw that the ball was fouled off. Initially, they give the Indians two runs. A.J. Hinch is, predictably (albeit after a very civil-looking conversation) tossed. Then they go to video review and determine that Joyce called time before Napoli scored, so they only give the Indians one run. Fortunately for Houston, Chisenhall would line out shortly after play resumed, ending the inning.
I still don’t understand how time was granted if the ball was considered in play. And if the ball went out of play on the “wild pitch,” then it’s a two-base error, isn’t it? So Napoli should have been allowed to score.
I don’t know what they’re putting in the umpires’ water at Progressive Field, but it seems to be working.
Correction to the above. Both runs were allowed to score. Here’s a recap from a more reputable source than myself: Let’s Go Tribe post.
Runners can advance only one base on a wild pitch or pickoff attempt that leaves the field of play. Rule 5.06 (b)(4).
Of course, they should have reversed the entire play. Jesus Christ, what do we have replay for, anyway?
There’s a video on mlb.com for anybody who’s interested. It’s just as bas as Asimovian describes. A story on ESPN points out that the plate ump in this case is the same one who blew the call that cost Armando Galarraga a perfect game several years back.
Just saw that video. That’s an unfortunate play for Houston. Everyone says Jim Joyce is one of the best umpires, and usually he is, but he has been on the wrong end of some pretty huge blown calls.
And, of course, the play wasn’t reviewable.
I’m almost positive the Giants will not lose any more ground in the NL West tonight…but if there’s some way they can, they’ll probably find it.
When does hockey season start?
The Galarraga game was also in Cleveland.
That’s it - Joyce has a mistress here. Something is distracting him when he comes to town!
He seems like a really likeable guy, and he’s the only umpire in the game that I recognize purely from the sound of his “Stri-EEEEEEEEEEEK!” calls. I really wish he’d stop making himself the public face of officiating gaffes.
Well, again, if the system is set up to allow Joyce to fail, he is doomed to fail. As it happens, he failed at a moment that was historically spectacular. But other umps fail just as often if not more so.
Had there been replay during the Galarraga game, and there should have been, then Joyce would not have failed; the call would have been corrected, the Tigers would have celebrated, and Joyce making an erroneous call would have been a barely remembered footnote. Were foul balls a reviewable play, the Chisenhall fiasco would have been swiftly corrected.
All of these problems - well, at least 99% of all officiating problems - are perfectly fixable. You could have everything in place and ready to go by Opening Day 2017. Replay, automation, and more officials. You could virtually eliminate bad calls.
I agree that the half-assed use of replay is unnecessarily harmful to the game. But the commissioner’s office seems so (stupidly, in my view) concerned with the speed of the game these days that I can’t imagine they’re going to be willing to allow for more instances of replay use.
The counterargument to that, of course, is that increasing the number of applicable situations for replay doesn’t necessarily mean increasing the number of challenges available to each team. But I’m not expecting MLB to listen to reason on this one.
Yeah, that’s the thing. In this case they did review the play, but for wholly arbitrary reasons, one thing they were not allowed to review was whether Chisenhall’s bat hit the ball, which was, of course, the source of the entire problem. Think of how quickly the review would have gone if that was a reviewable element. The entire review process could have lasted ten seconds.
The “manager’s challenge” nonsense is, IMHO, part of the problem; this is a silly borrow from the NFL and is inherently half-assed. Here’s what I would do if I were King of Baseball:
-
All balls and strikes shall be called by PitchF/X or its superior descendants. You can still have a home plate ump, but he’ll have some sort of visual indicator to tell him if it’s a ball or a strike. All you need is a scoreboard that says BALL or STRIKE.
-
All fair/foul calls are determined by automated systems, similar to the Cyclops and Hawkeye systems used in professional tennis. Similar systems should be used for determining home run/ball in play calls as well, in parks where that’s potentially a thing.
-
All calls in all games are under continuous review by teams of officials in an MLB office. ANY call not subject to automated calling can be immediately flagged for review by the review team assigned to that game, who watch every play for plays that may be questionable. The review team them notifies the game’s crew chief with some sort of simple technology that the play is under review and not to proceed with play. Given the HD cameras and multiple angels available now, virtually all clearly erroneous calls should be fixable within thirty seconds, and if not, they should add more damn cameras. The fact that a play is under review shall be clearly noted on the scoreboard and visible to everyone in the park.
-
The manager may still protest a call if the review team does not flag a play for review.
-
What constitutes a “Swing” will be defined in the rules, will be a reviewable play, and officials will be specifically designated to watch for that call.
Seriously, there is no reason MLB can’t afford to do this.
Yeah, there is. It would completely ruin the game. The second they start robocalling balls and strikes is the second I stop watching the game. Period.
That’s your opinion but I don’t think MLB relies on your personal support to keep afloat, and there’s not a chance in hell it’ll make any significant dent in attendance or viewership.
The hell you say!