Crazy play in Seattle

[Haid D' Salaami]

Thunderheads hope you can find the video from the Sea Vs Tex game on 24 may..

 

R1 & R2...0 outs.. Batter hits ball to F3 who throws to F6 covering 2nd... F3 and F1 went to cover 1st.. F6 throws to 1st.. F3 stretches to receive the throw and at the last possible sec F1 catches the throw but F1 was not touching 1st.. U1 called out the BR as he though and only till the replay can you see F1 catch the ball.. crazy play.. Manage came out to talk  to U1, but they never got together on the play... the video is good.

[Richvee]

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=27403447&c_id=mlb

[dumbdumb]

The perfect play for those who like to watch the ball all the way into the glove and then glance down for the foot. They will get this one, but all the calls where the foot is still just barely in the air when the ball smacks the glove will always be safe (consistent though), and there are whole lot more bangers at first than there are the OP plays.

[JHSump]

Isn't the umpire supposed to look up at the glove, to see that the ball was securely caught, after watching the BR's foot hit the bag and hearing the catch?  Wouldn't that procedure have caught this issue?

 

Weird play for sure, though.

[maven]

Weird. He's got to get help on that.

[mrumpiresir]

The perfect play for those who like to watch the ball all the way into the glove and then glance down for the foot. They will get this one, but all the calls where the foot is still just barely in the air when the ball smacks the glove will always be safe (consistent though), and there are whole lot more bangers at first than there are the OP plays.

I have never heard it done this way.  Shouldn't you be looking at the foot and hear the "pop" of the ball into the glove?

You will not see the foot touch the bag on a close play if you are watching the ball all the way into the glove.  Once the ball is released from F4 or F6, you should be looking for the foot to hit the bag.

 

In the video, I think the umpire was looking at the foot, heard the "pop" and ruled the "pop" came before the foot hit the bag.  What he did wrong was not verifying F3 had secure possession of the ball.

[dumbdumb]

 

The perfect play for those who like to watch the ball all the way into the glove and then glance down for the foot. They will get this one, but all the calls where the foot is still just barely in the air when the ball smacks the glove will always be safe (consistent though), and there are whole lot more bangers at first than there are the OP plays.

I have never heard it done this way.  Shouldn't you be looking at the foot and hear the "pop" of the ball into the glove?

You will not see the foot touch the bag on a close play if you are watching the ball all the way into the glove.  Once the ball is released from F4 or F6, you should be looking for the foot to hit the bag.

 

In the video, I think the umpire was looking at the foot, heard the "pop" and ruled the "pop" came before the foot hit the bag.  What he did wrong was not verifying F3 had secure possession of the ball.

 

Correct IMHO to the last line.

 

Unfortunately, from what I can surmise when watching a lot of non MLB games, is that a lot of umpires have not been taught to look at the foot and "listen" to the pop. They have either been taught to follow the ball into the glove and glance down, or they are in a group that offers no formal training and this is they technique they gravitate to by osmosis, or whatever, when they have to self-train themselves.

The ah-ha moment is when they are taught the way you explained and all those safes now become outs. Even though the other way, by sight, caused them to miss the call IMHO by just a hair on that bang bang play every time, at least it was consistent and players on either side would know it was always a "safe call" whereas one going by "sound" and getting the call correct IMHO would always be an "out" call.

[mrumpiresir]

 

 

The perfect play for those who like to watch the ball all the way into the glove and then glance down for the foot. They will get this one, but all the calls where the foot is still just barely in the air when the ball smacks the glove will always be safe (consistent though), and there are whole lot more bangers at first than there are the OP plays.

I have never heard it done this way.  Shouldn't you be looking at the foot and hear the "pop" of the ball into the glove?

You will not see the foot touch the bag on a close play if you are watching the ball all the way into the glove.  Once the ball is released from F4 or F6, you should be looking for the foot to hit the bag.

 

In the video, I think the umpire was looking at the foot, heard the "pop" and ruled the "pop" came before the foot hit the bag.  What he did wrong was not verifying F3 had secure possession of the ball.

 

Correct IMHO to the last line.

 

Unfortunately, from what I can surmise when watching a lot of non MLB games, is that a lot of umpires have not been taught to look at the foot and "listen" to the pop. They have either been taught to follow the ball into the glove and glance down, or they are in a group that offers no formal training and this is they technique they gravitate to by osmosis, or whatever, when they have to self-train themselves.

The ah-ha moment is when they are taught the way you explained and all those safes now become outs. Even though the other way, by sight, caused them to miss the call IMHO by just a hair on that bang bang play every time, at least it was consistent and players on either side would know it was always a "safe call" whereas one going by "sound" and getting the call correct IMHO would always be an "out" call.

