View Full Version : Angels get the stiff...
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:03 PM
...one-eye
One of the most blatant screwjobs I can remember.
VonneMarie
10-12-2005, 09:05 PM
They did get hosed. Now we'll hear about this forever.
Frazod
10-12-2005, 09:06 PM
...one-eye
One of the most blatant screwjobs I can remember.
Yeah, since Game 6 of the 198- never mind. :D
Seriously, that was a travesty. I wanted the White Sox to win, but win legitimately. Oh well.
Deberg_1990
10-12-2005, 09:06 PM
what happened?? Game was blacked out in my area. recap please....
siberian khatru
10-12-2005, 09:06 PM
I've never seen that happen before.
chefsos
10-12-2005, 09:08 PM
Wow....Wow. Big time controversy brewing here. The sports talking heads are gonna love it. You just knew the Sox were gonna score after that. I looks like the catcher caught it, but...wow.
HolmeZz
10-12-2005, 09:09 PM
Wouldn't call it 'blatant', though they did get screwed.
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:10 PM
what happened?? Game was blacked out in my area. recap please....
Bottom of the 9th with no one on, game tied. Batter strikes out swinging on a low pitch. The catcher catches the ball (albeit just barely off the ground), the ump calls the strikeout. Catcher rolls the ball back up to the mound and the Angels start trotting off the field. Then the runner starts off for first and for some reason, the umps decide that he gets to stay there.
Runner steals second, base hit into left scores the run, White Sox win.
KChiefsQT
10-12-2005, 09:10 PM
That was bullshit!!!! I would have socked the ump in the face and got fined 30K. It would have been worth it..... sheeesh
leviw
10-12-2005, 09:11 PM
Horrible, horrible call. I hope it doesn't cost the Halos the series.
I think we need to hear Hawk Harrelson and DJ's opinion of that play... ROFL
VonneMarie
10-12-2005, 09:13 PM
Bottom of the 9th with no one on, game tied. Batter strikes out swinging on a low pitch. The catcher catches the ball (albeit just barely off the ground), the ump calls the strikeout. Catcher rolls the ball back up to the mound and the Angels start trotting off the field. Then the runner starts off for first and for some reason, the umps decide that he gets to stay there.
Runner steals second, base hit into left scores the run, White Sox win.
It wasn't Crede it was AJ Pierzynski that struck out. Crede got the "game winning rbi." :shake:
Frazod
10-12-2005, 09:14 PM
I think we need to hear Hawk Harrelson and DJ's opinion of that play... ROFL
He gone put it in a can of cornnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn....... YES! :D
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:14 PM
It wasn't Crede it was AJ Pierzynski that struck out. Crede got the "game winning rbi." :shake:
Yeah, I figured out my mistake but couldn't remember who the actual batter was but you quoted me before my edit :)
KChiefsQT
10-12-2005, 09:14 PM
Bottom of the 9th with no one on, game tied. Batter strikes out swinging on a low pitch. The catcher catches the ball (albeit just barely off the ground), the ump calls the strikeout. Catcher rolls the ball back up to the mound and the Angels start trotting off the field. Then the runner starts off for first and for some reason, the umps decide that he gets to stay there.
Runner steals second, base hit into left scores the run, White Sox win.
you fogot the most important FACT.... that out would have been the end of the 9th and we would be watching extra innings.
VonneMarie
10-12-2005, 09:15 PM
He gone put it in a can of cornnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn....... YES! :D
Rep. ROFL
chefsos
10-12-2005, 09:18 PM
It wasn't Crede it was AJ Pierzynski that struck out. Crede got the "game winning rbi." :shake:
you fogot the most important FACT.... that out would have been the end of the 9th and we would be watching extra innings.
OWNED by the ladies!!
j/k!
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:18 PM
you fogot the most important FACT.... that out would have been the end of the 9th and we would be watching extra innings.
yes, there were two outs. I mean, there's no way to spin it, the Angels got flat-out screwed. This is like the 5th down game or something.
leviw
10-12-2005, 09:18 PM
Really, I'm trying to think if I've ever seen a worse call. (Dekinger's was bad, but I was only a year old so I didn't really "see" it.)
This was awful. He called him out...then just let him go on to first, I guess for the sake of the south-side scum. I'm not sure, but that's incredible.
milkman
10-12-2005, 09:20 PM
OWNED by the ladies!!
Doesn't sound like a bad thing to me!
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:20 PM
Really, I'm trying to think if I've ever seen a worse call. (Dekinger's was bad, but I was only a year old so I didn't really "see" it.)
