Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, April 11, 2021

Controversial call at home plate gives Phillies 7-6 win over Braves


The Philadelphia Phillies escaped Truist Park with a slight win on Sunday night.

Yet many watching at home, and even the Atlanta Braves, were confused with what appeared to be a missed call in the ninth inning that pushed the Phillies to their 7-6 win.

Phillies shortstop Didi Gregorius hit a fly ball to shallow left field in the top of the ninth inning, which prompted Alec Bohm — who doubled and then made it to third off a bunt — to break for home to try and take the lead.

Braves left fielder Marcell Ozuna made the catch and threw home to catcher Travis d’Arnaud. Bohm, after sliding in around the tag attempt, was called safe.


Though the call looked solid at first glance, replay showed that Bohm’s foot appeared to miss the plate completely.

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: April 11, 2021 at 11:05 PM | 86 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: braves, phillies, umpires

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. filihok Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:05 AM (#6012872)
I am more than 50% sure he missed the plate. I am less than 100% sure he missed the plate. Thus, I would have made the same call the replay umpires did.

I think I also would have made the same call the home plate ump did.
   2. smileyy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:35 AM (#6012876)
His momentum was carrying him towards touching the plate before d'Arnaud deflected him away. For that reason I can understand the initial call at the plate.

I wouldn't want to be the replay reviewer. That's a tough call. I'm pretty much on the same page as filihok.
   3. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:40 AM (#6012877)
In real time I thought he missed home. The replay was a bit more inconclusive, but I thought it tended to support that he missed it. But I don't know that it was conclusive enough to overturn a safe call.
   4. Posada Posse Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:42 AM (#6012878)
Very exciting play, and game in general, to watch live on TV. I'm just glad that there's a semblance of normalcy to this baseball season that's badly needed.

Despite a weak throw, I thought Ozuna made a good play in getting rid of the ball quickly, which made the play really close. Basically I agree that it was a blown call.
   5. The Gary DiSarcina Fan Club (JAHV) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:54 AM (#6012880)
I know the potential for injury is greater, but, especially on slides into home, I don't know why everyone doesn't go head-first. It allows for greater body control and a tougher target for the catcher to tag.
   6. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:59 AM (#6012881)
That was a bad slide. If he doesn't go in with his foot upright like that, it's probably not close.
   7. Walt Davis Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:07 AM (#6012883)
Less taste! Great filling!
   8. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:17 AM (#6012888)
Between this and the All-Star Game, let me be the first to say it's not looking like a good year for baseball in Atlanta.
   9. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 04:55 AM (#6012889)
I am more than 50% sure he missed the plate. I am less than 100% sure he missed the plate. Thus, I would have made the same call the replay umpires did.


Isn't that perfect grounds for overturning the call?
   10. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 08:04 AM (#6012895)
Nope
   11. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:18 AM (#6012907)
Why can replay reviews result in a shrug?

In other words, there was not enough evidence to overturn what had already been called. But why do we even HAVE this option? (In 2017, almost 30 percent of replays were ruled this way.)


Deferring to a split-second decision that initially seemed suspect, necessarily made without all the angles and slow-mo, doesn’t make any sense. At this point, there are more than enough cameras trained on every play to make a new call altogether. Compared to the bang-bang binaries umpires have to contend with in-game, doing so should be simple — so why do we let them shrug and just go with some version of whatever he said?

I’d like to think that if the replay officials watching that slide over and over were forced to make a clean decision in a vacuum, they would have gotten it right and called Bohm out. But if they really thought he was safe, they should at least have to say so with conviction.


Here, here. Why is the default option the one that is less likely to be correct (the call, in real time, by human eyes)?
   12. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:29 AM (#6012909)
Here, here. Why is the default option the one that is less likely to be correct (the call, in real time, by human eyes)?

It has to be the default b/c it's the only thing that exists on every play. Replay can't be the default b/c it rarely exists.

