WORLD CHAMPS!!!!!!! GO SOX!
10-13-2005, 09:50 AM
#81
teh Senior Instigator
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Huntington Beach, CA -> Ashburn, VA -> Raleigh, NC -> Walnut Creek, CA
Age: 42
Posts: 44,090
Received 957 Likes
on
328 Posts
Originally Posted by GreenMonster
But it's not often that a call will effect the outcome of the game like this one. It's a major screwup.
If the Angels win the series, it's not an issue, but if they Sox win, there will be people that will say that the angels were robbed...
If the Angels win the series, it's not an issue, but if they Sox win, there will be people that will say that the angels were robbed...
True, but say this happened in the first, and a run still scored and by the end of the game the white sox were up by one. Most likely it wouldn't be that big of a deal.
10-13-2005, 09:53 AM
#82
My Work is Done Here
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Still too far from the beach
Posts: 11,134
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
The umpires were interviewed after the game.... they said they saw a replay, blew it up, looked at it from different angles, and AT BEST is was still inconclusive. There is nothing to say the call was wrong.
to Scoscia, pure class.
to Scoscia, pure class.
10-13-2005, 11:09 AM
#83
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
The umpires were interviewed after the game.... they said they saw a replay, blew it up, looked at it from different angles, and AT BEST is was still inconclusive. There is nothing to say the call was wrong.
to Scoscia, pure class.
to Scoscia, pure class.
what i do see, and what the angels on the field saw, was eddings doing his arm motion first as if the batter swung, and then secondly as if the batter was out. they (espn) showed quite a few clips of eddings calling previous batters out on strikes when swinging, and it was the EXACT same set of signals he gave for pierzynski.
10-13-2005, 11:18 AM
#84
My Work is Done Here
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Still too far from the beach
Posts: 11,134
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
of course they're going to say that.
what i do see, and what the angels on the field saw, was eddings doing his arm motion first as if the batter swung, and then secondly as if the batter was out. they (espn) showed quite a few clips of eddings calling previous batters out on strikes when swinging, and it was the EXACT same set of signals he gave for pierzynski.
what i do see, and what the angels on the field saw, was eddings doing his arm motion first as if the batter swung, and then secondly as if the batter was out. they (espn) showed quite a few clips of eddings calling previous batters out on strikes when swinging, and it was the EXACT same set of signals he gave for pierzynski.
10-13-2005, 11:19 AM
#85
Just so I know what the whole argument is about (because it looked pretty clearly to be a clean catch), was the issue whether or not the play was dead and over when the homeplate ump called him out at home with the arm motion?
10-13-2005, 11:21 AM
#86
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Tracy, CA
Age: 51
Posts: 7,698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
The umpires were interviewed after the game.... they said they saw a replay, blew it up, looked at it from different angles, and AT BEST is was still inconclusive. There is nothing to say the call was wrong.
to Scoscia, pure class.
to Scoscia, pure class.Last edited by TLover; 10-13-2005 at 11:24 AM.
And he didnt get tagged. sooooooo
10-13-2005, 11:24 AM
#88
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
I'm not a fan of either team so I have no bias there, and I'm certainly not a fan of umpires in general. But the call that Eddings made physically is his 'strike' call, he makes all his strike calls with a fist. He continued to make his calls that way when Crede came up. The 'out' call on a strikeout is auditory, which is a call he didn't make. The two motions that you see Eddings make are 1st) to signal no contact was made with the swing, and 2nd) to call it a strike 3. Most people are perceiving it as 1st) to signal a strike call, and 2nd) to signal an out call, which is wrong. That's not how Eddings had done it on any of his other calls, so why think it means something different on that call?
10-13-2005, 11:26 AM
#90
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Always Dirty
Just so I know what the whole argument is about (because it looked pretty clearly to be a clean catch), was the issue whether or not the play was dead and over when the homeplate ump called him out at home with the arm motion?
10-13-2005, 11:26 AM
#91
My Work is Done Here
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Still too far from the beach
Posts: 11,134
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
if you've seen the clips of him calling earlier players out on strikes while swinging, it was the EXACT same set of signals he gave. how much clearer do i need to be?
If you think that his hand signals are signaling the strikeout, then by extension you have to think that he's calling Crede out on both his 1st and 2nd strikes on the very next at bat, because he makes the exact same signal.
10-13-2005, 11:28 AM
#92
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Crazy Sellout
not a clean catch! This mitt is facing downward!
Dirt then mit.. say it with me.
Dirt then mit.. say it with me.