This was awful. He called him out...then just let him go on to first, I guess for the sake of the south-side scum. I'm not sure, but that's incredible.
The 1985 call was one of those where you can see how it was bang-bang and it could be missed. This one was inexplicable. They had it right, and then inexplicably changed it to be wrong.
milkman
10-12-2005, 09:21 PM
yes, there were two outs. I mean, there's no way to spin it, the Angels got flat-out screwed. This is like the 5th down game or something.
Yep, the Angels got jobbed.
chefsos
10-12-2005, 09:23 PM
Well, the sports radio guys' show prep for tomorrow just got simplified.
The 1985 call was one of those where you can see how it was bang-bang and it could be missed. This one was inexplicable. They had it right, and then inexplicably changed it to be wrong.
Denkinger was authoritative about the call, there was never any question or confusion... he was there, and he made his call. Tonight was worse, it was real wishy washy and obviously nobody could tell what the actual call was...
Garcia Bronco
10-12-2005, 09:23 PM
I don't understand what happened...the guy was out right?
KChiefsQT
10-12-2005, 09:24 PM
Really, I'm trying to think if I've ever seen a worse call. (Dekinger's was bad, but I was only a year old so I didn't really "see" it.)
This was awful. He called him out...then just let him go on to first, I guess for the sake of the south-side scum. I'm not sure, but that's incredible.
If I had a say in it... I would make damn sure that idiot doesnt ump another playoff game until he goes to an umpire clinic.
KChiefsQT
10-12-2005, 09:25 PM
I don't understand what happened...the guy was out right?
He was out... was called out...angels players thought the same started walking off the fiels... allowed to run to first by dumb ump...then called safe. Ended up scoring and winning the game. stupid call.
I don't understand what happened...the guy was out right?
If the catcher drops the ball on strike 3... the runner can advance to first. All the catcher has to do is throw to first and step on the bag. But the catcher cannot drop the third strike. The umpire ruled the catcher didn't catch the ball, but he did... and nobody realized it until the catcher flipped it back to the mound and Sox player was standing on first.
VonneMarie
10-12-2005, 09:27 PM
Angels played under protest?
HolmeZz
10-12-2005, 09:28 PM
Angels played under protest?
I suppose they could, but nothing would come of it. This puppy's in the books.
siberian khatru
10-12-2005, 09:29 PM
So when is a guy out? I mean, obviously an umpire TWICE signaling out doesn't settle the issue.
In fact, I don't know why Pierzynski stopped at 1B. The way his luck was going, he should've just kept running around the bases. The Angels may have eventually tagged him "out," but surely some ump would've let him come around to score. Sheesh.
Garcia Bronco
10-12-2005, 09:31 PM
Just another reason why baseball is stupid.
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:31 PM
So when is a guy out? I mean, obviously an umpire TWICE signaling out doesn't settle the issue.
I thought signalling the strikeout settled the issue, but apparently that's only an intermediate indicator of what the play's outcome might be.
leviw
10-12-2005, 09:32 PM
So when is a guy out? I mean, obviously an umpire TWICE signaling out doesn't settle the issue.
In fact, I don't know why Pierzynski stopped at 1B. The way his luck was going, he should've just kept running around the bases. The Angels may have eventually tagged him "out," but surely some ump would've let him come around to score. Sheesh.
Why did he run to first in the first place? Pierznski's the catcher; he's heard the ump's caidence all game...he had to know what the umpire had said to signal a strikeout throughout the game. I wonder if the ump signaled out, but didn't say anything...so A.J. just thought, "what the hell, i'll run."
I have no idea :shrug:
chefsos
10-12-2005, 09:33 PM
Angels played under protest?
I've never, ever seen that succeed, but wouldn't it be bizarre if they were made to come back and begin play where they left off, I guess going to the top of the 10th?
Why did he run to first in the first place? Pierznski's the catcher; he's heard the ump's caidence all game...he had to know what the umpire had said to signal a strikeout throughout the game. I wonder if the ump signaled out, but didn't say anything...so A.J. just thought, "what the hell, i'll run."
I have no idea :shrug:
A.J. started toward the dugout before going to first... so that might not be too far off...
leviw
10-12-2005, 09:35 PM
I've never, ever seen that succeed, but wouldn't it be bizarre if they were made to come back and begin play where they left off, I guess going to the top of the 10th?
Don't remember, but wasn't the Royals-Yanks' pinetar game played under protest and it worked out for KC....how'd that work?
