Jump to content
andydufresne

RLI Game 6

Recommended Posts

What I really want to know it what in the world they could have been talking about with NY that took that long. That has got to be one of the most obvious RLI that you can get.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah - that was obvious RLI and I'm on a Cardinals forum where everyone was moaning about it.  I guess they don't coach how to run to first any more?  Becauase that was  a textbook RLI.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

And while it's not relevant, the throw would have beat him minus the interference...I've had that argument pop up already

 

Screen Shot 2019-10-29 at 10.18.57 PM.jpg

Martinez was remembering this play last year in the WS and Fairchild on the plate from CCS. He pulled this play up on his i phone and saw they were both the same play and wanted to know why it was being called differently than last year. He wanted to know if he was wearing the wrong color of uniform or something. He did get rather vehement with the call didn't he? Good ejection and good not to make Cedarstrom do the ej  since it was the PU call.

https://www.closecallsports.com/2018/10/runners-lane-interference-2018-world.html

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is sad. I follow along on/post on my college alma mater's sports forum, and the stupidity is flowing on the series thread. People love to blast umpires and this is just too far. Torre begrudgingly admitted the call was correct but it wasn't very convincing and the former players are just idiots. At least Ortiz said someone should teach these big leaguers how to run to first.

It won't happen but there need to be apologies and corrections read at the beginning of the next game. This crap just fuels the already out of hand spite directed at umpires/officials.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule has been no called in similar sits and improperly called in unsimilar sits at all levels. I think the call was proper. But, the disparity in calling this rule is obvious at all levels, called properly, called improperly, not called properly, not called improperly. I submit that what I think I heard Jim Evans say at a clinic is what we should subscribe to. The rule is an anachronism. Change it or eliminate it. Change would be to call a runner out if he wasn’t in the lane by 45’. Eliminate it would require a quality throw and the runner would not be allowed to veer once he saw where the fielder was poised to catch the throw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because a rule isn't always applied/not applied properly, doesn't mean that it needs to be changed/eliminated. The rule gives parameters to use, when judging interference...otherwise interference calls would be completely arbitrary. The rule is perfectly fine as is. 

Runners can run to 1B illegally without penalty all game long...but if you do, and something like that happens, you get what you get. Quit whining.

Ballzy call

 


 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The above video shows the 2018 world series play and this years. It also has a split screen to attempt to catch some similarities. 

Big difference in 2018 is the plate umpire had a play at the plate before the RLI (alleged) This year, all he had to do was get a look. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Holbrook dies, they ought to bronze his balls and hang them over the roadway leading into Cooperstown. The end.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, andydufresne said:

Can't they train Joe Buck to shut up when he doesn't know what he's talking about? He's like Ken Harrelson, but with manners.

Did you see these??

 

 

IMG_20191018_230105.jpg

IMG_20191018_230058.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Aging_Arbiter said:

Did you see these??

 

 

IMG_20191018_230105.jpg

IMG_20191018_230058.jpg

 

I preferred the pair from Game 5!

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the way I see it its called RLI because he did not run the full lane?  Its a judgement call right?

I'm having a tough time with this because the runner did not interfere with the throw until it was at the bag. But the runner has the right to the front of the bag.

 

From my views on it he got there as the balls getting there. Pretty sure he beat the ball as it hits him in the right leg back of the knee as his left foot is touching or a inch from the bag.

Again I get the call, but the call is because he was left of the line and not right of the line.  My point is the throw was not interfered with.  The catch was.  but the catch is at the point where the runner has right to.  I think had he been running in the lane and veered at the last second to the front of the bag this discussion would be different and he would be safe. 

But anyway just saying I see why people are so upset 

But yah I get the reason why out.

thing that killed me was the damn delay. Seriously if the PU knew the rule and called it correct why does NY need to get involved and why did they get them involved?  Seemed Very odd to me.

 

then again I would want to get it right too.   not to mention seeing what the PU saw from his vantage point yep  he got it right.   Slowing it down and seeing it replayed over and over is when I start to feel nit picky

But also 1st base ump heck of a few bang bang calls wooooo one of those was like 1 inch of foot off the base.. loved seeing that replay in slow mo and him nailing it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

So the way I see it its called RLI because he did not run the full lane?  Its a judgement call right?

I'm having a tough time with this because the runner did not interfere with the throw until it was at the bag. But the runner has the right to the front of the bag.

 

From my views on it he got there as the balls getting there. Pretty sure he beat the ball as it hits him in the right leg back of the knee as his left foot is touching or a inch from the bag.

