Posted on 10/14/2005 7:57:37 AM PDT by nikos1121
ANAHEIM, Calif. -- The world will have to end, I assume, before baseball finds a way to stop embarrassing itself. It should be ashamed, in October, to employ an umpire who turned what should be a clear, conclusive process into a vague, confusing guessing game of arm mechanics. It should be ashamed the same umpire, Doug Eddings, didn't provide some sort of verbal cue -- "No catch!'' -- allowing the Angels to make a fair play on future international spy Anthony John Pierzynski.
It should be ashamed, on the very day an iPod with video capabilities was hatched, that it doesn't have devices implanted in and around home plate that could answer many questions, including whether the ball brushes the dirt or not. And it should be ashamed, in sum, that the umps didn't administer the play properly even if Eddings was absolutely certain -- as he claims, though not under oath -- that the ball was trapped by catcher Josh Paul, sure to be grand marshal if Buffalo Grove has a White Sox parade.
But I refuse to buy a developing theory that Eddings was spotted the other night in a smoky Chicago backroom, cutting deals with a gel-haired Venezuelan manager and a 70-year-old owner wearing a black leather biker jacket with "SOX'' across the back. The South Side ballclub has a history of misdeeds that warrant apologies, such as the 1919 fix, yet this is not one of them. Commissioner Bud Selig should be apologizing for another Mr. Magoo moment, for allowing a critical playoff game to be decided so chaotically. The supervisor of American League umpires, one Rich Rieker, should be apologizing for contradicting himself and suggesting TV replays were "inconclusive'' while adding, "The ball changes direction, so I don't see how [the media] can say it's clearly a caught ball.'' Eddings should be apologizing for not separating his "third-strike mechanic'' gesture from a more definitive out call.
The Sox? They have nothing to apologize for, even if comments from some of the Angels insist they got away with murder. For once, they benefit from someone else's incompetence instead of tripping over their own.
Ozzie should just keep quiet
Not that Ozzie Guillen didn't do his best Thursday to throw a match on the flickering ashes. In remarks that probably won't be taken seriously by the Angels, in that he also praised manager Mike Scioscia for handling the Wednesday night episode with class, the Blizzard of Oz targeted Paul for blame. This came after Guillen tried to spin things by saying firmly, "The ball hit the dirt,'' when he really has no idea. Shouldn't Ozzie have kept his trap shut after getting away with the crime of the current baseball century?
"I think Josh Paul made everything confused,'' Guillen said. "Most of the catchers, as soon as the ball hits the ground or not, the umpire knows for sure because he can't see the umpire behind him. He didn't know if he was calling safe or out. Most of the guys tag the [runner], just for insurance. Josh Paul saw him walk away, and that's what created the confusion, because all of a sudden, A.J. don't feel when he touch him. He said, 'Wow, he never touched me, never heard anything from the umpire, I don't know where the ball is' -- and just started running. Josh created a little confusion there with the umpire.''
Yeah, and Paris Hilton is a misunderstood angel up there on the Sunset Strip. Rather than politic, the Blizzard should be thankful the Sox weren't the victimized party, whereupon he would have stormed around U.S. Cellular Field like the Tasmanian Devil. Whether the baseball actually hit the dirt or not will be debated for years, with no one entirely sure about the truth -- after 24 hours of replays -- except maybe Paul, who says he caught the ball cleanly but speaks with obvious bias.
"It was the wrong call,'' said Paul, whose distinction as a former Sox catcher and boyhood fan only adds intrigue. "When you know you catch the ball, you just roll it back to the mound and walk off the field. It's not my fault. I take no responsibility for that whatsoever.''
Now make use of huge break
Actually, Guillen is right about Paul in one respect. How many times do catchers unnecessarily tag batters after a third strike, simply to be safe instead of sorry? At such an important juncture -- Game 2, AL Championship Series, bottom of the ninth, 1-1 game -- I'm tagging out a batter on a third-out third strike as a precaution.
But that's Ozzie, always making news. He isn't happy that media and fans are jazzed by this story, figuring we should be applauding Mark Buehrle for his complete-game gem and the Sox for manufacturing their own charm. "Don't forget what we did to win the game,'' Guillen said. "I don't want to concentrate on the calls.'' He even shooed away his sons as they watched the replays in his office.
All Pierzynski's romp did, remember, was give the Sox a runner at first with two out. Joe Crede still had to deliver the game-winning double, which had nothing to do with the umps and everything with getting to Kelvim Escobar. The Sox should smile, shrug and give extra thanks to their personal gods, then prepare themselves the best they can to take full advantage of the gift and win this series. If they go on to lose now, after receiving a break of historic magnitude, they might never win a World Series.
"I feel sorry for the ump. I feel sorry for Josh. I feel sorry for me. I feel sorry for Crede. I feel sorry for everybody,'' Pierzynski said. "I feel sorry it happened. And I feel sorry it's turned into such a national story, because there are so many other good things that came out of the game that people should be talking about. Instead they're talking about a weird play that never happens.''