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:35 PM
I've never, ever seen that succeed, but wouldn't it be bizarre if they were made to come back and begin play where they left off, I guess going to the top of the 10th?
Well, why don't they? The inning is over now, but it was over when the ump signalled the strikeout. Who knows if he's actually decided on what his final call is yet?
siberian khatru
10-12-2005, 09:35 PM
I've never, ever seen that succeed, but wouldn't it be bizarre if they were made to come back and begin play where they left off, I guess going to the top of the 10th?
The George Brett Pine Tar Game.
leviw
10-12-2005, 09:35 PM
A.J. started toward the dugout before going to first... so that might not be too out there...
Exactly. So what made him turn and run to first???
siberian khatru
10-12-2005, 09:37 PM
Another thing that bugs me: A.J. Pierzynski is the biggest red-ass in baseball. He's universally hated, mostly by his own teammates, and two teams dumped him because he's such an asshole. Guy doesn't deserve ANY breaks.
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:37 PM
Exactly. So what made him turn and run to first???
I suppose it was just a shot in the dark. The ball was caught near the ground, so he may have ran just to make sure.
chefsos
10-12-2005, 09:38 PM
Exactly. So what made him turn and run to first???
I think you said it yourself. He figured "What the hell, I've got nothing to lose".
leviw
10-12-2005, 09:39 PM
I suppose it was just a shot in the dark. The ball was caught near the ground, so he may have ran just to make sure.
Nah, I bet Eddings (the ump) was whispering loudly, "RUN, A.J., RUN, RUN, RUN....YOU GOT IT BUDDY!"
VonneMarie
10-12-2005, 09:39 PM
Another reason why I hate the Sux.
siberian khatru
10-12-2005, 09:39 PM
Nah, I bet Eddings (the ump) was whispering loudly, "RUN, A.J., RUN, RUN, RUN....YOU GOT IT BUDDY!"
ROFL
nychief
10-12-2005, 09:39 PM
what ****ing terrible call.
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:41 PM
Another thing that bugs me: A.J. Pierzynski is the biggest red-ass in baseball. He's universally hated, mostly by his own teammates, and two teams dumped him because he's such an asshole. Guy doesn't deserve ANY breaks.
Yeah, couldn't happen to a nicer... err.. uhh...
chefsos
10-12-2005, 09:41 PM
I'm willing to bet tk13's looking at an Angels' board right now. Meltdown!
siberian khatru
10-12-2005, 09:42 PM
Well, apparently now the ump is saying that after reviewing the videotape of the play, he STILL thinks Molina trapped the ball.
So not only is Edding a moron, he's a f*cking liar.
VonneMarie
10-12-2005, 09:44 PM
Well, apparently now the ump is saying that after reviewing the videotape of the play, he STILL thinks Molina trapped the ball.
So not only is Edding a moron, he's a f*cking liar.
OMFG. What a blind White Sux ball sucking idiot.
chefsos
10-12-2005, 09:44 PM
Well, apparently now the ump is saying that after reviewing the videotape of the play, he STILL thinks Molina trapped the ball.
So not only is Edding a moron, he's a f*cking liar.
No doubt. He rung A.J. up, then backpedaled.
siberian khatru
10-12-2005, 09:45 PM
BTW, it was Josh Paul, not Molina, who was catching.
I'm willing to bet tk13's looking at an Angels' board right now. Meltdown!
Well, I wasn't. I can, I guess. I'd imagine I'd have to wear a helmet though.
Frazod
10-12-2005, 09:49 PM
There is one undeniable truth here - had the Angels catcher simply tagged Pierzynski out or thrown to first, none of it would have mattered. It may have been a bogus call, but it could have easily been diffused. Paul may not have literally dropped the ball, but he did figuratively.
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 09:50 PM
There is one undeniable truth here - had the Angels catcher simply tagged Pierzynski out or thrown to first, none of it would have mattered. It may have been a bogus call, but it could have easily been diffused. Paul may not have literally dropped the ball, but he did figuratively.
But, why would the catcher need to do that, once the umpire has called the strikeout? That by definition negates the need to make the tag, because the out has already been recorded. Well, you would think anyway.
Frazod
10-12-2005, 09:55 PM
But, why would the catcher need to do that, once the umpire has called the strikeout? That by definition negates the need to make the tag, because the out has already been recorded. Well, you would think anyway.
I see it happen all the time - the catcher tags the runner after he strikes out, just to be sure, if there is any question as to the outcome of the play.
And I'm not saying the call wasn't bogus - it was.
