Look at this play..

[mazzamouth]

I beat Thunderheads to one..LOL

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=18000759&topic_id=&c_id=mlb&tcid=vpp_copy_18000759&v=3

[UMP45]

Original call correct. He tagged him with an empty glove.

[mstaylor]

At the end of the play the ball is in his left hand.

[carolinablue]

Looks like he may have been safe from what this video shows, the ball is definately not in the glove at the end. Francona also got tossed on this play.

[Mr Umpire]

It doesn't matter that the ball is not in the glove. R3 slides into the hand as well with the ball in the hand. You can see that at 1:14. Now, as far as all that goes, I have an out on the play.

Since I don't know what the umpire saw or called safe for though I can speculate based on another umpire showing a transfer motion, did he call it for not being in the glove or did he call it b/c F2 does drop the ball on his chest momentarily and hasn't regained body control before the end of the play? I know it came after the play is over IMO but could that be why he signaled a very late safe call. Just speculation of why he called him safe b/c I think the reversal was right though I don't see asking for help on this one. No other umpire could have seen anything based on F2's position and the side the play occurred.

As far as the transfer motion, there was none so I don't know where the other umpire gets that. But, isn't he the same one who saw Reyes come off the bag earlier this season on a triple when everyone else didn't (even the cameras)?

[BillB1960]

Original call correct. He tagged him with an empty glove.

You're kidding right? Did you watch the video? The hand with the ball touched the runner. He was out. I watched the game live on TV and during the commercial I told my wife that the umpire looked at the empty glove, didn't see the ball in Bard's hand and made the safe call. They came back from the break and they showed the PU in close up. He looked at the glove and started to make the safe call, then his eyes moved to the hand and you could read his expression, it was "Oh damn!"

[BillB1960]

At the end of the play the ball is in his left hand.

It was in Bard's right hand.

[BillB1960]

It doesn't matter that the ball is not in the glove. R3 slides into the hand as well with the ball in the hand. You can see that at 1:14. Now, as far as all that goes, I have an out on the play.

Since I don't know what the umpire saw or called safe for though I can speculate based on another umpire showing a transfer motion, did he call it for not being in the glove or did he call it b/c F2 does drop the ball on his chest momentarily and hasn't regained body control before the end of the play? I know it came after the play is over IMO but could that be why he signaled a very late safe call. Just speculation of why he called him safe b/c I think the reversal was right though I don't see asking for help on this one. No other umpire could have seen anything based on F2's position and the side the play occurred.

As far as the transfer motion, there was none so I don't know where the other umpire gets that. But, isn't he the same one who saw Reyes come off the bag earlier this season on a triple when everyone else didn't (even the cameras)?

Bard never lost control of the ball. The PU looked at the empty mitt and assumed he dropped it. He never did. PU knew he'd booted it even as he was making the safe call.

[mazzamouth]

Ellisbury still hasn't touched the plate, and its been 12 hours later..lol

[UMP45]

No I'm not kidding Plumber!

[Mr Umpire]

It doesn't matter that the ball is not in the glove. R3 slides into the hand as well with the ball in the hand. You can see that at 1:14. Now, as far as all that goes, I have an out on the play.

Since I don't know what the umpire saw or called safe for though I can speculate based on another umpire showing a transfer motion, did he call it for not being in the glove or did he call it b/c F2 does drop the ball on his chest momentarily and hasn't regained body control before the end of the play? I know it came after the play is over IMO but could that be why he signaled a very late safe call. Just speculation of why he called him safe b/c I think the reversal was right though I don't see asking for help on this one. No other umpire could have seen anything based on F2's position and the side the play occurred.

As far as the transfer motion, there was none so I don't know where the other umpire gets that. But, isn't he the same one who saw Reyes come off the bag earlier this season on a triple when everyone else didn't (even the cameras)?

Now Mr U

Brian O'Nora = Marvin Hudson----not.

Sorry but I don't follow the umpires very close. They look similar since I can't get a good look at his face and only recognize a few of them for various reasons.

[sdix00]

After the tag, F2 has the ball between the outer edge of his palm and his pinky finger. This to me does not meet the criteria of "Securely AND Firmly". It is also possible that PU saw the ball move or saw F2 secure the ball against the chest protector. The point is, based on what we have on video, I like the first call. And, there may be even more info that is not on the video as the actual tag is not captured by any of the camera angles.

[Mr Umpire]

After the tag, F2 has the ball between the outer edge of his palm and his pinky finger. This to me does not meet the criteria of "Securely AND Firmly". It is also possible that PU saw the ball move or saw F2 secure the ball against the chest protector. The point is, based on what we have on video, I like the first call. And, there may be even more info that is not on the video as the actual tag is not captured by any of the camera angles.

If the ball isn't moving and he is using nothing to keep it in his hand, that is secure and firm enough for me. But, I don't know what the PU was able to see. Maybe he did look at the glove first and noticed it empty which is why he signaled safe. I don't know.

The readjustment comes well after the tag was applied and by the old OBR interp, that would be legal. Under the newer one since the Varitek play, I wonder if that is a consideration on a play like this. I don't know.

I still think the out call was correct in the final outcome. The only issue I have is with the conference. Did the PU say "I blew it" and decided on a conference? I just don't see this as a moment to have one unless he was using it as a "way out" of his blown call if he felt like he did. B/c no other umpire could have helped due to angles and positions. I also think that is where the transfer motion came from. I think that umpire "saw" the ball disappear into the glove and then saw it in F2's hand after the play. He must have thought he saw it this way and said F2 was transferring it from glove to hand to show the umpire and PU missed the transfer. All speculation at this point.