Exhibit #87 as to why replay sucks. It can never achieve what its proponents expect (perfection), and every effort to try and get closer makes it more burdensome.
   13. salvomania Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:32 AM (#6012912)
After showing the same two inconclusive views over and over again, ESPN eventually showed a view from behind home that conclusively showed Bohm's foot over the plate, then landing to the the right of it---what seemed very likely from the other views was indisputable from this view: he was out. It was a terrible replay review.


   14. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:33 AM (#6012913)
I don't want perfection. I don't want lousy calls with no possible way of fixing them.

Option A is no replay and you get bad officiating.

Option B is replay and you get bad officiating with the occasional mistake fixed.

I'll take option B
   15. Brian C Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:44 AM (#6012915)
Here, here. Why is the default option the one that is less likely to be correct (the call, in real time, by human eyes)?

IMO, as the saying goes, defaulting to the call on the field is the worst option except for all the others.

Now, in this particular play, I think the replay evidence is conclusive, and I'm not really sure what people are seeing when they say it's not. I guess it's theoretcally possible that the tips of his spikes grazed the plate or that his foot landed on the outer micrometer of the corner of the plate. But that puts us firmly into a kind of existential "well, isn't anything possible when you think about it?" territory that is really overthinking things. This play meets any reasonable bar of the "clear and convincing evidence" standard to overturn.

And I think that's ultimately the problem here, that too much nitpicking is done by replay officials over what constitutes "clear and convincing evidence". Too often that's misapplied to mean something more definitive. But for cases where it's genuinely unclear from replay what the right call is, then deferring to the call on the field seems like the only real option - if we think we're seeing controversy now, just wait until replay officials start overturning legitimately unclear calls based on their best guesses. The system is shaky enough without officials actually being encouraged to pull calls out of their asses.
   16. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:54 AM (#6012916)
Should the call on the field stand or not is a reasonable and probably best position to take when reviewing a play.
   17. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:55 AM (#6012917)
Smyly: "For MLB not to overturn that, it’s embarrassing. Why even have replay if you won’t overturn that? They say there wasn’t enough evidence but there were five different angles. It’s clear, he didn’t touch the plate."
   18. Brian C Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:56 AM (#6012918)
Should the call on the field stand or not is a reasonable and probably best position to take when reviewing a play.

OK but how do you define "should" in that case? "Should" how? There's a reason why they make an effort to come up with an actual standard.
   19. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:59 AM (#6012919)
Clear and convincing sounds good to me.
   20. salvomania Posted: April 12, 2021 at 11:00 AM (#6012920)
At around 1:30 of this video you can see, in the view from behind home, that when the foot comes down, it's well beyond home plate. Clearly out.

   21. Random Transaction Generator Posted: April 12, 2021 at 11:38 AM (#6012925)
It's funny how in the video from #20 that the moment they show the view (1:30) that pretty much proves he missed the plate, it's at the exact moment the review comes back and upholds the (incorrect) call.
I thought Bohm's reaction was him seeing the same video and being upset that it showed him being out...but he's celebrating getting away with it, instead.
   22. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 11:57 AM (#6012928)
I don't want perfection. I don't want lousy calls with no possible way of fixing them.

Option A is no replay and you get bad officiating.

Option B is replay and you get bad officiating with the occasional mistake fixed.

I'll take option B


There's another trade-off in there you're not accounting for; the "cost" of replay in both delay, and sucking the fun out of the moment.

