Posted on 10/26/2013 8:00:20 PM PDT by foundedonpurpose
except that the runner was NOT in the base line.
He doesn't have to be unless someone is trying to tag him out. Even then, his baseline is a direct line between his location and the base he is headed to.
besides which, the same ump all night long called pitches below the knees “strikes” for the SL pitchers, the opposite for the Sox. Bias in the extreme.
The plate ump is not the one who made the obstruction call. Speaking of bias....
Yep, the 3rd base umpire made the call almost immediately.
When reporters asked the umps, “What was Middlebrooks supposed to do?”, they had no answer.
That’s because it is irrelevant. The rule does not address the point because it simply does not matter.
Look...I understand Red Sox fans and players are going to be pissed. I’m still pissed about 1985. But the fact is that if Middlebrooks isn’t in the base path, Craig is easily home. Be pissed at Saltalamacchia for such a terrible throw...don’t blame the umpires for making the correct call, no matter how hard it might be to swallow.
Obstruction is a judgement call. You agree with it, I don’t. Hence my home field advantage comment.
Yes it was the right call. I was watching with my 90 year old father who is sharper than men half his age, and a baseball fan his entire life. The standing joke is him saying something during a game and 2 seconds later the announcer will say exactly what my Dad just said. I’m not talking the usual jibberish that is said during a typical game, I’m talking the whole ‘inside baseball’ thing.
Anyway, it was a great game, a great finish.
I will admit, having lived in the Boston area, I’m NOT a fan. Worst 5 years of my life as far as personal relationships, them east coast folks somehow believe the world began with them and never advanced west. Btw, wasn’t it the patriots coach that was caught cheating?! Why yes it was, imagine that! lol
Ok, you just made a swig of beer go right out my nose. ARE YOU HAPPY NOW?
Obstruction - 3rd baseman lifted his legs after he missed the pick-off throw from the catcher [tried to cheat].
Runner out at the plate, but umps CORRECTLY called obstruction.
*******************************
Exactly! It was VERY obvious that the third baseman, lying face down on the ground, purposely raised his legs to trip the Cardinal runner. Good call by two umps; third base and home. .......I’m an AL fan, not NL, but it was the right call.
...just looked like he was trying to get up.
**************************
Lie face down on your floor and then try to get up. Would raising your lower legs help in any way? ....No. He was purposely trying to trip the runner, and succeeded.
Like y'all, I believe Middlebrooks raised his legs (twice) with intent to obstruct.
However, it makes no difference if he did it intentionally, it makes no difference that he raised his legs at all.
The rule is that a fielder cannot impede the progress of a runner in the baseline if he does not possess the ball.
Thus, as soon as any contact at all was made between Craig and Middlebrooks, the proper call was "obstruction".
Baseline is from where the runner is and the next base. Baseline is irrelevant(read he rules). He wasn’t running out of baseline to avoid a tag in other words. Where he regained his feet is the baseline
“The call was 100% wrong! Controversial in the least, and umps and refs should never decide games, especially big games. The guy was out at the plate. Boston got robbed. . . . besides which, the same ump all night long called pitches below the knees “strikes” for the SL pitchers, the opposite for the Sox. Bias in the extreme”
The ump that made the call was the third base umpire. He wasn’t calling balls and strikes.
“Watch closely and you will also see that the runner pushed Middle brooks back down as he was trying to get up.”
The base path belongs to the runner, not the fielder. Even if unintentional, it is obstruction to impede the base runner.
The base path is a straight line from where the runner regained his feet in a straight line to home plate, not the chalk lines (read the rules)
“When reporters asked the umps, “What was Middlebrooks supposed to do?”, they had no answer.”
Yes they did have an answer.They cited the rule. If you can’t get out of the way you are obstructing. Intent is not a determinant.
“Be pissed at Saltalamacchia for such a terrible throw...”
Be pissed at him for even making a throw. There was little chance at getting the runner and there were 2 outs, bottom of the batting order
So? When I pointed out that you didn't even know which umpire made the call, you had no answer.
Saltilamacchia made two mistakes: First was the decision to throw down to third base. He should have held the ball. He could see that Craig would beat even a good throw. And the throw was bad..way wide..and too low. Middlebrooks also messed up. He should have come off the bag for the throw..sensing that if the ball gets past him, the runner scores, and the game is over..
Arrgh...see my #59..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.