STL - LA neighborhood play

[Jimurray]

Top 7, Ramirez comes off the bag early, most likely because the throw took him there, he gets the obvious neighborhood play call because R1 was nowhere near 2B and he didn't cheat to get the DP. At least that is what I'm thinking. Now let's factor in instant replay on that one.

[hbk314]

To me it just looked like he was being lazy. He definitely came off early and, as stated, R1 was nowhere near the base so it wasn't for self-preservation.

 

I understand why the neighborhood play exists. I also understand why you're out when you crash the catcher if the catcher holds onto the ball whether a tag was applied or not (See Game 1).

I'd like to see both plays remain in the days of IR, but I don't think this play qualifies.

[mstaylor]

The neighborhood play is fine but the timing has to be there. Here he comes off early, and I'm not sure it wasn't because it was a bad throw. 

[Rich Ives]

I've seen that called a safe most of the time in MLB these days. I was surprised to see the out call. It was blatant.

 

The play is already mostly dead because of replay.  It'll get the final nails after replay is official.

[Concernedcitizen2]

Do you guys think the play at the plate from game 1 will be an out or safe under IR?

[hbk314]

Do you guys think the play at the plate from game 1 will be an out or safe under IR?

 

It would have to be a safe call with replay.

 

It would be interesting to know if Mattingly would have challenged the play if replay were an option right now.

[ricka56]

Sometimes a call is correct/incorrect by a micro-second. Coaching staffs shouldn't have the benefit of slo-mo replay before deciding whether to challenge or not. You saw the play, are you gonna challenge or not? You've got 5 seconds to decide...we're gonna need a basketball style shot-clock/buzzer.

 

yeah, I know   

[Jimurray]

I've seen that called a safe most of the time in MLB these days. I was surprised to see the out call. It was blatant.

 

The play is already mostly dead because of replay.  It'll get the final nails after replay is official.

In thinking about it, if the ump doesn't give the out, does he give a safe call with R1 nowhere near and possibly abandoning? Or is it a no call and wait to see what happens next.

[noumpere]

Make the call (whichever it is)

[maven]

Video?

[Texas Manny]

Video?

My thoughts exactly. I didn't see the play (in the neighborhood. I saw the HP call that was missed by GD) originally.

[Rich Ives]

Do you guys think the play at the plate from game 1 will be an out or safe under IR?

 

Out.  If you go to umpire.org and watch the video "Was R3 Ever Tagged Out" linked there at about 0:56 - 0:57 you will see what appears to be a tag on the runner's elbow. In any event it isn't conclusive enough to reverse the call.

 

http://www.umpire.org/index.php/2012-01-24-14-48-04

 

 

then click General -  Instant Replay Conundrum

 

if it works.

[umpstu]

The neighborhood play is fine but the timing has to be there. Here he comes off early, and I'm not sure it wasn't because it was a bad throw. 

First off, I am a Cardinals fan. That being said I will say this as an umpire. The throw took him off of the bag. There goes the neighborhood. No longer a safety issue because he wasn't around the bag. Basically that's the only way I won't give an out on that. Or dropping the throw.

[Jimurray]

 

Video?

My thoughts exactly. I didn't see the play (in the neighborhood. I saw the HP call that was missed by GD) originally.

 

I've got the video from my DVR on my computer in a .mov but I don't know how to get it here. The "How to embed" thread doesn't play.

[hbk314]

Video?

My thoughts exactly. I didn't see the play (in the neighborhood. I saw the HP call that was missed by GD) originally.

It's tough to call it a miss by Davis. Technically it is, but not according to the way baseball's played. The runner didn't dispute the call.

[Texas Manny]

 

 

Video?

My thoughts exactly. I didn't see the play (in the neighborhood. I saw the HP call that was missed by GD) originally.

It's tough to call it a miss by Davis. Technically it is, but not according to the way baseball's played. The runner didn't dispute the call.

 

That was a miss as miss could be. There was a collision but no tag. Never. The collision pushed the glove hand and free hand away. Never touched the runner. It would have taken massive kahoannies to call "safe" with a collision like that, but he was safe. That's not to say that GD doesn't have 'em.

[hbk314]

Video?

My thoughts exactly. I didn't see the play (in the neighborhood. I saw the HP call that was missed by GD) originally.

It's tough to call it a miss by Davis. Technically it is, but not according to the way baseball's played. The runner didn't dispute the call.

That was a miss as miss could be. There was a collision but no tag. Never. The collision pushed the glove hand and free hand away. Never touched the runner. It would have taken massive kahoannies to call "safe" with a collision like that, but he was safe. That's not to say that GD doesn't have 'em.

There's no way he's getting called safe there. It's a correct call according to the spirit of the game. Unfortunately with IR coming in, that'll have to change.

