Sorry - but when you're lucky to be in the bigs at all, and hitting below Mendoza to start the game, you need to be a bit more humble. And showing up umpires - real or perceived - isn't exactly Mensa material.

EDIT (upon a moment's reflection): The Josh Paul play, right?

Yep, once a ump ever makes a mistake he should be pilloried for life, and endure any amount of crap from future penal league all stars.

Yawn. I'll have more sympathy for this argument when umpires stop acting like professional jackasses themselves. If we want to talk about unprofessionalism in the game, umpires are first in line.

Eddings after screwing up that playoff series focused on his "mechanic" for making an out call. Well, his explanation didn't pass the giggle test, but the more important point is that umpires feel the need to make the game about them, by all using their own personal "mechanics." If they all used the same "mechanic," maybe we could avoid some of this confusion.

There isn't a reason in the world an umpire should have to sit there after the game explaining his unique "mechanic."

Yawn. I'll have more sympathy for this argument when umpires stop acting like professional jackasses themselves. If we want to talk about unprofessionalism in the game, umpires are first in line.

Starting with that strike 3 on Pujols, his strike zone consistently became "anything in the general vicinity of home plate."

Elijah Dukes should get beaned every time he comes up to bat. The guy is a disgrace as a human being, and should be happy to be playing the game of baseball instead of hide the sausage in prison.

It doesn't matter if he is horrible person himself or bad at his job, he still can call the players who are being jackasses out.

Starting with that strike 3 on Pujols, his strike zone consistently became "anything in the general vicinity of home plate."

So, Dukes shouldn't have made a fuss because Eddings decided to change the strike zone in the middle of the game?

If I remember correctly from listening to assorted interviews, don't most players (both batters and pitchers) say that they would rather deal with an overly large or small strike zone which is consistant, rather than one which changes non-stop?

The guy obviously has anger-management issues, and he's done a whole bunch of things which I consider to be disgusting and reprehensible. I also fully expect that it's only a matter of time before he ends up in prison.

It doesn't matter if he is horrible person himself or bad at his job, he still can call the players who are being jackasses out.

Of course, maybe I'm the one missing something here; when both Gaelan and Ryan agree with me on an issue, I clearly need to re-think it.

Hey - I thought people dealing with legal troubles aren't allowed to play.

Come on, Ryan. You're missing the point. Sparkles thinks that Eddings can be excused for evolving his strike zone in-game since Eddings's strike zone consistently became something different.

Dukes took it personally when it was just shitty umpiring. That's what I'm saying.

The Cardinals were the team hurt by Eddings despite the fact that you readily admit the Nationals had to deal with the same strike zone in their half of an inning?

I think the argument is that the Card batters were the one who got to first encounter the negative change in the strike zone, whereas the National batters at least had a chance to find out in advance.

Dukes took it personally when it was just shitty umpiring. That's what I'm saying. If Dukes makes an out because of a bad call, just say so on the way back to the dugout, like everyone else was doing.

I think the argument is that the Card batters were the one who got to first encounter the negative change in the strike zone, whereas the National batters at least had a chance to find out in advance.

The problem, Ryan, is that it's not like Eddings broadcasts on the jumbotron that he's now calling a different strike zone. The players have to figure it out, which could take some time. (And by then Eddings is probably on to his next strike zone anyway.)

This entire argument is hilarious, as it's being conducted by people who seem not to have seen the actual play. Dukes' celebration almost certainly had nothing to do with Doug friggin' Eddings but rather with the fact that, after two months of atrocious play, he hit his FIRST home run as an extra-innings, game-winning walk-off to cap a day where he had already gone 3 for 5 (triple, single, single, error leading to a double, K, BB). That's a hell of a day for a guy who had struggled mightily up until then. You would grant any other player the right to do a little chest-thumping after that...it's just because it's Dukes that Eddings (and some others here) feel okay in calling him out.

Why should the Nats believe that was the new zone because Pujols got called out once on a borderline pitch?

Elijah Dukes should get beaned every time he comes up to bat. The guy is a disgrace as a human being, and should be happy to be playing the game of baseball instead of hide the sausage in prison. And Eddings was right to call him out on this play. It doesn't matter if he is horrible person himself or bad at his job, he still can call the players who are being jackasses out.

it's just because it's Dukes that Eddings (and some others here) feel okay in calling him out.

It was dumb of Dukes to do that, but Eddings needs to get over it. Be a goddamned professional and do your job objectively.

In fact if I was running the show I'd try and fire Eddings too. If an umpire demonstrates that he is the type of person to hold grudges that is evidence that he not only is he bad at his job but he's incapable of impartiality which is the most important part of the job.

I would love for some enterprising pitch F/x guru to re-draw the strike zone back into the pitch F/X system and evaluate these umpires.