Not knowing that I saw what I just saw, and can celebrate in the moment, sucks a ton of joy out of sports for me. Waiting four minutes to celebrate a game-winning hit means I never get to celebrate b/c after four minutes of committee meetings, my joy is gone.
   23. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:07 PM (#6012930)

It’s not 100% clear to me that he was actually tagged by the catcher.
   24. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:16 PM (#6012934)
That isn't a cost for me.
   25. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:19 PM (#6012935)
Yes, none of those views show a conclusive tag.
   26. 57i66135 right now is attacking rest Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:23 PM (#6012939)
And yet, these slow-motion, high-definition replays of Bohm’s foot sliding over and around the plate weren’t enough to convince the umpire in the replay booth that the call should be overturned. And so we ended up with one of the worst possible results video replay can grant us: a game being delayed for what feels like an eternity in service of the idea that all calls must must be right, and that their rightness can be revealed through careful analysis of every last pixel of video and scrap of dirt, only to end up with a clearly wrong call being upheld.

To which I say: Good! All of the meticulously thought-out criticisms of video replay have done dick to prevent the practice from becoming more and more prevalent in major sports leagues, so let’s instead spend our time rooting for and celebrating disasters such as this one. We should be cheering every time video replay fails this spectacularly and publicly, if only because it brings us one step closer to a reality in which everyone is just so goddamned sick of replay that they decide the hassle of it isn’t worth getting a few more calls correct every year. We need more failure, not less. We need Buster Olney hopping mad on Twitter. We need more players to end up in the same place Travis d’Arnaud is:
“It makes me not even want [replay] anymore,” d’Arnaud said. “It just slows the game down. To me, they got it wrong. I’d just rather not have it and get the game going.”

   27. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:45 PM (#6012945)
That isn't a cost for me.

That's strange. You really don't feel any less excited having to wait 5 minutes to see whether to be happy or not?
   28. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:45 PM (#6012947)
Replay is never going away.
   29. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:45 PM (#6012948)
“It just slows the game down. To me, they got it wrong. I’d just rather not have it and get the game going.”
In response to the reporter’s follow up, d’Arnaud said: “What? Stay in the batter’s box? Pitch clock? Oh, hell no. #### that.”
   30. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:46 PM (#6012949)
"That's strange. You really don't feel any less excited having to wait 5 minutes to see whether to be happy or not?"

A: it's a meaningless early season game, who feels anything for these games?

B: it's called suspense. If you're that into a game there are plenty of emotions going on while you wait.
   31. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:55 PM (#6012951)
Not knowing that I saw what I just saw, and can celebrate in the moment, sucks a ton of joy out of sports for me. Waiting four minutes to celebrate a game-winning hit means I never get to celebrate b/c after four minutes of committee meetings, my joy is gone.

I hugely agree with this.
   32. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:56 PM (#6012952)

A: it's a meaningless early season game, who feels anything for these games?

B: it's called suspense. If you're that into a game there are plenty of emotions going on while you wait.


To summarize, it's a meaningless game that you feel nothing for other than the edge-of-your-seat suspense that leaves you breathless in anticipation.
   33. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:56 PM (#6012953)
A: it's a meaningless early season game, who feels anything for these games?

I do. I want my team to win.

B: it's called suspense. If you're that into a game there are plenty of emotions going on while you wait.

Joy is great, disappointment sometimes inevitable, but suspense always sucks.
   34. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:00 PM (#6012956)

There's another trade-off in there you're not accounting for; the "cost" of replay in both delay, and sucking the fun out of the moment.



"Do you want the job done right, or do you want it done fast?"

"Well like all Americans, fast!"
   35. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:03 PM (#6012957)
"Do you want the job done right, or do you want it done fast?"

"Well like all Americans, fast!"


Right when there's something serious on the line, fast when it's just entertainment.
   36. Mayor Blomberg Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:05 PM (#6012959)
He was out. It's really not in doubt if you look at another angle of the play, which is easy to find.

I clicked the Twitter link and looked at the "another angle" post directly below.

Out
   37. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:06 PM (#6012961)
He was out. It's really not in doubt if you look at another angle of the play, which is easy to find.


Is there an angle that shows conclusively he was tagged with the mitt?
   38. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:12 PM (#6012963)
To summarize, it's a meaningless game that you feel nothing for other than the edge-of-your-seat suspense that leaves you breathless in anticipation.