 

I prefer outs to safes on bangers.

[BRUMP]

This play is the one in a million you will miss even with perfect mechanics.

[mrumpiresir]

I still think if the umpire had confirmed F3 had possession of the ball he would have made the correct "Safe" call.

[Richvee]

He's watching the bag, he's looking at F3's foot for a pulled foot, he hears the "pop", F3's glove is on the ground, closed, like he would if a ball were in there. He never saw a ball roll away or have any reason to assume it was bobbled. after all, he heard the "pop".  Hell, it took the announcers 2 or 3 replays to realize F3 didn't catch it. That said, perhaps getting together to see if anyone else saw who really caught the ball may have been the prudent prudent thing to do here. Then again, are we sure Wedge was arguing who caught the ball? He may have been asking about F3 holding the bag. 

[Lindsay]

I still think if the umpire had confirmed F3 had possession of the ball he would have made the correct "Safe" call.

^ This is what the DiMuro phantom catch play last season taught us.

[Dannytheman]

I have to admit, that was very cool!!  

[sdix00]

Goes to show that we have an advantage over the MLB guys in this regard.   Professional games RARELY/NEVER have these issues.   Our games have them often enough where we train specifically to catch them.  

 

Yeah, maybe Nelson's technique in checking for possession might be questionable, but he has other things to focus on that we never have to deal with - calling the banger just like instant replay will call it a few seconds later. 

[JHSump]

Goes to show that we have an advantage over the MLB guys in this regard.   Professional games RARELY/NEVER have these issues.   Our games have them often enough where we train specifically to catch them.  

So very true.  All sorts of craziness occurs in my youth-level games.  I have to be on guard constantly for the next wacko event.

[dumbdumb]

OK--it's official----Wedge didn't even know the pitcher caught the ball. Wedge argued that he thought the 1B pulled his foot off the bag on the play.

 

http://www.theolympian.com/2013/05/26/2559784/umpire-admits-he-botched-call.html

 

Read this 8th paragraph in this second article. Kind of sums up everything about umpiring.

 

http://www.argus-press.com/world_sports/national/tigers/article_06199bbe-1689-5318-9761-bc0735de5051.html

[bam]

 

 

 

The perfect play for those who like to watch the ball all the way into the glove and then glance down for the foot. They will get this one, but all the calls where the foot is still just barely in the air when the ball smacks the glove will always be safe (consistent though), and there are whole lot more bangers at first than there are the OP plays.

I have never heard it done this way.  Shouldn't you be looking at the foot and hear the "pop" of the ball into the glove?

You will not see the foot touch the bag on a close play if you are watching the ball all the way into the glove.  Once the ball is released from F4 or F6, you should be looking for the foot to hit the bag.

 

In the video, I think the umpire was looking at the foot, heard the "pop" and ruled the "pop" came before the foot hit the bag.  What he did wrong was not verifying F3 had secure possession of the ball.

 

Correct IMHO to the last line.

 

Unfortunately, from what I can surmise when watching a lot of non MLB games, is that a lot of umpires have not been taught to look at the foot and "listen" to the pop. They have either been taught to follow the ball into the glove and glance down, or they are in a group that offers no formal training and this is they technique they gravitate to by osmosis, or whatever, when they have to self-train themselves.

The ah-ha moment is when they are taught the way you explained and all those safes now become outs. Even though the other way, by sight, caused them to miss the call IMHO by just a hair on that bang bang play every time, at least it was consistent and players on either side would know it was always a "safe call" whereas one going by "sound" and getting the call correct IMHO would always be an "out" call.

 

I prefer outs to safes on bangers.

 

Bangers are out 100% of the time.

[BigUmpire]

" Show me the ball"

[mstaylor]

HTH can they call out an egregious error when everybody thought the F3 caught the ball.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

[Umpire in Chief]

I think the Pitcher sold it well. He realized they got the out and started talking to F3 so nobody would see the ball exchange. Very heads up on the pitcher. 

 

For me I hear that smack, see the foot then see no ball on the ground; I've got an out.

 

No if it were brought to my attention, I'd confer with my partners. 

 

Me: (Discreetly with my partner) "Hey this piece of work is saying the pitcher actually caught the ball"

Partner: He did.

Me:  You're F'ing with me right?

Partner: Nope

[SoCal Lurker]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mlb/news/20130525/umpire-expresses-regret-on-botched-call.ap/?sct=obinsite

 

Umpire's comment . . . .