MLB Ejections 025|026 - Ron Kulpa (1-2; J Farrell, D Ortiz)

[Lindsay]

HP Umpire Ron Kulpa ejected Red Sox Manager John Farrell and DH David Ortiz for arguing strike calls in the top of the 9th inning of the Yankees-Red Sox game. With one out and the bases loaded, Ortiz took two consecutive 3-1 sliders from Yankees pitcher Andrew Miller for called second and third...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

View the full article

[stkjock]

I was watching when this happened.  Got a good,chuckle,out of it. 

[Stk004]

What'd you guys think of the pitch, honestly? Because when you watch the replay from the side view it looks right at the knees. 

[pnewton]

7 hours ago, Stk004 said:

What'd you guys think of the pitch, honestly? Because when you watch the replay from the side view it looks right at the knees. 

The 3-1 pitch was a strike (the one Ortiz really went nuts over), I think catcher was crossed up and made it look much worse than it was.  I have the 3-2 pitch down, but close enough with 2 strikes and two outs that David should have been swinging.

[Cav]

I can get that strike all night or we run out of eligible players, which ever comes first.

[BRUMP]

3-2 pitch i thought was good enough. the 3-1 pitch even though it might be a rulebook strike my guess is MLB umpire supervisors would want that pitch called a ball every single time. 

disclaimer- i am not and probably will never be a professional umpire

[Richvee]

Ortiz has been around long enough to know that after the hissy fit he threw on strike 2, he better be swinging at anything close on 3-2.

[Thunderheads]

On 5/7/2016 at 9:35 AM, pnewton said:

The 3-1 pitch was a strike (the one Ortiz really went nuts over), I think catcher was crossed up and made it look much worse than it was.  I have the 3-2 pitch down, but close enough with 2 strikes and two outs that David should have been swinging.

where are you guys seeing this 3-1 pitch as a strike??????? Please show me .........

[maven]

The pitches in question were #5 and #6. Umpire's perspective:

[scrounge]

So when the Utopian Robot calls this a strike, who is Ortiz going to fake-tough guy try to charge?

[indianaumpire15]

1 minute ago, scrounge said:

So when the Utopian Robot calls this a strike, who is Ortiz going to fake-tough guy try to charge?

Exactly.  It was a rule book strike.  Wait until Kershaw starts dropping in 12-6 curveballs that clip the bottom of the zone and damn near hit the dirt when they get to F2.  Every option has its own set of problems.

[ALStripes17]

What article did I read that said the strike 3 was 5 1/2 inches out of the zone? The chart Maven posted has that pitch less than an inch out of the zone.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[maven]

According to Gil, the 3-1 pitch was correctly ruled a strike, and the 3-2 pitch incorrectly ruled a strike. The Brooks diagrams are "uncorrected" for the height of the batter: Ortiz is 6'5".

[Lindsay]

The raw pitch f/x numbers have the 3-2 as 5.496 inches from the bottom of the zone, which, assuming maximum margin of error, is no less than 4.5 inches out of the zone. That said, keeping mind that the pitch f/x system doesn't use a computer algorithm to measure the bottom and top of the strike zone: PFX still relies on an actual person to, in real time, calculate where sz_bot and sz_top are for each batter. Some operators change these values pitch-by-pitch (as they should) while others keep them constant for the entire at-bat since, after all, coming up with those two values for each pitch is quite a large job.

For Papi's at bat, his sz_bot was 1.790 for both the 3-1 AND 3-2 pitches, which likely means the operator elected to keep the measurements the same, which, in my estimation, suggests the numbers are not entirely reliable. The pitch was out of the zone, but I don't think 5.5 inches is accurate, and I ascribe that to pitch f/x operator error.

[ALStripes17]

Great information guys! Thanks.

The math geek in me is having s freaking party

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[grayhawk]

28 minutes ago, Gil: Owner - UEFL said:

The raw pitch f/x numbers have the 3-2 as 5.496 inches from the bottom of the zone, which, assuming maximum margin of error, is no less than 4.5 inches out of the zone. That said, keeping mind that the pitch f/x system doesn't use a computer algorithm to measure the bottom and top of the strike zone: PFX still relies on an actual person to, in real time, calculate where sz_bot and sz_top are for each batter. Some operators change these values pitch-by-pitch (as they should) while others keep them constant for the entire at-bat since, after all, coming up with those two values for each pitch is quite a large job.

For Papi's at bat, his sz_bot was 1.790 for both the 3-1 AND 3-2 pitches, which likely means the operator elected to keep the measurements the same, which, in my estimation, suggests the numbers are not entirely reliable. The pitch was out of the zone, but I don't think 5.5 inches is accurate, and I ascribe that to pitch f/x operator error.

Cool.  So if the "robo ump" advocates get their way, we merely move from "umpire error" to "PFX operator error."  In either case, a human being's judgment is involved in every pitch.

[stkjock]

the future of the MLB uniform....  

 

[ZebraStripes]

On 5/9/2016 at 8:09 AM, Thunderheads said:

where are you guys seeing this 3-1 pitch as a strike??????? Please show me .........

Front corner. knee high

[ZebraStripes]

On 5/9/2016 at 10:06 AM, maven said:

According to Gil, the 3-1 pitch was correctly ruled a strike, and the 3-2 pitch incorrectly ruled a strike. The Brooks diagrams are "uncorrected" for the height of the batter: Ortiz is 6'5".

Pretty tall stack of s#$t there

[Mudisfun]

On 5/9/2016 at 0:47 PM, stkjock said:

the future of the MLB uniform....  

 

I would not be surprised if in the future there is some form transponder worn/sewn into the uniform at the bottom and top of each players zone... then a tracker inserted into the ball as well as sensors embedded into the plate. Then the judgement will be did the batter monkey with his sensors? Maybe RF ID tag them like my dog... right into the skin.

1984 for baseball.

[dumbdumb]

So, why was a professional player, who is the second coming of all the Hall of Famer's to swing a bat, swinging at pitch 1, and when do the umpires get to chew his ill tempered and arrogant backside about that?

[ZebraStripes]

On 5/11/2016 at 1:30 PM, Mudisfun said:

I would not be surprised if in the future there is some form transponder worn/sewn into the uniform at the bottom and top of each players zone... then a tracker inserted into the ball as well as sensors embedded into the plate. Then the judgement will be did the batter monkey with his sensors? Maybe RF ID tag them like my dog... right into the skin.

1984 for baseball.

Get to that point and the hacking will take over.  hmmm could I use that to get this sorry sack of a Braves team to win the World Series?