Um there was an "if" involved.
   39. Mayor Blomberg Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:12 PM (#6012964)
SoSH, I suspect you'd need the longer clip of either one. I mean, I never see him touching the plate, so he can't be safe.
   40. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:13 PM (#6012965)
Right when there's something serious on the line, fast when it's just entertainment.


If it's entertainment who cares who wins?
   41. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:14 PM (#6012966)
And if he's never tagged he's never out.
   42. Lassus Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:16 PM (#6012968)
But is he allowed to be pushed out of the way BEFORE he's allegedly tagged?
   43. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:17 PM (#6012970)
Joy is great, disappointment sometimes inevitable, but suspense always sucks.
I think that's definitely a you thing.
   44. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:22 PM (#6012972)
28. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 12:45 PM (#6012947)
Replay is never going away.


That's the problem and no one seemed to consider it when everyone was pining for replay.
   45. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:23 PM (#6012973)
Once the umpire called him safe, you can’t call him out for never having touched the plate (edit: since there was no appeal). You can only call him out if he was tagged on the play.

Since the videos don’t show a conclusive tag, unless the umpire saw a tag in real time, I think they made the right decision not to overturn the call.
   46. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:23 PM (#6012975)
People who wanted replay aren’t the ones trying to get rid of it.
   47. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:26 PM (#6012979)
I mean, I never see him touching the plate, so he can't be safe.


No, he doesn't have to touch the plate to be safe. He does need to be tagged out to be out (or, if he doesn't touch home plate, the play needs to be appealed). But without an appeal, he's presumed safe.

And thinking about this, I'd love to see a guy hit a walkoff two- or three-run or grand slam homer, when his run doesn't matter, there's fewer than two outs and see him circle the bases without touching any of them.

Once the umpire called him safe, you can’t call him out for never having touched the plate.


The Braves could have appealed, if they thought it was possible he was neither tagged nor touched home.
   48. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:27 PM (#6012980)

Suspense is great when we are waiting to see the players do something. Suspense when we’re waiting for an umpire’s decision is bad.
   49. My name is Votto, and I love to get Moppo Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:51 PM (#6012988)
Suspense is good when it's a full-count, bases loaded, and the pitcher's on the rubber. Waiting for an umpire to go look at a TV screen....not so much.

I wonder if it's any different for fans in the stadium. Obviously sitting at home, you're getting your own slo-mo version of the replay from the TV feed. At the ballpark, you're 'maybe' getting a view on the Jumbotron, but no commentary.
   50. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:51 PM (#6012989)
I have to say, from the first angle (the 1st base side), it is more likely than not that he missed the plate...but probably not enough to overturn the call on the field.

But when you look at the angle from directly behind home plate, it is an easy call to overturn. It's pretty disappointing that this did not get overturned.

What is the correct level of certainty to overturn a call?

In the NFL, it is "indisputable visual evidence" - basically, 100% certainty.

In a criminal court of law, it would be, "beyond a reasonable doubt" - so, not quite 100%, but pretty close.

In a civil court, it would be, "the preponderance of the evidence" - so, better than 50/50.

In MLB, it is "clear and convincing evidence" - so, where does fit on this spectrum? I would say it about the same as a criminal court of law's standard - not 100% certainty, but pretty darned close.
   51. The Gary DiSarcina Fan Club (JAHV) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:56 PM (#6012990)
it's a meaningless early season game, who feels anything for these games?


I certainly do. These games have been exciting.
   52. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 01:57 PM (#6012991)
In MLB, it is "clear and convincing evidence" - so, where does fit on this spectrum? I would say it about the same as a criminal court of law's standard - not 100% certainty, but pretty darned close.