[BillB1960]

After the tag, F2 has the ball between the outer edge of his palm and his pinky finger. This to me does not meet the criteria of "Securely AND Firmly". It is also possible that PU saw the ball move or saw F2 secure the ball against the chest protector. The point is, based on what we have on video, I like the first call. And, there may be even more info that is not on the video as the actual tag is not captured by any of the camera angles.

Those camera angles don't tell the whole story. I was watching it live in HD and they showed about 4 or 5 different camera angles including one from the front where the PU's face is clearly visible. You can actually follow his eye motion and read the expression on his face as he's making the safe call. He knew he blew it.

The ball NEVER came loose and if holding the ball in your bare hand like Bard was isn't secure and firm posession then you can't call an 'ice cream cone' catch an out either. I'd like to see you sell that one! :shakehead:

[BillB1960]

No I'm not kidding Plumber!

Don't know who Plumber is but you're still wrong.

[UMP45]

What I thought was confirmed. When they have a way of showing EXACTLY what the umpire sees on plays such as these, then I will rely on what the umpire calls. If it makes you feel superior, to a big league umpire, then critique every move they make and tell everyone I can do a better job then so and so. The fact of the matter is they are professionals because they are that good. I don't worship them I just know my place on the food chain.

[BillB1960]

What I thought was confirmed. When they have a way of showing EXACTLY what the umpire sees on plays such as these, then I will rely on what the umpire calls. If it makes you feel superior, to a big league umpire, then critique every move they make and tell everyone I can do a better job then so and so. The fact of the matter is they are professionals because they are that good. I don't worship them I just know my place on the food chain.

You said the original call of safe was correct because the runner was tagged with the empty glove. You're wrong, he was tagged with the bare hand with the ball in it. Are you in complete denial? The umpires got together and got the call correct, the runner was out. Not only that they got together at lightning speed because the PU knew he got it wrong. While the rest of the crew couldn't see the actual tag they could see the catcher holding the ball up in the air in his bare hand showing he had posession the whole time.

I'd venture to say that all of us have gotten a call or 3 or 4 wrong in our careers, it happens to the pros as well. Good knews is they got it right in the end.

[UMP45]

I still say safe Fanboy. You're right. He did tag him with the back of his hand but did not maintain secure possesion through out the play as he rolled it across his cp. We don't know if the right questions were asked in the huddle either. And you're right Mazza he hasn't touched the plate yet. How was the CPL? Where did you work?

[Chris Hickman]

The biggest problem with all of this is that you have base umpires 90+ feet away changing a call at the plate. This is one of those plays where you call the guy out and nobody says boo. This is the ol' taking the crappy end of the stick senerio. Whats next? Managers are going to want umps to get together on all tag plays @ the plate? You have to let Ripper live and die with his call...right or wrong.

[carolinablue]

You guys must have a different video than I see to be so sure either way.

[Thunderheads]

Mazza, ...

Just ready to post this ....you got me on this one by a long shot!! :)

[mazzamouth]

I still say safe Fanboy. You're right. He did tag him with the back of his hand but did not maintain secure possesion through out the play as he rolled it across his cp. We don't know if the right questions were asked in the huddle either. And you're right Mazza he hasn't touched the plate yet. How was the CPL? Where did you work?

CPL was good, i worked all over.. I got to meet warren, he came down to watch.. I had a great time, learned a little.

[mazzamouth]

After the tag, F2 has the ball between the outer edge of his palm and his pinky finger. This to me does not meet the criteria of "Securely AND Firmly". It is also possible that PU saw the ball move or saw F2 secure the ball against the chest protector. The point is, based on what we have on video, I like the first call. And, there may be even more info that is not on the video as the actual tag is not captured by any of the camera angles.

Sid I will disagree with you, he ( IMO ) held on to the ball, there was no bobble.. So I have an out. ( IMO )

[sdix00]

After the tag, F2 has the ball between the outer edge of his palm and his pinky finger. This to me does not meet the criteria of "Securely AND Firmly". It is also possible that PU saw the ball move or saw F2 secure the ball against the chest protector. The point is, based on what we have on video, I like the first call. And, there may be even more info that is not on the video as the actual tag is not captured by any of the camera angles.

Those camera angles don't tell the whole story. I was watching it live in HD and they showed about 4 or 5 different camera angles including one from the front where the PU's face is clearly visible. You can actually follow his eye motion and read the expression on his face as he's making the safe call. He knew he blew it.

The ball NEVER came loose and if holding the ball in your bare hand like Bard was isn't secure and firm posession then you can't call an 'ice cream cone' catch an out either. I'd like to see you sell that one!

Good point.

[BillB1960]

I still say safe Fanboy. You're right. He did tag him with the back of his hand but did not maintain secure possesion through out the play as he rolled it across his cp. We don't know if the right questions were asked in the huddle either. And you're right Mazza he hasn't touched the plate yet. How was the CPL? Where did you work?

Y'know the name calling is unnecessary and while it's true you didn't have the benefit of seeing multiple replays since you didn't watch the game you're still wrong about losing posession. There was no rolling across the cp, you're just making sh*t up to try to defend an indefensible position. Somtimes when you're wrong you're wrong and it's better just to accept it. Kinda like the PU did.