10-13-2005, 11:30 AM
#94
My Work is Done Here
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Still too far from the beach
Posts: 11,134
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
the top of his mit is curled into the ground, and the ball hit that, not the dirt. that's what i see, and so does most of the US not in residing in Chicago.
10-13-2005, 11:31 AM
#95
Team Owner
I'm not up on the details of baseball rules. So, if an two-strike pitch is swung on and missed, bounces in the dirt and is then caught by the catcher cleanly the out has to be recorded at 1st base?
10-13-2005, 11:31 AM
#96
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
He wasn't calling those batters out with his hand signals. The out call is auditory on a strikeout.
If you think that his hand signals are signaling the strikeout, then by extension you have to think that he's calling Crede out on both his 1st and 2nd strikes on the very next at bat, because he makes the exact same signal.
If you think that his hand signals are signaling the strikeout, then by extension you have to think that he's calling Crede out on both his 1st and 2nd strikes on the very next at bat, because he makes the exact same signal.
10-13-2005, 11:34 AM
#97
Team Owner
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
That's not what I see in the blown up version. And I don't even care who wins. But yes, in the regular view from centerfield, it does look like he caught it.
10-13-2005, 11:35 AM
#98
My Work is Done Here
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Still too far from the beach
Posts: 11,134
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
well, then besides needing to get some glasses and getting the call right to begin with, mr. eddings needs to find a better way to differentiate between what the fuck is a strike and what is an out because he's doing the EXACT SAME MOTION for both. i doubt anyone out on the field is going to hear whether or not he's calling a strike or an out, which is why all the players began running/walking off the field.
Yes, but he said it's never been an issue until last night.
and the catcher would hear it, Pierzynski (the sox catcher) didn't hear it, and that's why he ran.
10-13-2005, 11:35 AM
#99
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by jlukja
The side view on the replays looked like he caught it also, from the trajectory of the pitch in slow motion. But, I guess, the point of contention is that, whether he cought it or not, there was no "out" call, only a "strike 3" call?
10-13-2005, 11:37 AM
#100
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jlukja
The side view on the replays looked like he caught it also, from the trajectory of the pitch in slow motion. But, I guess, the point of contention is that, whether he cought it or not, there was no "out" call, only a "strike 3" call?
10-13-2005, 11:41 AM
#104
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
either way, eddings handed this game to the white sox on a silver platter. had they been down 2-0 to the angels, 
You assuming the Angels would have taken it in the extra inning.
10-13-2005, 11:49 AM
#106
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
You need to take a lesson from your team's manager 
10-13-2005, 11:59 AM
#107
Cause of power outages...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Age: 42
Posts: 1,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
sorry, angels aren't my team, astros are. i just call em like i see em. there's been way too many blown calls made by refs these days (in all sports), just erks me.
10-13-2005, 12:12 PM
#108
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hojo061782
There are no more blown calls now than there used to be. It's just that now we have much better technology with which to see the blown calls.
10-13-2005, 01:05 PM
#109
Cause of power outages...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Age: 42
Posts: 1,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
then they should utilize that technology to right any wrong calls. they've made changes in football as well as basketball with instant replays. it may be time to introduce this into baseball.
However, you're going to have a lot of the "purists" who enjoy how equipment hasn't tremendously changed over the history of baseball all up in arms. They'll claim that bringing in this technology will somehow taint the "sanctity" of the sport.
10-13-2005, 01:21 PM
#113
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TSX 'R' US
Would this even be an issue if Crede popped/struck out?
10-13-2005, 01:21 PM
#114
Do I think it was a blown call... yes...did moment shift a bit, yes, but not much... afterall, it was just a runner on first with two outs.
However, that said the Umps (they're called umpires in baseball folks
) did not lose the game for the Angels. They did not blow it for them... nothing. They blew one call.
What lost the game for the Angels was Molina getting handcuffed on the stolen base by Ozuna putting the winning run on second base.
What also lost the game for them was Escobar's FAT pitch down the heart of the plate with a 1-2 count on the #8 batter in the lineup.....
So the umps blew a call... but they did not lose the game for the Angels... the Angels lost the game for the Angels.
However, that said the Umps (they're called umpires in baseball folks
) did not lose the game for the Angels. They did not blow it for them... nothing. They blew one call.What lost the game for the Angels was Molina getting handcuffed on the stolen base by Ozuna putting the winning run on second base.
What also lost the game for them was Escobar's FAT pitch down the heart of the plate with a 1-2 count on the #8 batter in the lineup.....