I think there are some courts that do use "clear and convincing" and I'm pretty sure that burden is less than beyond a reasonable doubt. If preponderance is "55:45", I think "clear and convincing" is like 80:20, and "beyond a reasonable doubt is like 98:2".
   53. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:16 PM (#6012995)
In a criminal court of law, it would be, "beyond a reasonable doubt" - so, not quite 100%, but pretty close.

In a civil court, it would be, "the preponderance of the evidence" - so, better than 50/50.
It's more analogous to the standard for overturning a lower court's decision on appeal. Questions of law are reviewed de novo, i.e. as if it were in the first instance, whereas questions of fact involve varying standards of deference to the lower court, including "clear error," "unsupported by substantial evidence," and "abuse of discretion."

As pointed out in #11, there's no logical reason that the umpire's decision would be entitled to any deference, although maybe it is the best option practically speaking. Even so, it shouldn't be given a huge weight.
   54. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:19 PM (#6012996)
In the NFL, it is "indisputable visual evidence"


In MLB, it is "clear and convincing evidence"


As these are both video-based, they're the same to me.
   55. 57i66135 right now is attacking rest Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:26 PM (#6012998)
Once the umpire called him safe, you can’t call him out for never having touched the plate (edit: since there was no appeal). You can only call him out if he was tagged on the play.

Since the videos don’t show a conclusive tag, unless the umpire saw a tag in real time, I think they made the right decision not to overturn the call.
couldn't ATL have still made that appeal after the failed review?
The Braves could have appealed, if they thought it was possible he was neither tagged nor touched home.
right. the simpsons did it.
   56. Brian C Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:26 PM (#6012999)
As these are both video-based, they're the same to me.

Except that often the video does not show a result with 100% certainty either way.

To me, "indisputable visual evidence" means 100% certainty. "Clear and convincing" is means that most reasonable people will draw the same conclusion.

This play is actually the perfect example of the difference - I don't believe anyone in this thread is saying that Bohm appears to be safe, but most agree that the video (or at least the clip in the OP) doesn't show this with absolute certainty.
   57. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:34 PM (#6013005)
Except that often the video does not show a result with 100% certainty either way.


And that's when the initial call remains.

Since the initial umpire call remained after review with this play, it's a safe bet it would have also remained if the call had been out. There was no clear evidence at the time to say otherwise in either direction.
   58. Lassus Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:35 PM (#6013007)
I feel ignored.

If there was no clear tag BEFORE he knocked the runner away from the plate, allowing him to make a tag after, isn't that kind of a problem?
   59. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:35 PM (#6013008)
couldn't ATL have still made that appeal after the failed review?


Looking at the rules, there's nothing that prevents the defensive team from asking for an appeal after a replay review. The only requirement applicable to this instance is the appeal be made prior to the next pitch being thrown, so presumably the Braves could have appealed after the initial call was upheld.

Of course, in real time, if the runner doesn't touch the base and he isn't tagged and the ump notices it, he should call nothing. I suppose that's not an option during the use of replay.
   60. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:36 PM (#6013010)
If there was no clear tag BEFORE he knocked the runner away from the plate, allowing him to make a tag after, isn't that kind of a problem?


If the umpires ruled that happened, I think home could be awarded, sure.
   61. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:37 PM (#6013011)
Looking at the rules, there's nothing that prevents the defensive team from asking for an appeal after a replay review.


I believe the replay rules preclude this:

The decision of the replay official to either uphold or change one or more calls subject to replay review shall be final and is not subject to further review or revision. Once replay review is initiated, on-field personnel from either club who further argue the contested calls or the decision of the replay official shall be ejected. No protest shall ever be permitted on judgment decisions by the replay official.


Edited to correct incomplete replay rules.
   62. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:39 PM (#6013013)
The decision of the replay official to either uphold or change one or more calls subject to replay review shall be final and is not subject to further review or revision.

Replay: getting it right every time, 60% of the time!
   63. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:42 PM (#6013016)
The decision of the replay official to either uphold or change one or more calls subject to replay review shall be final and is not subject to further review or revision.


