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.
No kidding? I grew up in Concord/Walnut Creek, and had season tickets to the Raiders for a couple of seasons in the the 70's.
We might have tailgaited next to each other and not even known it. :-)
I've seen many plays where the ump calls batter or runner out initially and then changes the call after either the fielder drops the ball or there is an appeal.
Your beef is with the NFL rulebook, my friend. Don't blame the officials for getting the call right, or Belichick for knowing the rules so well he knew to throw the red flag.
Yep and lost on many Raider fans is that on the ensuing game winning drive, Patriot receivers broke almost a dozen tackles getting to the sidelines killing the clock. Troy Brown broke three tackles on one play!
The Raiders were old and gave up.
The problem in a nutshell.
Ya, Mariotti makes his living out of manufacturing controversy. They've got paper to fill and its easy to cry and moan about an umps "blown call." Then whenever the fans dog him by email, he insults us further by insisting that fans should ignore him and watch the team.
Really, no body I know reads him. He's just the loudest of the squeaky wheels that make up the chicago baseball sports rags.
I'm thinking all this caviling will only hurt the Angels. Umps didn't do anything wrong and the Angels crying about the ump's "mechanics" (hand signals) is completely laughable. The catcher admits he never heard AJ "called out." But the manager and others insist he motioned a strike--funny thing is no way the catcher (a former Sox player) could see the motion. He assumed the call--and you know what happens if you assume.
Hey Mariotti, na na na na, na na na na, Sox win one, u lose.
Jay Mariotti represents the worst of today's sports media. It's not enough that they have their own byline, and get to attend world class sporting events while getting paid for it. Now, thanks to ESPN, they are all clamoring to get face time on TV. To get that face time, they have to be obnoxious like Stephen A. Smith, Skip Bayless, Woody Paige, et al.
What the white writers don't understand is that they can't be as over the top as the minority writers, who really get away with slander and racial references.
Even mild-mannered Tim Cowlishaw of the Dallas Morning News, whose work I have enjoyed in the past, has become smarmy and arrogant in his columns of late. DMN's sportsblog is replete with references to which staff members of the staff are getting the most time on TV, not on who's doing the best reporting.
But, is the team actually charged with an "out"? If the answer is yes, then that means (doesn't it?) that the teams ends up making more than three outs in the inning? Thanks.
Never was fortunate enough to see the Raiders live at the Colisseum. I did get to see them beat the 'Pokes at Texas Stadium in the mid-80s, though.
I grew up in Castro Valley. After I graduated from HS in '72, I went to college in Washington (Gonzaga). During my junior year, my folks retired and moved to Oregon. Visited my sister in Oakland a few times, but that's about it. Been a "naturalized" Texan for the past 25 years.
Seattle's a beautiful city...visited many times. Beautiful country up there. Texas has its own beauty, too. The bluebonnets and wildflowers in the spring make the summers worth bearing. The Rio Grande Gorge is worth a visit, too.
If the opportunity arose, I'd move back to Spokane in a heartbeat. Still, I'm very happy here in Texas.
However, there is one situation where the fielding team must produce a fourth out in an inning or else suffer adverse consequences. Can you name it?
Sorry but that doesn't cut it because even after Angels catcher put the ball on the ground the Angels could still pick in up and toss it to first to to get the out if they know the ball is live still...
If you look an the replay the plate ump gave both the "strike three" AND the "out signal" meaning "dead ball"...
At the very least the plate ump if he contends the ball is still live after Angels catcher put it on the ground needs to indicate to his fellow ump that ball is still in play so THEY (the other umps) could get back in to position to make a call if needed.... the other ump were walking out of position because they also thought the inning was over ( note the White Sox runner didn't have to stop at first he could of rounded the bases)
The kicked is the plate ump walked on to the field between the Angels pitcher and the ball ..and the ump had his back to the ball, the Angels pitcher was the closest Angels player to the live ball the pitcher could pick it up and try to make the play at first...
So why is the plate ump walked in between the player and the ball and the ump is not even looking an the ball (note that if the ump really thought the ball was still live would have stayed out of the potential play and follower what was going on with that live ball on the ground to see if the Angels go get the ball and try to make the play?... after all the play is where ever the live ball is... and the ball was not at first so the play is not at first yet..
So why is the ump not looking at the live ball on the ground but has got his back to it?
Because he knew he call it an out and the ball behind him was dead... then he sees the White Son player ran to first... and then the plate ump for what ever reason called the dead ball live.. that play was total BS
I really havn't read or heard what the Angel fans or their media are saying. I agree with you that the catcher should not be assuming anything.
The people, mainly media, who are saying that the umpire needs to call out that the ball was not caught are stupid. Are they saying that if a runner misses the bag while running the bases the umpire should call that out too when he sees it?
"And, by the way... when did the officiating crews start holding press conferences? WTF is that all about?!"
I loved that first question from some foreign reporter. Something about they say if there is not officiating controversy it was not a good game. I don't know who ever said that, but the umpire chief's reply was priceless:
"Pardon me? Next question."
And don't forget that Ozuma stole second before Crede's hit. They could have kept him on the bag or thrown him out and still be out of the inning.
No they are not. It is common practice for the umpire behind the plate in that situation to call out "no catch, no catch, no catch"
"It sure looked to me like the umpire made two distinct the motions: the first to call the third strike, the second to call him out."
How does the catcher, with his back to the ump, know that?
"If the umpire calls the batter out, the batter is out."
Did he "call" him out? Everyone, catcher hitter and umpire, agree he never did.
LEt's ask people out there who have umpired that question.
Yup, it is not the responsibility of the umpire to tell either team how to play in a given situation. Your example of missing the bag on the bases is one example. The umpire can call the the runner safe and then out on the appeal--I've seen it happen. Same with leaving the bag too early on a caught fly ball. The opposing team has a responsibility to appeal.
The media is responsible for fanning the flames of discontent here (much as they continually carp about conservatives, etc.). Their ignorance is striking, but they are ignorant with an agenda. Their agenda is to sell more papers and get more people to watch the games.
If you watch the replay on mlb.com you can see that the ump DOES NOT turn his back on the play and is obviously following the play as AJ runs down the line. The first base ump also follows the play.
Much is made of the assertion that Chisox fans would be just as angry if the "blown" call went against them. This begs the question that the call was "blown." I disagree that the call was blown. If I was an Angel fan right now I'd want Josh Paul's head on a pike--for not tagging the runner. I'm not blaming the umpire for thinking that the ball was in the dirt.
BTW--the signal out does not indicate dead ball. The signal for a dead ball is the same as a foul--arms raised. The ball was never dead. Sure the call confused. Cry me a River. and next time tag the runner, chumpy.
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.