Ejection Worthy II ??

[Thunderheads]

Hey, it's Jeff's MLB video of the day!

Ejection worthy?

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11130025

[Mr Umpire]

Riggleman's: definitely. Of course, if the 1st one didn't happen, then it probably wasn't going to happen.

Zimmerman's: I think the intensity got him more than it actually being done. Do I think it was deserved? No. But, if a HS or college player do it the same way, I better see the whole picture. If I catch a glimpse or tail end of it and notice the bat and helmet location, there may be an EJ.

I think the umpire misread it. He was looking when they were thrown down. Or, he thought about the perception of Zimmerman's actions. I don't know but I don't think it warranted one at that level. If I see it the same way at the amateur level like I see this one, it will earn a warning but not an EJ depending on how the player reacts.

Edited August 19, 2010 by Mr Umpire

[Umpire in Chief]

Oh no one of the many hometown heros from the 757 tossed. I bet there was something said too.

Look when Riggleman gets the hook. At about 1:30 he says something to Barry, as he says what ever got him the hook Gerry Davis looks from Riggleman to Barry almost as if "Here it comes."

[BrianC14]

Good thing for announcers (known to themselves as "experts") that they can't be dumped. These two could be ejected for stupidity in the extreme.

Think of the intelligent comments we'd hear from all that silence... aaaahhhh... wonderful stuff!

[zm1283]

Good thing for announcers (known to themselves as "experts") that they can't be dumped. These two could be ejected for stupidity in the extreme.

Think of the intelligent comments we'd hear from all that silence... aaaahhhh... wonderful stuff!

The funniest thing about the whole video is the announcers defending Zimmerman and Pudge because "They're good guys". And the part about Pudge being a veteran who has caught such and such amount of games. Who cares?

[BrianC14]

The funniest thing about the whole video is the announcers defending Zimmerman and Pudge because "They're good guys". And the part about Pudge being a veteran who has caught such and such amount of games. Who cares?

And a "future Hall of Famer" ... hahahaaaa Sounds like Rodriguez got dumped the day before arguing balls and strikes - - -from the dugout! :shakehead:

[zm1283]

And a "future Hall of Famer" ... hahahaaaa Sounds like Rodriguez got dumped the day before arguing balls and strikes - - -from the dugout!

He got dumped for arguing after he batted to end the inning.

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11055773

Edited August 20, 2010 by zm1283

[Umpire in Chief]

Good call on the lost on the transfer.

[BrianC14]

He got dumped for arguing after he batted to end the inning.

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11055773

So where's his ejection?

I thought the commentators in the earlier vid said something about him arguing from the dugout?

[Thunderheads]

So where's his ejection?

I thought the commentators in the earlier vid said something about him arguing from the dugout?

They didn't show it, ...only the play itself ....not the ejection

[midmoump]

The 3-1 pitch to Ryan Zimmerman is very interesting. Umpire Scott Barry called this pitch a strike on an 84 mph curveball.

The Pitch Track analysis indicated the ball was a strike, and the umpire and at least one member of the public agree. The Left Field Corner, a site that tracks ejections, states, "Replays indicate the pitch was located at the hollow of the knee and over the outer half of the plate, the call was correct."

This strike call highlights the problems with literal rulebook application, strike zone computer analysis, and umpire interpretation. Slow motion replay from the side indicates that the ball nicked the bottom of the zone right at the hollow of the knee at the front of the plate. The ball then traveled below the strike zone and was caught below the catcher's knee with the catcher dropping his glove to catch it (see video at 0:18).

Did the ball to Zimmerman "break the plane?" You bet, that's what Pitch Track showed us in two dimensions. Did the ball's flight pass through the strike zone? Well, that's an interpretation call.

The rulebook defines a strike as "any part of the ball passes through any part of the strike zone." The way I look at it, if a Kansan stepped one foot into Missouri, he did not "pass through" a part of Missouri. I think the better interpretation is that a significant portion of the ball's flight must pass through the three dimensional strike zone in order to be called a strike.

Did the pitch to Zimmerman pass through the strike zone? Apparently Barry thinks it did, or perhaps he just lost track of the ball the last few feet into the glove b/c of poor head height.

Edited August 21, 2010 by midmoump

[sasmallen]

Add another member to the public on that list...me. I thought it was a good strike call, and looking at the side angle only affirms that for me.

[LMSANS]

The 3-1 pitch to Ryan Zimmerman is very interesting. Umpire Scott Barry called this pitch a strike on an 84 mph curveball.

The Pitch Track analysis indicated the ball was a strike, and the umpire and at least one member of the public agree. The Left Field Corner, a site that tracks ejections, states, "Replays indicate the pitch was located at the hollow of the knee and over the outer half of the plate, the call was correct."

This strike call highlights the problems with literal rulebook application, strike zone computer analysis, and umpire interpretation. Slow motion replay from the side indicates that the ball nicked the bottom of the zone right at the hollow of the knee at the front of the plate. The ball then traveled below the strike zone and was caught below the catcher's knee with the catcher dropping his glove to catch it (see video at 0:18).

Did the ball to Zimmerman "break the plane?" You bet, that's what Pitch Track showed us in two dimensions. Did the ball's flight pass through the strike zone? Well, that's an interpretation call.

The rulebook defines a strike as "any part of the ball passes through any part of the strike zone." The way I look at it, if a Kansan stepped one foot into Missouri, he did not "pass through" a part of Missouri. I think the better interpretation is that a significant portion of the ball's flight must pass through the three dimensional strike zone in order to be called a strike.

Did the pitch to Zimmerman pass through the strike zone? Apparently Barry thinks it did, or perhaps he just lost track of the ball the last few feet into the glove b/c of poor head height.

You mean the ball is still hanging in space above the plate at the level of the hollow of his knee?B)