You're probably right. It's not absolutely clear (what exactly does revision mean?), but that may mean any appeal would have to take place before replay was initiated.

Honestly, that's the way it should be. The defensive team shouldn't get two-plus minutes to discover a guy missed a base.
   64. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 02:57 PM (#6013025)
I love when die hard fans complain about some aspect of the game and then continue to watch and enjoy their sport for decades.
   65. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:05 PM (#6013028)
I love when die hard fans complain about some aspect of the game and then continue to watch and enjoy their sport for decades.


Totally! It's like how I stay with my spouse who isn't perfect.
   66. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:09 PM (#6013029)
Do you go around bashing your wife to everyone constantly?
   67. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:11 PM (#6013030)
Complaining, not baseball, is the true national pastime.
   68. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:13 PM (#6013033)
Complaining now equals bashing? That says more about you than anything. And nothing good.

But to answer your question: We are very up front about our complaints regarding each other, and we ill publicly joke about what we see as the other's shortcomings if we have already discussed such issues together.

I would gladly do the same with MLB if I could reach Manfred.
   69. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:16 PM (#6013034)
Complaining in this context most certainly equals bashing. But weird how an argument about replay means something more to you.

But you missed the point. Nobody takes complaints about replay all that seriously. Nobody cares that you don't like replay.
   70. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:26 PM (#6013036)
Complaining in this context most certainly equals bashing. But weird how an argument about replay means something more to you.

But you missed the point.Nobody takes complaints about replay all that seriously. Nobody cares that you don't like replay.


So it's all kind of like the comments you gave over the years about how you didn't like the way the Cubs were building a championship team. Peas in a pod, we are.
   71. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:29 PM (#6013037)
I mean, yes, duh.

Hopefully some day you'll be as self aware.
   72. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:51 PM (#6013038)
I mean, yes, duh.

Hopefully some day you'll be as self aware.


If I commented here at the rate you have I'd be over 24,000 comments, well under your 41,000 but quite a bit more than my nearly 350 in 10 years. I'm comfortable with my self-awareness. So, too, is my spouse.
   73. sunday silence (again) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 03:56 PM (#6013040)
It takes four minutes to suck all the joy out of a game for Snapper.

Why am I not suprised?
   74. sunday silence (again) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 04:11 PM (#6013042)

You're probably right. It's not absolutely clear (what exactly does revision mean?)...


I think you bring up a very good pt. and I will attempt to answer it and hopefully square the circle and explain the entire thing.

I guess the assumption (not explicitly stated in the rules) is that a video review is intended to cover ANY and ALL possible arguments that could have been made. Take this situation:

batter comes and hits a ball down the line, it is ruled fair. Other team complains that it was foul. On review play stands. But as the batter goes back to second base the fans realize: "Hey he batted out of order! WHy isnt he out?" Or something similar.

I guess that play has to stand that was as the ruling by the video people is final and can't be reviewed. Presumably in that case, they are expected to consider every possible argument even if these werent presented by the coach/manager making the appeal.
So a "revision" would be something like we ruled him safe on the hit down the line. A few minutes later the team in the field argued that he batted out of order. So now we MLB will revise our ruling to be:

"fair ball, not a hit, batting out of order, batter is out. We've revised our previous ruling, we didnt over turn it. Its still a fair ball we havent overruled that we are simply REVISING base hit to fair ball/batting out of order/he's out."

So per the rules cited above; we can't have that. There's no further revising a video ruling. That's the play and it stands forever.

In the case of the PHI/ATL game similar reasoning. There's grounds to suggest the catcher never tagged him. what then? There's grounds to suggest he was blocking the plate as well. So we have to assume all of these issues were considered on the video appeal and the ruling of "safe" is a final call. Presumably they considered in light of all these issues that there wasnt enuf to change the call.