Again I get the call, but the call is because he was left of the line and not right of the line.  My point is the throw was not interfered with.  The catch was.  but the catch is at the point where the runner has right to.  I think had he been running in the lane and veered at the last second to the front of the bag this discussion would be different and he would be safe. 

But anyway just saying I see why people are so upset 

But yah I get the reason why out.

thing that killed me was the damn delay. Seriously if the PU knew the rule and called it correct why does NY need to get involved and why did they get them involved?  Seemed Very odd to me.

 

then again I would want to get it right too.   not to mention seeing what the PU saw from his vantage point yep  he got it right.   Slowing it down and seeing it replayed over and over is when I start to feel nit picky

But also 1st base ump heck of a few bang bang calls wooooo one of those was like 1 inch of foot off the base.. loved seeing that replay in slow mo and him nailing it.

 

 

I'm sure they were required to do a rule check. That's why it took so long. Every one of them out there knew the call was correct. We all have bosses...they were just checking the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the call was absolutely correct and Gil's video is excellent as usual. 

Just as great as Gil does not to let us down the announcers do the opposite to make sure they let the fans down.

But I want to address the ejection. Holbrook gave him so much room to eject himself maybe even too much. When you have to have people hold you back before the ejection the whole world knows you've already earned your trip to the shower. From an optics point it looks excellent (and unfortunately umpires need to think about optics to some extent in today's world) , no one can fault the ejection. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ArchAngel72 said:

So the way I see it its called RLI because he did not run the full lane?  Its a judgement call right?

I'm having a tough time with this because the runner did not interfere with the throw until it was at the bag. But the runner has the right to the front of the bag.

 

From my views on it he got there as the balls getting there. Pretty sure he beat the ball as it hits him in the right leg back of the knee as his left foot is touching or a inch from the bag.

Again I get the call, but the call is because he was left of the line and not right of the line.  My point is the throw was not interfered with.  The catch was.  but the catch is at the point where the runner has right to.  I think had he been running in the lane and veered at the last second to the front of the bag this discussion would be different and he would be safe. 

But anyway just saying I see why people are so upset 

But yah I get the reason why out.

thing that killed me was the damn delay. Seriously if the PU knew the rule and called it correct why does NY need to get involved and why did they get them involved?  Seemed Very odd to me.

 

then again I would want to get it right too.   not to mention seeing what the PU saw from his vantage point yep  he got it right.   Slowing it down and seeing it replayed over and over is when I start to feel nit picky

But also 1st base ump heck of a few bang bang calls wooooo one of those was like 1 inch of foot off the base.. loved seeing that replay in slow mo and him nailing it.

 

 

Let me see if I can breakdown your problems with this play

1. Runner interfered with catch, not throw

You are correct, the interference was committed against F3. By this is exactly what the rule specifies 

5.09(a)(11) "...and in the umpire’s judgment in so doing interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base..." [Emphasis mine]

As we can see, it's all about the fielder, not the throw.

2. Runner has right to the front of the bag

This is false. Kinda. 

In general, if contact happens between a runner and the first baseman reaching for a ball down the first baseline before the bag, it's nothing. Both people are doing what they should be, so don't penalize it.

However, in this play, Turner had been running outside the running lane, and thus was required to not hinder the first baseman's ability to field the ball. If he had been running legally up to this point, he would be safe, probably on second. 

But wait, the bag is entirely in fair territory, meaning the batter runner is screwed, right? Not quite. The rule understands this impossibility it creates for the runner. That's why 5.09(a)(11) Comment exists. It reads, in part, "The batter-runner is permitted to exit the three-foot lane by means of a step, stride, reach or slide in the immediate vicinity of first base for the sole purpose of touching first base."

Note, the batter runner is permitted to exit the lane to touch the base. To exit something, you must have first been in it. Turner was never in the lane, thus he is not granted this exception. 

3. You think he beat the throw

I'm not totally sure on this (if someone could chime in, that'd be great), but I don't think it matters. In this play, the ball gets past the first baseman due to Turner's actions, which would have allowed him to go to second. He still has an advantage due to his illegal actiona.

In addition, he didn't beat the throw. See @johnnyg08's post above for a picture, or watch the play again in slowotion.

4. How long the rules check took (I agree with this one).

Johnny already answered this one as well as I could. But I agree, the long delay doesn't look good, and I don't think it's needed.

I think that covers your concerns. Anything I missed? 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...