SoCalBronco
10-12-2005, 09:56 PM
this was fair. Both games were a draw. It wouldnt be right for one team to be up 2-0 anyway.
Go Sox!
KChiefsQT
10-12-2005, 09:57 PM
But, why would the catcher need to do that, once the umpire has called the strikeout? That by definition negates the need to make the tag, because the out has already been recorded. Well, you would think anyway.
true... but on the third strike if the ball hits the dirt and the batter runs to first and beats the throw they are safe.
siberian khatru
10-12-2005, 10:00 PM
Josh Paul was just on ESPNews and taking it quite well, I'd say. Not fuming or anything. I'd be going Brett on that place.
He did say that usually an ump will say "No catch, no catch" when he thinks a ball's been trapped -- implying that Eddings didn't.
Stinger
10-12-2005, 10:00 PM
But, why would the catcher need to do that, once the umpire has called the strikeout? That by definition negates the need to make the tag, because the out has already been recorded. Well, you would think anyway.
6.09
The batter becomes a runner when_ (a) He hits a fair ball; (b) The third strike called by the umpire is not caught, providing (1) first base is unoccupied, or (2) first base is occupied with two out; When a batter becomes a base runner on a third strike not caught by the catcher and starts for the dugout, or his position, and then realizes his situation and attempts then to reach first base, he is not out unless he or first base is tagged before he reaches first base. If, however, he actually reaches the dugout or dugout steps, he may not then attempt to go to first base and shall be out
MLB Rules (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/official_info/official_rules/batter_6.jsp)
Coach
10-12-2005, 10:02 PM
However, the umpire made an initial signal out to the right to signal the strike, then made a separate motion to pump the fist to ring up the out.
That's 2 different motions.
StcChief
10-12-2005, 10:09 PM
Really, I'm trying to think if I've ever seen a worse call. (Dekinger's was bad, but I was only a year old so I didn't really "see" it.)
This was awful. He called him out...then just let him go on to first, I guess for the sake of the south-side scum. I'm not sure, but that's incredible.
Wow. it's a 1985 call of a different color. Let's call him and then let's change our call.
Replay should now be back on the table......
By request... on the Angels website there are literally 4 full pages of threads on this... and it's 50 threads a page, so I can't even begin to get it all...
THAT WAS F#CKING B#LLSH!T. WE LOST THE GAME BECAUSE OF THE F#CKING UMP. THE UMP BEAT US.
Angels need to protest this game-- what a joke!
I'd say the Don Denkinger call was a lot worse. The call in the 48 WS against the Indians was awfully bad, too.
You can't protest a judgement call, so we are stuck with the call. Many catchers will tag the batter, right after those kinds of plays to make sure of the out. Paul should have done that. Scioscia should have had the plate ump go for help a lot sooner as well. By the time he did, it was an afterthought and there was no way he was going to over turn that call by that time.
If the Angels and we as fans dwell on this call, we will turn into Cardinal fans obsessing about the Denkinger call. Besides, they let him steal without a throw and then a double off the wall.
Doug Eddings will be working at McDonalds after this. Not only was it a terrible call, but he REVERSED HIS OWN CALL. He clearly called the strikeout and the out in the video, Paul did catch the pitch, and even if he didn't the UMP CALLED THE OUT!!!!.
This guy should never be allowed to umpire another major league game ever, ####, i wouldn't want him umping a t-ball game.... I'm sure Bud Selig agrees.
KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...KILL THE UMPS!!!...GO ANGELS!!!!....I kinda feel like Jack Nicholson in THE SHINING..hehe
Wow. I would have been total agreement with you guys and I'm a Sox fan. But, after seeing the replay over and over again in slow-motion...the ball skipped up into his mit.
I know this probably sounds biased.....but it really did skip up.
yes... WATCH IT... it bounces... IN THE WEB OF HIS GLOVE -- BALL WAS CAUGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm so #### MAD!
No way ump could see it from his position behind the catcher. Not only did he make the sign for strike three, then he clenched his fist and called the runner out.
Doesn't matter if the ball hits the ground if the ump calls the runner out.
MLB told them to give this one to the White Sox. Anything for more TV ratings now that the Red Sox and Yankees are out of it.
Angels were robbed.
Who knows who this guy is?
How do we find out where he lives?
His phone #
His e-mail address
He had to be paid off - that ####. There's no way that was an innocent mistake.
chefsos
10-12-2005, 10:10 PM
ROFL
Here's A.J., lovable as ever.
"Do we feel lucky? No," Pierzynski said. "Did they feel lucky when they won last night?"