I think that sort of makes sense in a way. BUt I dunno Im not a rules expert, just trying to use logic to understand what the rules are saying.
   75. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 04:12 PM (#6013043)

If I commented here at the rate you have I'd be over 24,000 comments, well under your 41,000 but quite a bit more than my nearly 350 in 10 years. I'm comfortable with my self-awareness. So, too, is my spouse.


Good to know.
   76. SoSH U at work Posted: April 12, 2021 at 04:21 PM (#6013045)
I think that sort of makes sense in a way. BUt I dunno Im not a rules expert, just trying to use logic to understand what the rules are saying.


I think it makes perfect sense, and I know that's the way most of those issues are handled. Missing a base/leaving early are somewhat different, however, in that they're not simply called by the umpire but have to be identified and appealed by the defensive team. If the umpires are looking to see if a tag was made on time, and discover via replay the ball was actually dropped for a split second, they would be able to use all that information in reaching a conclusion. In this situation, if the ump ruled the runner neither touched the plate nor was he tagged, the failure to touch the plate would still require some kind of appeal from the defensive team outside the replay process (regardless what the original call was, the runner in that situation would be safe without an appeal). Presumably, based on what Lowry cited and, to an extent, fairness, that appeal would need to be made in advance of any video replay being initiated.
   77. The Duke Posted: April 12, 2021 at 06:32 PM (#6013072)
He’s clearly out to me. He didn’t touch home plate and I’m 100% sure of it looking at these views. It’s really not as grey as everyone is saying.

Regardless,

1. Replay sucks the life out of baseball at the stadium
2. It’s used for far too many things
3. It’s wrong a surprising amount of times, maybe 5-10%
4. Umpires, who were never inclined to collaborate, now have a great reason to collaborate even less
5. Too many Ticky-tack calls get made (see point 6)
6. The whole process which seems to take about 3-4 minutes should be no more than a minute. Why do managers need to talk to the booth - it should be so obvious that the manager immediately calls for review - like the don denkinger call. Why do the umps gather around the headset - they aren’t making the call. Why does NY wait to review plays until someone asks for a review. Just start reviewing all close plays.
   78. Brian C Posted: April 12, 2021 at 06:46 PM (#6013076)
Why do managers need to talk to the booth - it should be so obvious that the manager immediately calls for review - like the don denkinger call.

I see this kind of sentiment a lot but it seems to me like it's piped in directly from an alternate universe where slow-motion video simply doesn't exist. If we went to a system where only the most incredibly obvious calls were reviewed, then ... the first time a freeze-frame showed a close call to be incorrect, then everyone would be outraged about the blown call and demand to expand replay.

   79. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 12, 2021 at 07:13 PM (#6013082)
I see this kind of sentiment a lot but it seems to me like it's piped in directly from an alternate universe where slow-motion video simply doesn't exist. If we went to a system where only the most incredibly obvious calls were reviewed, then ... the first time a freeze-frame showed a close call to be incorrect, then everyone would be outraged about the blown call and demand to expand replay.

If it's not obvious in real time, it's not a blown call. Too close to tell is too close to tell. Why do we need to litigate 50:50 calls?
   80. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 07:58 PM (#6013093)
Because we want to?
   81. McCoy Posted: April 12, 2021 at 07:58 PM (#6013094)
It's here, it's everywhere, it's not going away.
   82. Brian C Posted: April 12, 2021 at 09:11 PM (#6013112)
Seems like there's a really, really clear gap in between "not obvious in real time" and "50:50 calls". It happens all the time that plays are not obvious in real time but are obvious upon replay.
   83. Walt Davis Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:30 PM (#6013141)
1. I agree he does not touch the plate.
2. I agree I don't see a tag (not sure I'm seeing all the replays)
3. Isn't the C these days required to allow a clear path to the plate? There was one but then he shuts it down with his knee/leg after receiving the ball (then lies on the plate)
4. In the absence of a tag or a touch of the plate, at what point are the C's actions interference?