Sox lucky they're not down 0-2
Other than Buehrle, you can't say the Sox deserved to win Game 2. There were too many baserunning blunders, too many missed opportunities by Jermaine Dye, Paul Konerko and a lineup that has managed four runs in two games against starting pitchers running on fumes. The Sox looked tight and restless at the plate and are fortunate not to be down 0-2 heading into Angel Stadium, a park that traditionally treats them rudely.
A.J.'s punking of the ump isn't unlike steroids and other issues in Selig's domain. Just once, I'd like to see Bud and his people proactively stomp out a problem -- even an umpire's arm mechanics -- before it infects the big picture. Shouldn't an official or umpiring supervisor be teaching the distinction between a fist-clench/arm-pump and a verbal out call? Baseball is complicated enough to leave a significant decision so vague when the world is watching so closely.
Naturally, one of Bud's guys was in a defense mode Thursday. Said vice president of umpiring Mike Port: "Doug Eddings, all things considered, did nothing wrong.''
Baseball, all things considered, laid a rotten egg atop a compelling series.
I don't know about any other White Sox fans out there, but I'm getting sick of hearing this guy Chicago Sports Reporter Mariotti trash them any chance he gets. What is it with him?
Through the years this sort of thing has happened in all sports. The NE Pats were handed the conference championship a few years ago because a Brady fumble was called a forward pass. In the end it all evens out and this kind of story is a waste of news print.
Question: "When a batter advances to first base on an third strike where the ball is not cleanly caught by the catcher, did the batter 'strike out' or 'strike safe'?
The Angels just received their share for the two bad calls in the Yankees series; The Cano interference BS and the A-Rod to Giambi put-out that was called safe.
"Question: "When a batter advances to first base on an third strike where the ball is not cleanly caught by the catcher, did the batter 'strike out' or 'strike safe'?"
I would think that it would be charged as strike out and passed ball would it now?
Usually, it's scored K/E2. The exception would be if the batter swings and misses at what turns out to be a wild pitch. In this case, the play would be scored K/E1.
Tuck rule, my friend. Tuck rule. The rest is sour grapes.
I'd hate to see baseball going to instant replay except maybe on homeruns. If it did it would be a slippery slope to removing umpires, esp behind the plate, and substitute them with robots.
Did the ump make an out sign with his arm? That's what he seemed to do. That is what the fielders saw and walked off the field. Verbal decisions are needed so everyone can hear - enough of the umpire motion performance horsesh't.
"Game three Angels vs Black Sox today in California."
Hey! Careful there. :-)))
Exactly.
Also, how many men did the Angels leave on base? Bellyaching about officials' calls as the reason for a loss is juvenile.
This guy writes like he's afraid of losing a bundle on this series.
This supposed "bad call" by the umpire did not enable the pinch runner to steal second and the next batter to smack a double...
You are correct. I see Posada do it instinctively even when it is clear that he caught the ball cleanly 2in. off the ground.
Wrong... the umpire clearly called him "OUT" by raising his fist in front of his chest. He first called the "STRIKE" by raising his right hand up and then, in a second motion, pulled his hand in front of him, closed his fist and shook it signifying an out. At that point the play is over (or at least should have been).
The correct procedure for a third strike that is not caught by the catcher is to call the strike with your right hand raised, and then make a verbal call "no catch, no catch, no catch"... This is taught to umpires as far down as High School.
So, the bad call (the ball clearly hit the webbing of the mitt and rolled into the pocket - watch the replays, no dirt flew up as it would have if the ball had hit the ground first) was bad enough... but where the umpire really blew it was in his hand signals and in giving no verbal clues. That umpire is going to have fun with the fans in right field at Anaheim Stadim tonight.
As much as I like Brady and the Pats though they are not my team..Let me say this
Dude that was an F******G fumble. LOL.
If you have heard Mariotti expound on all things, he takes small breaks from his politically liberal pounding of Bush, Rove et al. to make equally uninsightful insipid sports commentary. Apparently he did not appreciate his prior Chicago experience before slithering onto the national ESPN stage. So Chicago get the same as the President from him and his irritation with the city exudes from his being. As best I can tell, that would seem to be what this is about.
I used to think there was a definitive answer to all umpire rulings. Was it a catch or wasn't it?
What I came to realize over time was that there will always be times when players make mistakes, and there will always be times when umpires make mistakes. It's all part of the game.
Humans fail. It's the hardest part of the game to come to terms with. There are times when you'll feel that you or your team were robbed. At times you'll be right, recognizing that at times the team you're playing will also be robbed.
Sports are a good place to develop character. As in all walks of life, things will sometimes not be fair. Understanding this and dealing with it builds character, and that's not only the hardest play to make in sports, it's the hardest play to make in life.
You can't take the human error factor our of your teams play. As I've grown older, I have come to the point that I don't think you should attempt to remove the human factor from the officiating either.
I'm sure I'll get a lot of flack for holding this view. There are certainly reasons to disagree.
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.