Back-to-back unintentional HBPs lead to all kinds of mayhem

[MikeSafari]

The first: Giancarlo Stanton takes an 88mph fastball off his cheek:

 

http://m.mlb.com/video/v36168595

 

Totally accidental and everyone treats it as such. However, because he was ruled to be swinging on the pitch, Reed Johnson takes his place, and on the very next pitch...

 

http://m.mlb.com/video/v36168933

 

What a mess. Hope Stanton's okay though. One of the most exciting young players in the game right now and you hate to see someone go down like that :-

[lawump]

I've been behind the plate in a professional game when (what happened to Stanton) happened.  Even though it was clearly unintentional...you knew a sh!thouse was coming.

[Jimurray]

What kind of motion does Fiers have that can make a batter swing at that pitch? Down the middle and tailing up and in? 

[Thunderheads]

here's the question brewing here at work.  I sit by 2 baseball guys who know I'm an umpire (I've actually umpired numerous games for the one guys sons) ........

 

Stanton's HBP was ruled a strike because he offered ............. did he?

[Replacematt]

here's the question brewing here at work.  I sit by 2 baseball guys who know I'm an umpire (I've actually umpired numerous games for the one guys sons) ........

 

Stanton's HBP was ruled a strike because he offered ............. did he?

 

Yep.

What kind of motion does Fiers have that can make a batter swing at that pitch? Down the middle and tailing up and in? 

 

If you look at the replay, I think Stanton didn't pick it up well and was guessing.

[MadMax]

What kind of motion does Fiers have that can make a batter swing at that pitch? Down the middle and tailing up and in?

Knowing Fiers, and watching how Lucroy sets up, my estimation is it's a cutter that's taking off on him. With a power hitter like Stanton, you've gotta get in on his hands and take that potential energy away. With Fiers delivery, _everything_ reads like his fastball (which is a benefit, I'm sure). Brewer pitchers are notorious for elevating their fastball with no movement (see Marco Estrada). Fiers has been getting a lot of KO's in his previous starts because his two supplemental pitches – changeup and curveball (rather compact and curt) have very effective movement.

[Replacematt]

Plus, when you watch his delivery on the first HBP, you can tell his release point is unintentionally high.

[hbk314]

Neither of those were swings. The bat only went forward in Stanton's case after he was hit in the face and released the bat. Both strike calls were brutal.

[Replacematt]

Neither of those were swings. The bat only went forward in Stanton's case after he was hit in the face and released the bat. Both strike calls were brutal.

 

You're joking, right? The bat was in front of his hip before he got hit.

[hbk314]

Neither of those were swings. The bat only went forward in Stanton's case after he was hit in the face and released the bat. Both strike calls were brutal.

 

You're joking, right? The bat was in front of his hip before he got hit.

No. He was turning his body to try to avoid the pitch. The bat was practically still on his shoulder when he got hit.

[Replacematt]

 

 

Neither of those were swings. The bat only went forward in Stanton's case after he was hit in the face and released the bat. Both strike calls were brutal.

 

You're joking, right? The bat was in front of his hip before he got hit.

No. He was turning his body to try to avoid the pitch. The bat was practically still on his shoulder when he got hit.

 

 

I hope none of your coaches are on this board, because they're really going to question you. He was swinging. He never saw the pitch come at his head because he didn't get his eye on the ball (well, figuratively,) which is why he never ducked or turned his body. 

[mjr_2013]

Both of those were clear swings... The only thing that's a "joke" as the Marlins announcer so calmly put it ( ) is that the Marlins swung at two pitches that were closer to their head than the zone!

 

Marlins announcers should be embarrassed about the way they called that sequence of events. They stopped calling the game and turned into the worst kind of idiot fan. 

[hbk314]

Both of those were clear swings... The only thing that's a "joke" as the Marlins announcer so calmly put it ( ) is that the Marlins swung at two pitches that were closer to their head than the zone!

 

Marlins announcers should be embarrassed about the way they called that sequence of events. They stopped calling the game and turned into the worst kind of idiot fan.

This is one of the few times where I don't think the announcers went way overboard. At least not in the parts of the video I watched.

In Stanton's case, you can't take where the bat goes after he gets hit in the face into account, and he was certainly not even close to a swing prior to being hit.

In Johnson's case, his bat never left his shoulder. He rotated his whole body in an attempt to avoid. It was as much of swing as it would have been if he hadn't moved at all.

[Replacematt]

 

Both of those were clear swings... The only thing that's a "joke" as the Marlins announcer so calmly put it ( ) is that the Marlins swung at two pitches that were closer to their head than the zone!

 

Marlins announcers should be embarrassed about the way they called that sequence of events. They stopped calling the game and turned into the worst kind of idiot fan.

This is one of the few times where I don't think the announcers went way overboard. At least not in the parts of the video I watched.

In Stanton's case, you can't take where the bat goes after he gets hit in the face into account, and he was certainly not even close to a swing prior to being hit.

In Johnson's case, his bat never left his shoulder. He rotated his whole body in an attempt to avoid. It was as much of swing as it would have been if he hadn't moved at all.