But this is a reason why you default to the decision on the field. Near as I can tell, the proper call was there was neither a tag nor a touch and so the play at the plate should have still been live ... but given the ump called him safe, neither the runner nor C was treating it as a live play. A replay call of "neither safe nor out" leaves you nowhere other than the deeper recesses of the rule book on "you needed to appeal that bit before the replay."
   84. Lowry Seasoning Salt Posted: April 12, 2021 at 10:43 PM (#6013142)
3. Isn't the C these days required to allow a clear path to the plate? There was one but then he shuts it down with his knee/leg after receiving the ball (then lies on the plate)


As you described it is permissible.

The catcher is not permitted to block the runner's path to the plate unless he is in possession of the ball, though blocking the path of the runner in a legitimate attempt to receive a throw is not considered a violation. The runner can be ruled safe if the umpire determines the catcher violated this rule. But per a September 2014 memorandum to the rule, the runner may still be called out if he was clearly beaten by the throw. Backstops are not subject to this rule on force plays.

When receiving a throw, catchers will often provide a sliding lane into home plate for the runner to lower the possibility that they will be called for violating the rule. Likewise, runners can lower their chances of being called for a violation by sliding in the given lane.
   85. Lassus Posted: April 13, 2021 at 10:19 AM (#6013185)
by sliding in the given lane.

But not the catcher's throwing lane.
   86. Jose Is An Absurd Balladeer Posted: April 13, 2021 at 10:36 AM (#6013186)
If it's not obvious in real time, it's not a blown call. Too close to tell is too close to tell. Why do we need to litigate 50:50 calls?


Because we want to?


A lot of us don't.

It's here, it's everywhere, it's not going away.


This is both true and annoying. For me as a fan replay has not improved things. Just because it's inevitable doesn't mean we have to like it.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
HowardMegdal
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogTB progressing with Montreal Sister City plan
(39 - 1:59am, Sep 28)
Last: Doug Jones threw harder than me

NewsblogWhy Detroit Tigers, Chicago White Sox stormed the field: 'It wasn't intentional'
(2 - 1:44am, Sep 28)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogShohei Ohtani, on future with Los Angeles Angels: 'I want to win'
(19 - 1:29am, Sep 28)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogBrother HRs off brother for first time since '75
(6 - 12:59am, Sep 28)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogThe Cardinals’ Impressive Winning Streak Doesn’t Guarantee October Success
(14 - 12:50am, Sep 28)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogNBA 2021 Playoffs+ thread
(4653 - 10:50pm, Sep 27)
Last: PJ Martinez

Sox TherapyThat Didn’t Go Well, But The Situation Is Still Very Good
(21 - 10:36pm, Sep 27)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - Transfer! Kits! Other Stuff!
(302 - 9:02pm, Sep 27)
Last: bunyon

NewsblogArizona Diamondbacks give manager Torey Lovullo one-year extension despite 104-loss season
(11 - 7:34pm, Sep 27)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogWhich MLB managers are on the hot seat? Ranking four skippers most likely to be fired after 2021 season
(2 - 6:47pm, Sep 27)
Last: Tom Nawrocki

Newsblog14 wins in a row! Cards tie 1935 club record
(17 - 6:24pm, Sep 27)
Last: Ron J

NewsblogChicago Cubs plan to be 'really active" in MLB free agency, says team president Jed Hoyer
(13 - 6:13pm, Sep 27)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogMullins 1st Oriole in 30-30 club: 'It's surreal'
(29 - 6:11pm, Sep 27)
Last: Ned Garvin: Male Prostitute

NewsblogEmpty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird
(14214 - 5:10pm, Sep 27)
Last: GregD

NewsblogFINAL REGULAR SEASON OMNICHATTER! for September 27 thru Game 162!
(8 - 5:06pm, Sep 27)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.5747 seconds
48 querie(s) executed