Coach
10-12-2005, 10:12 PM
A.J. is a f**king tool. He is a classless person - this is known around baseball, just ask the SF pitching staff from last year. Apparently he has as much honesty as he does good looks. Zero.
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 10:15 PM
However, the umpire made an initial signal out to the right to signal the strike, then made a separate motion to pump the fist to ring up the out.
That's 2 different motions.
yeah, that's what I was referring to.
In little league, they tell you to always tag the guy anyway just in case as a safety measure. But in this case, it's hard to see why any reasonable person would have thought anything else had happened.
chefsos
10-12-2005, 10:16 PM
By request... on the Angels website there are literally 4 full pages of threads on this... and it's 50 threads a page, so I can't even begin to get it all...
Holy crap. I hope you were wearing internet Nomex when you went in there.
Holy crap. I hope you were wearing internet Nomex when you went in there.
Yeah, I need to get to a hospital, I look like a charbroiled smurf.
chiefsfan987
10-12-2005, 10:31 PM
"I'd say the Don Denkinger call was a lot worse."
I disagree, how can it be worse when a guy who was out thats called safe doesn't even score?
schneider221
10-12-2005, 10:36 PM
alteast the 1985 call was a bang bang call, and he stayed with his call and didnt flip flop
this could by a HUGE factor in getting instant replay in baseball now
Eleazar
10-12-2005, 10:38 PM
"I'd say the Don Denkinger call was a lot worse."
I disagree, how can it be worse when a guy who was out thats called safe doesn't even score?
Yeah.
In '85, you have a guy who was out but called safe that changed the dynamics of the inning, but didn't actually score.
In '05, you have a guy who was out, the out that would have ended the game and made the series 2-0 (how many teams have lost the first two games at home and gone on to win aplayoff series? only two that I can think of), and that runner was the game winning run.
Both affected the game to different degrees, but this was a much more potent mistake.
SoCalBronco
10-12-2005, 11:06 PM
A.J. is a f**king tool. He is a classless person - this is known around baseball, just ask the SF pitching staff from last year. Apparently he has as much honesty as he does good looks. Zero.
Yeah because the SF Giants are fair arbiters of which players are classless and which arent. This is just KC Royal based hatred right here thats all. Just homer it up, whatever.
Sox win. You can put in on the board, yessss!!!
Yeah because the SF Giants are fair arbiters of which players are classless and which arent. This is just KC Royal based hatred right here thats all. Just homer it up, whatever.
Sox win. You can put in on the board, yessss!!!
Actually he has the reputation around baseball as being a jerk. That's not just a Royals thing.
One of those now-it-can-be-told stories the White Sox, A.J. Pierzynski's new employer, surely haven't heard: During a Giants exhibition game last spring, Pierzynski took a shot to his, shall we say, private parts. Trainer Stan Conte rushed to the scene, placed his hands on Pierzynski's shoulders in a reassuring way, and asked how it felt. "Like this," said Pierzynski, viciously delivering a knee to Conte's groin. It was a real test of professionalism for the enraged Conte, who vowed to ignore Pierzynski for the rest of the season until Conte realized how that would look. The incident went unreported because all of the beat writers happened to be doing in-game interviews in the clubhouse, but it was corroborated by a half-dozen eyewitnesses who could hardly believe their eyes. Said one source, as reliable as they come: "There is absolutely no doubt that it happened."
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/01/15/SPG6IAQNH81.DTL
He stomps around when he's not hitting and whoops it up when he is. He sometimes skyhooks the ball back to the pitcher after a strike, like Kareem with a chest protector. He's toned it down lately, but opponents have long memories, long enough that a few extra fastballs always end up headed for A.J. Pierzynski's ribs.
Exhibit A: In April, after Bartolo Colon, then with Cleveland, plunked Pierzynski, Matt Lawton, a former teammate and current Indian, suggested nobody was losing sleep over it. "I just get the feeling that a lot of guys over here don't like the Twins and don't like A.J. Pierzynski himself," Lawton said at the time. "I can't say Bartolo was trying to hit him, but I don't think he minded hitting him at all."
Of course, none of this is news to the guys who share a clubhouse with Pierzynski. "A.J. does a lot of things to piss off the other team," says leftfielder Jacque Jones. "We know how to deal with him by now, but a lot of people don't like him."
To which Pierzynski, 25, replies: "If they have to throw at me, they're gonna throw at me. The only thing that matters is what my teammates think."
