Why did BOB wait???

[JaxRolo]

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/63817564/v35373247

[UmpJeff]

Well, he got the "Pause" part right.  I think maybe he had time to sneak a little nap in, too.  And, maybe even the "React" part.  The "Read" part...not so much.  A.J. Ratzinzchsksdyski told everyone in the St. Louis metropolitan area he missed the tag (at least that's what he told me...).

 

I guess to answer the question, Jax, maybe he was trying to decide whether he had a balk on the pitch.  Just a guess...

[BigUmpire]

Dirty Harry said "A mans got to know his limitations"

 

 

Might be time for Bob to go.

[MikeSafari]

That was painful to watch. The look on Davison's face when he was on the headset said everything.

[LMSANS]

I thought he called him for out of the baseline.  Still no explanation for not calling it right away.  F2 took 2 steps to miss that tag.

[ricka56]

1. Not the best position to see a tag/no tag, but not the worst either. 

2. Better ?

 

So if PU had a tag on the 1st attempt (which it looked like BD did) but F2 doesn't know that he had a tag, or thinks that he missed the tag and attempts a 2nd tag, what do you call ? Go with the 1st tag that you saw ? or the touch beating the 2nd tag attempt ?

[UmpJeff]

I think that's exactly what BD was processing during his delay...

 

Although, on a play like that, if he in fact had a tag, I would think he'd be selling the heck out of the tag call.  Here, he simply points in the direction of the play and continues to watch it unfold until completion then points again to the area where the "tag" was made and signals out.  A strange mechanic, indeed.

[Richvee]

Watching MLB network late last night, they said the call was out on the tag and upheld in NY. 

 

Seems like he thought he saw the tag, pointed to it and was going to come up with the big out call until AJP starts chasing the runner. Now the doubt sets in and he's thinking, "please tag him before he touches the plate to get me out of this mess". 

 

I thought it was pretty funny. After the play, BD pretty much acted like "I have no idea what I just saw or called so lets just go put on those headsets"  

[maven]

Well, he got the "Pause" part right.  I think maybe he had time to sneak a little nap in, too.  And, maybe even the "React" part.  The "Read" part...not so much.  A.J. Ratzinzchsksdyski told everyone in the St. Louis metropolitan area he missed the tag (at least that's what he told me...).

 

 

"Pause, read, react" is a mechanic used by BU's in A position on batted balls to RF, in order to determine whether to go out. It is not applicable on plays at the plate.

 

 

I thought he called him for out of the baseline.  Still no explanation for not calling it right away.  F2 took 2 steps to miss that tag.

 

R2 was well wide of AP before he had the ball, and his base path wasn't fixed until then. As you know, Larry, R2 may run as far around F2 as he likes until F2 is attempting a tag.

 

Davidson is such a liability.

[Magic]

Watching MLB network late last night, they said the call was out on the tag and upheld in NY. 

 

Seems like he thought he saw the tag, pointed to it and was going to come up with the big out call until AJP starts chasing the runner. Now the doubt sets in and he's thinking, "please tag him before he touches the plate to get me out of this mess". 

 

I thought it was pretty funny. After the play, BD pretty much acted like "I have no idea what I just saw or called so lets just go put on those headsets"  

 

I think that's exactly what happened. I know it has happened to me. Now imagine being in his shoes in front of that audience? I have a tag, I have a tag. Oh SH$T, He is chasing him. Now I am screwed. And as he stood there he probably said to himself."Bob you have to call what you saw. Don't change your call." And that is what he did.

[Umpire in Chief]

The delay- who knows. He pointed then and should have continued to sell the call. 

 

While the call was upheld. I saw no replay which would let the viewer know conclusively, so it may be a case of not enough info to overturn. Bob's angle wasn't bad. I think it was the hesitation that caused Black to ask for the challenge.

 

Now maybe he didn't actually see the tag, made an assumption then F2's action told him there was no tag. I think this is a timing issue (not necessarily PRR).

 

 

My next question is did they give Bud Black too much rope on his rant after the replay???

[Richvee]

The delay- who knows. He pointed then and should have continued to sell the call. 

 

While the call was upheld. I saw no replay which would let the viewer know conclusively, so it may be a case of not enough info to overturn. Bob's angle wasn't bad. I think it was the hesitation that caused Black to ask for the challenge.

 

Now maybe he didn't actually see the tag, made an assumption then F2's action told him there was no tag. I think this is a timing issue (not necessarily PRR).

 

 

My next question is did they give Bud Black too much rope on his rant after the replay???

Maybe they gave Black some rope because Davidson knows he was "less than perfect" on his mechanics. Just from watching it, I tend to get the impression that Bob, at best, started second guessing the fact that he had a tag when AJP started chasing the runner, and was hoping there was going to be a definitive view of the missed tag. 

[umpstu]

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/63817564/v35373247

If it went the Cardinals' way it was a great call.  Good job, Bob.  Did anybody notice that I spelled Bob backwards?

[Gfoley4]

Looked like he asked AJ something like "did you tag him?"

[Haid D' Salaami]

I really liked his position for the 1st tag play.. I think he was in a GREAT spot to see the no tag...

 

now for the rest of the stuff.....LOL

 

With good timing, the players will almost always tell us something... and A.J.. told us that he didn't tag him, and we all now AJ is a Rat si if he did tag him, he wouldn't have went back for the 2nd attempt.

[T-Rav]

<br /> <br />M

[Rulekeep]

<br /> <br />M

The best piece of insight I have ever seen.

[BillKen]

This is what you get when you put in replay.  The ump knows that he can call anything and NYC will make the real call.  So if you have a play like this, there was a point in time when BD would have sold this call to the hilt, and owned it like a boss!  FF to August 2014 and Bob knows that selling a call is a waste of time and energy...and if you sell it hard and then get proven wrong, you look like a DA.  So there is really no harm in just shrugging your shoulders and making a beeline for the headsets.  The wussification of the MLB umpire is in full effect.