[MidAmUmp]

The chances of neighborhood touches and actual tags on collisions at the plate being challenged on replay will be pretty slim. These guys aren't shade tree mechanics coaching the Chico Bail Bonds Bears at the local Little League each night. The managers have been around the game and they know how the game is played. They're going to attempt to challenge calls they currently argue. Mattingly didn't move a muscle on the play at the plate or the play at 2nd. Why? Because he knows how the game is played. He expects those calls to be made the same way when his team is on defense.

 

Oh, sure, there will be a few stupid replay challenges, but they will be few and far between.

[Mr Umpire]

The chances of neighborhood touches and actual tags on collisions at the plate being challenged on replay will be pretty slim. These guys aren't shade tree mechanics coaching the Chico Bail Bonds Bears at the local Little League each night. The managers have been around the game and they know how the game is played. They're going to attempt to challenge calls they currently argue. Mattingly didn't move a muscle on the play at the plate or the play at 2nd. Why? Because he knows how the game is played. He expects those calls to be made the same way when his team is on defense.

 

Oh, sure, there will be a few stupid replay challenges, but they will be few and far between.

We hope.

[Rich Ives]

 

 

 

Video?

My thoughts exactly. I didn't see the play (in the neighborhood. I saw the HP call that was missed by GD) originally.

It's tough to call it a miss by Davis. Technically it is, but not according to the way baseball's played. The runner didn't dispute the call.

 

That was a miss as miss could be. There was a collision but no tag. Never. The collision pushed the glove hand and free hand away. Never touched the runner. It would have taken massive kahoannies to call "safe" with a collision like that, but he was safe. That's not to say that GD doesn't have 'em.

 

 

You didn't watch the replay I referenced did you . . .

[ricka56]

 

That was a miss as miss could be. There was a collision but no tag. Never. The collision pushed the glove hand and free hand away. Never touched the runner. It would have taken massive kahoannies to call "safe" with a collision like that, but he was safe.

 

Safe??? how silly. A safe call wouldn't been a case of adaquate amount of nuts, it would have been a lack of sense. What will takes balls is to see that play next year, IR review it and uphold the out call.

 

There's no way he's getting called safe there. It's a correct call according to the spirit of the game. Unfortunately with IR coming in, that'll have to change.

Here's some interesting comment about that play and IR.  

 

http://wapc.mlb.com/play/?content_id=31127041   (includes the play video)

 

http://wapc.mlb.com/play?content_id=31127041

http://wapc.mlb.com/play/?content_id=31128259

 

http://wapc.mlb.com/play?content_id=31128259

[Umpire in Chief]

First Ellis gets a gold star for his answer. He understands the game. Beyond Vin Scully I'm not a fan of either the Dodgers or Cardinals so I have nothing in this debate.

 

Second, This is an out you get. Maybe you could put this under the "expected call" file. The ball beats him, you have a collision and the catcher maintains possession. 

 

I don't see this as something IR will overturn in the future. 

 

Finally I love Davis's Call. And while this is a collision, he took it from 3BLX b/c as we discussed in an earlier thread the play is going to be infront of the catcher.

[maven]

The call on the field was not only the "expected call," it was the only call that occurred to any of the participants.

 

That said, I have no idea how IR will be able to uphold this call. What rule permits this to be an out?

 

In pro ball, it IS an out, and I wouldn't dispute that for a moment. But that's not the rule, and IR is going to be rigidly circumscribed by the rules. That's it's whole point.

[MidAmUmp]

The call on the field was not only the "expected call," it was the only call that occurred to any of the participants.

 

That said, I have no idea how IR will be able to uphold this call. What rule permits this to be an out?

 

In pro ball, it IS an out, and I wouldn't dispute that for a moment. But that's not the rule, and IR is going to be rigidly circumscribed by the rules. That's it's whole point.

Because it's the "expected call"...meaning everyone expects the out to be made...meaning no one is going to challenge it to get to instant replay.

 

The Instant Replay challenges will be things like fair/foul, HR/Fan Interference, pulled foot, swipe tags, catch/no catch, foul ball/HBP, Runner's lane violations, dropped 3rd strikes...things like that.  Again, neither call even drew a fart from the dugout.  So if they don't argue, they aren't going to challenge.

[bam]

 

The call on the field was not only the "expected call," it was the only call that occurred to any of the participants.

 

That said, I have no idea how IR will be able to uphold this call. What rule permits this to be an out?

 

In pro ball, it IS an out, and I wouldn't dispute that for a moment. But that's not the rule, and IR is going to be rigidly circumscribed by the rules. That's it's whole point.

Because it's the "expected call"...meaning everyone expects the out to be made...meaning no one is going to challenge it to get to instant replay.

 

The Instant Replay challenges will be things like fair/foul, HR/Fan Interference, pulled foot, swipe tags, catch/no catch, foul ball/HBP, Runner's lane violations, dropped 3rd strikes...things like that.  Again, neither call even drew a fart from the dugout.  So if they don't argue, they aren't going to challenge.

 

Bwahahahaha....

 

Rats are rats.  If there's a big play at an important time, do you really think Mike Metheny or Jim Leyland won't throw the flag - or whatever method they'll use.

 

Look at our resident rat.......