So the umps blew a call... but they did not lose the game for the Angels... the Angels lost the game for the Angels.
10-13-2005, 01:27 PM
#116
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by juniorbean
Do I think it was a blown call... yes...did moment shift a bit, yes, but not much... afterall, it was just a runner on first with two outs.
However, that said the Umps (they're called umpires in baseball folks ) did not lose the game for the Angels. They did not blow it for them... nothing. They blew one call.
What lost the game for the Angels was Molina getting handcuffed on the stolen base by Ozuna putting the winning run on second base.
What also lost the game for them was Escobar's FAT pitch down the heart of the plate with a 1-2 count on the #8 batter in the lineup.....
So the umps blew a call... but they did not lose the game for the Angels... the Angels lost the game for the Angels.
However, that said the Umps (they're called umpires in baseball folks
) did not lose the game for the Angels. They did not blow it for them... nothing. They blew one call.What lost the game for the Angels was Molina getting handcuffed on the stolen base by Ozuna putting the winning run on second base.
What also lost the game for them was Escobar's FAT pitch down the heart of the plate with a 1-2 count on the #8 batter in the lineup.....
So the umps blew a call... but they did not lose the game for the Angels... the Angels lost the game for the Angels.
they did not lose the game, the umpire did because everything that happened after pierzynski's 3rd strike should not have. this isn't the chicken or the egg debate, ozuna wouldn't have stolen the base, escobar wouldn't still be pitching, crede wouldn't have had the game winning hit.
10-13-2005, 01:29 PM
#117
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SoCal
Age: 49
Posts: 8,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sport...=thepulsealcs2
How does this call rate among questionable calls in postseason plays? (32,809 votes)
53.0% One of the 10 worst
22.6% Bad but not historic
13.9% The worst of all time
10.5% I thought he called it correctly
apparently 3400 people in Chicago have casted votes.
How does this call rate among questionable calls in postseason plays? (32,809 votes)
53.0% One of the 10 worst
22.6% Bad but not historic
13.9% The worst of all time
10.5% I thought he called it correctly
apparently 3400 people in Chicago have casted votes.
10-13-2005, 01:36 PM
#118
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
angels did not do enough to win the game up until the middle of the 9th. but, they did enough to put the game into extra innings.
they did not lose the game, the umpire did because everything that happened after pierzynski's 3rd strike should not have. this isn't the chicken or the egg debate, ozuna wouldn't have stolen the base, escobar wouldn't still be pitching, crede wouldn't have had the game winning hit.
they did not lose the game, the umpire did because everything that happened after pierzynski's 3rd strike should not have. this isn't the chicken or the egg debate, ozuna wouldn't have stolen the base, escobar wouldn't still be pitching, crede wouldn't have had the game winning hit.
The facts are everything after the third strike DID happen. Ozuna DID steal b/c Molina was handcuffed. Escobar WAS still pitching. Crede DID hit the game winning hit on a fat pitch.
If baseball was a game of should have's... I'd be arguing that the Yanks should have won game 5 but didn't b/c of some bad calls. Bottom line is they didn't win b/c they didn't score more runs then the Angels... regardless of what happened up to that point, that's the fact. Same here. The game continued and the Angels did not make the plays... so they lost b/c they only scored one run and Chicago scored two....
10-13-2005, 01:42 PM
#119
Originally Posted by GTKrockeTT
if the ball is caught cleanly, the batter cannot try to advance to first on strike three, he is automatically out. if it hits the dirt, he can try to take first before he is tagged or thrown out.
Assume the ball bounced in - should the play have been dead regardless when the ump used his arm to signal the out? Is that the issue here?
10-13-2005, 01:45 PM
#120
Originally Posted by Always Dirty
I understand the rule, meatwad, I just wasn't sure if the issue was whether the home plate ump punching him out was supposed to be the end of the inning or not.
Assume the ball bounced in - should the play have been dead regardless when the ump used his arm to signal the out? Is that the issue here?
Assume the ball bounced in - should the play have been dead regardless when the ump used his arm to signal the out? Is that the issue here?
From ESPN.com
While home-plate umpire Eddings, umpire crew chief Jerry Crawford and umpire supervisor Rick Rieker testify that they are absolutely sure Kelvim Escobar's pitch hit the ground before it entered Josh Paul's mitt.
"Doug ruled that the ball was trapped," Rieker said.
"I never called him out," Crawford claimed.
"That's my 'Strike 3' mechanics," Eddings added.