[scrounge]

This is what you get when you put in replay.  The ump knows that he can call anything and NYC will make the real call.  So if you have a play like this, there was a point in time when BD would have sold this call to the hilt, and owned it like a boss!  FF to August 2014 and Bob knows that selling a call is a waste of time and energy...and if you sell it hard and then get proven wrong, you look like a DA.  So there is really no harm in just shrugging your shoulders and making a beeline for the headsets.  The wussification of the MLB umpire is in full effect.

 

You're missing a few things in that, though. There was a point in time when you would own that call - and if it was obviously wrong, you get on the front page of Deadspin or immortalized for eternity a la Denkinger. Now, it's at worst a momentary embarrassment but forgotten before the night is out. Doesn't even make the tidbits section of Sportscenter. And if someone doesn't like it? They can pound sand and get mad at the faceless remote entity in NY. I think replay - in its very first year when no one realistically could have expected perfection - has been an overall positive and will turn out to be in the umpires' enlightened self-interest.

[Richvee]

This is what you get when you put in replay.  The ump knows that he can call anything and NYC will make the real call.  So if you have a play like this, there was a point in time when BD would have sold this call to the hilt, and owned it like a boss!  FF to August 2014 and Bob knows that selling a call is a waste of time and energy...and if you sell it hard and then get proven wrong, you look like a DA.  So there is really no harm in just shrugging your shoulders and making a beeline for the headsets.  The wussification of the MLB umpire is in full effect.

I don't agree..... and this play is a perfect example why the umpire cannot rely on the IR. When the video evidence is inconclusive, as in this play, (no clear cut angle shown a miss tag or a tag), the umpire's call stands. If BD, or any other major league umpire is gonna give a half hearted call or effort because they're gonna review it anyway, they need to go. 

[BillKen]

 

This is what you get when you put in replay.  The ump knows that he can call anything and NYC will make the real call.  So if you have a play like this, there was a point in time when BD would have sold this call to the hilt, and owned it like a boss!  FF to August 2014 and Bob knows that selling a call is a waste of time and energy...and if you sell it hard and then get proven wrong, you look like a DA.  So there is really no harm in just shrugging your shoulders and making a beeline for the headsets.  The wussification of the MLB umpire is in full effect.

 

You're missing a few things in that, though. There was a point in time when you would own that call - and if it was obviously wrong, you get on the front page of Deadspin or immortalized for eternity a la Denkinger. Now, it's at worst a momentary embarrassment but forgotten before the night is out. Doesn't even make the tidbits section of Sportscenter. And if someone doesn't like it? They can pound sand and get mad at the faceless remote entity in NY. I think replay - in its very first year when no one realistically could have expected perfection - has been an overall positive and will turn out to be in the umpires' enlightened self-interest.

 

I don't disagree with you for the most part here...but let me pose a question for discussion.  If you were a MLB umpire and were in the trenches...both as an on-the-field guy who is making decisions, and as a guy in NYC making the real calls...What changes would you lobby your union rep to make?

[magna929]

I was watching this game live, and this call forever persuaded me to be against IR.  It seems as the season has progresses the less I like what the cameras are doing to the game.

[scrounge]

This is what you get when you put in replay.  The ump knows that he can call anything and NYC will make the real call.  So if you have a play like this, there was a point in time when BD would have sold this call to the hilt, and owned it like a boss!  FF to August 2014 and Bob knows that selling a call is a waste of time and energy...and if you sell it hard and then get proven wrong, you look like a DA.  So there is really no harm in just shrugging your shoulders and making a beeline for the headsets.  The wussification of the MLB umpire is in full effect.

 

You're missing a few things in that, though. There was a point in time when you would own that call - and if it was obviously wrong, you get on the front page of Deadspin or immortalized for eternity a la Denkinger. Now, it's at worst a momentary embarrassment but forgotten before the night is out. Doesn't even make the tidbits section of Sportscenter. And if someone doesn't like it? They can pound sand and get mad at the faceless remote entity in NY. I think replay - in its very first year when no one realistically could have expected perfection - has been an overall positive and will turn out to be in the umpires' enlightened self-interest.

I don't disagree with you for the most part here...but let me pose a question for discussion.  If you were a MLB umpire and were in the trenches...both as an on-the-field guy who is making decisions, and as a guy in NYC making the real calls...What changes would you lobby your union rep to make?

Not a whole lot, actually. Some more discussion/standardization on what indisputable evidence means and the threshold to overturn (which will come from experience), a 2 or 3 min time limit, removing 7.13 entirely from replay review (a judgment call on essentially obstruction should not be part of review), and a strict limit of 2 challenges without ability to beg for a freebie late.

[MikeSafari]

I was watching this game live, and this call forever persuaded me to be against IR.  It seems as the season has progresses the less I like what the cameras are doing to the game.

 

I don't really have a problem with IR, but there need to be clearer rules on what it can be used to review, and the replays need to be quicker. There's no reason that some replays take 5+ minutes while others take 30 seconds.

 

It needs some tweaking, no doubt, but it's definitely here to stay.

[bleacher_bum]

Watching MLB network late last night, they said the call was out on the tag and upheld in NY. 

 

Seems like he thought he saw the tag, pointed to it and was going to come up with the big out call until AJP starts chasing the runner. Now the doubt sets in and he's thinking, "please tag him before he touches the plate to get me out of this mess". 

 

I thought it was pretty funny. After the play, BD pretty much acted like "I have no idea what I just saw or called so lets just go put on those headsets"  

^^ This ^^  I totally agree.  And I've been there.  (not on those headsets) but lost just the same.