 

 

You've got to be a rat. There's no other explanation. Defending petulant announcers? Claiming non-swings on motions that would have led to doubles? The only thing you haven't done yet is whine that Fiers wasn't ejected.

[heyoh]

I thought Stanton's "swing" was a swing, but I thought Reed Johnson held up

[hbk314]

 

 

Both of those were clear swings... The only thing that's a "joke" as the Marlins announcer so calmly put it ( ) is that the Marlins swung at two pitches that were closer to their head than the zone!

 

Marlins announcers should be embarrassed about the way they called that sequence of events. They stopped calling the game and turned into the worst kind of idiot fan.

This is one of the few times where I don't think the announcers went way overboard. At least not in the parts of the video I watched.

In Stanton's case, you can't take where the bat goes after he gets hit in the face into account, and he was certainly not even close to a swing prior to being hit.

In Johnson's case, his bat never left his shoulder. He rotated his whole body in an attempt to avoid. It was as much of swing as it would have been if he hadn't moved at all.

 

 

You've got to be a rat. There's no other explanation. Defending petulant announcers? Claiming non-swings on motions that would have led to doubles? The only thing you haven't done yet is whine that Fiers wasn't ejected.

 

 

Doubles? Really? Reed Johnson's bat literally never left his shoulder. His body rotated as a reaction to the ball coming at him. That's not an attempt to strike the ball.

[UMP45]

 

 

Both of those were clear swings... The only thing that's a "joke" as the Marlins announcer so calmly put it ( ) is that the Marlins swung at two pitches that were closer to their head than the zone!

 

Marlins announcers should be embarrassed about the way they called that sequence of events. They stopped calling the game and turned into the worst kind of idiot fan.

This is one of the few times where I don't think the announcers went way overboard. At least not in the parts of the video I watched.

In Stanton's case, you can't take where the bat goes after he gets hit in the face into account, and he was certainly not even close to a swing prior to being hit.

In Johnson's case, his bat never left his shoulder. He rotated his whole body in an attempt to avoid. It was as much of swing as it would have been if he hadn't moved at all.

 

 

You've got to be a rat. There's no other explanation. Defending petulant announcers? Claiming non-swings on motions that would have led to doubles? The only thing you haven't done yet is whine that Fiers wasn't ejected.

 

He sounds more like a Fan Boy!

[hbk314]

 

 

 

Both of those were clear swings... The only thing that's a "joke" as the Marlins announcer so calmly put it ( ) is that the Marlins swung at two pitches that were closer to their head than the zone!

 

Marlins announcers should be embarrassed about the way they called that sequence of events. They stopped calling the game and turned into the worst kind of idiot fan.

This is one of the few times where I don't think the announcers went way overboard. At least not in the parts of the video I watched.

In Stanton's case, you can't take where the bat goes after he gets hit in the face into account, and he was certainly not even close to a swing prior to being hit.

In Johnson's case, his bat never left his shoulder. He rotated his whole body in an attempt to avoid. It was as much of swing as it would have been if he hadn't moved at all.

 

 

You've got to be a rat. There's no other explanation. Defending petulant announcers? Claiming non-swings on motions that would have led to doubles? The only thing you haven't done yet is whine that Fiers wasn't ejected.

 

He sounds more like a Fan Boy!

 

lol I'm a Phillies fan, so obviously I'm not going to be pro-Marlins on anything. I'm looking at this objectively, and what I see is one bad call (Stanton) and one terrible call (Johnson). Nice try though.

[JaxRolo]

I can not tell if stanton swung or not. I have watched it several times.

[ricka56]

Neither of those were swings. The bat only went forward in Stanton's case after he was hit in the face and released the bat. Both strike calls were brutal.

 

When a batter starts a bat movement to swing and then ends up continuing that movement even though it is purely an attempt to avoid being hit, I call it a swing. We can't tell when a swing stops and avoidance begins, so I call it a strike.

[hbk314]

Neither of those were swings. The bat only went forward in Stanton's case after he was hit in the face and released the bat. Both strike calls were brutal.

 

When a batter starts a bat movement to swing and then ends up continuing that movement even though it is purely an attempt to avoid being hit, I call it a swing. We can't tell when a swing stops and avoidance begins, so I call it a strike.

You shouldn't be applying that logic with the benefit of replay when you're looking at a call like this. Neither of them were at the point that most would call a swing when the ball hit them anyway, and what happens after they're hit is irrelevant.

[UMP45]

If you look in the scorebook they were both called strikes.

[hbk314]

If you look in the scorebook they were both called strikes.

 

Why do you post in all these threads if you're not going to contribute anything?

[UMP45]

 

If you look in the scorebook they were both called strikes.

 

Why do you post in all these threads if you're not going to contribute anything?

 

Because you sound like a fan instead of an umpire.

[hbk314]

 

 

If you look in the scorebook they were both called strikes.

 

Why do you post in all these threads if you're not going to contribute anything?

 

Because you sound like a fan instead of an umpire.

 

lol hardly. I've actually made an argument based on the rulebook. All you've done is troll.