Well, as you might imagine, some of Pierzynski's teammates can't stand him either. Doug Mientkiewicz calls him a baby. Torii Hunter prefers "smart-ass." To Jones, he's just a knucklehead. They say all this with a smile, thinking how much more they'd hate him if they were playing against him. "He talks a lot, and gets under the skin of opposing teams"
http://espn.go.com/magazine/vol5no20pierzynski.html
4th and Long
10-13-2005, 04:36 AM
true... but on the third strike if the ball hits the dirt and the batter runs to first and beats the throw they are safe.
Technically, the rule reads, with less than 2 outs, if first base is occupied, the batter is automatically out. If first base is occupied with 2 outs the batter may advance to first base at his own risk on a dropped third strike. Either way, the ump blew that one big time.
Ultra Peanut
10-13-2005, 05:04 AM
I think we need to hear Hawk Harrelson and DJ's opinion of that play... ROFL"He gawn... to first!"
Ultra Peanut
10-13-2005, 05:07 AM
Just another reason why baseball is stupid.And why instant replay is a good thing in sports.
Ultra Peanut
10-13-2005, 05:11 AM
Well, apparently now the ump is saying that after reviewing the videotape of the play, he STILL thinks Molina trapped the ball.
So not only is Edding a moron, he's a f*cking liar.Crack: kid tested, Eddings approved!
"Josh Paul took it for granted that he caught the ball..." - Kruk on Baseball Tonight (I'm too lazy to change the channel from ESPN2, for some reason)
BECAUSE HE ****ING DID, AND THE UMPIRE CALLED PIERZYNSKI OUT.
ExtremeChief
10-13-2005, 05:16 AM
Yeah.
In '05, you have a guy who was out, the out that would have ended the game and made the series 2-0
The game would still have been tied and went into extra innings.
Still a bs call though.
siberian khatru
10-13-2005, 05:54 AM
"I'd say the Don Denkinger call was a lot worse."
No, it wasn't because the Cardinals never got the second out in the inning (thus, Orta was not the phantom third out). Plus, they self-destructed in numerous ways that inning.
The Eddings call WAS the third out in the inning.
jcl-kcfan2
10-13-2005, 07:35 AM
yeah, that's what I was referring to.
In little league, they tell you to always tag the guy anyway just in case as a safety measure. But in this case, it's hard to see why any reasonable person would have thought anything else had happened.
Where, pray tell, did you play little league?
Dropped 3rd strike in LL????
Extra Point
10-13-2005, 07:51 AM
This proves that baseball is an uncanny sport, with idiosyncratic rules like 6.09, the ground rule double with RISP, infield fly rule, and such. Integrating replay would make too much sense, and would take the fuzz out of the sport. Then you're on to computerized calling of the strike zone.
Taking the imperfection in the umpiring position out of the game, making for much less emotion in the game, taking the fan out of fanatic. Baseball would be nothing with replay. "Hating" the ump is part of the whole game, and his bad calls stoke the fire.
('85 wasn't that long ago. Ask any Card fan.)
Goapics1
10-13-2005, 07:57 AM
I do not understand why the homeplate umpire did not ask the 1st or 2nd base ump for an appeal. The ball was not clearly caught IMHO, so I do not know if it would have mattered.
Still, the White Sox had to execute to score the run, it was not like the 3rd strike dropped/not dropped ball was a home run to end the game. Quit fuggin' whining.
You know, with the angle of it blown up that FOX just showed, I'd like to see it again. I think the ball might have hit the ground. From the zoomed in shot they showed it looked like the ball was actually higher in the "last" frame in the mitt than it was when it was at it's lowest point closest to the dirt.
siberian khatru
10-13-2005, 07:37 PM
You know, with the angle of it blown up that FOX just showed, I'd like to see it again. I think the ball might have hit the ground. From the zoomed in shot they showed it looked like the ball was actually higher in the "last" frame in the mitt than it was when it was at it's lowest point closest to the dirt.
My beef isn't with whether or not the ball was caught. It's how Eddings signaled it. He pumped his fist, which I think is pretty widely regarded as the "out" sign. But since he apparently didn't say "out," the play continues. WTF? So hand signals DON'T count? Or just sometimes? Or umps can use any hand signal they want for any play? Why signal at all if the verbal cue is what matters? I just don't get it, and I thought Eddings gave a vague answer to that in the press conference.
Having ranted about that, I will say this: Paul should've tagged A.J. for good measure, but even more to the point -- if Escobar retires Crede, this is all moot. Bottom line is, Escobar didn't do his job, either.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.