No excuse for calling it a ground-rule double

[2314@work]

QUOTE(OmniscienceFrog @ May 21 2010, 05:38 PM) [snapback]562399[/snapback]
Yes, he can review plays that fall under the review rule at any time, but if he feels sure the correct call was made on the field and nobody argues it, what is his motivation to delay the game and review it?

The problem was Wash didn't ask for a review.
But, in Wash's defense, the ump told him he was CERTAIN what he saw and I can see why Wash didn't argue after he was told that.
And I don't buy the bleeding-heart BS some of you are putting out.
It was complete arrogance of the umps and crew chief that kept it from review.
Somebody should get suspended - without pay of course.
Only a wuss would disagree.
Or somebody who hates Dallas sports h34r: And those of you on here who are like that need to shut your pie holes and respect the fact that 90 percent of us on the board are Dallas/Fort Worth sports fans.

 

[The Artist Formerly Known as PhormerPhrog]

Simple physics should tell you that a line drive doesn't ricochet off a padded wall like that.

 

[2314@work]

QUOTE(PhormerPhrog @ May 21 2010, 11:55 PM) [snapback]562471[/snapback]
Simple physics should tell you that a line drive doesn't ricochet off a padded wall like that.

And 20/20 vision.

 

[The Artist Formerly Known as PhormerPhrog]

Das how baseball go...

 

[2314@work]

QUOTE(PhormerPhrog @ May 22 2010, 12:34 AM) [snapback]562475[/snapback]
Das how baseball go...

Seriously, if that ump or crew chief didn't at least receive a fine then I have lost all respect for baseball.
They are putting themselves in the NBA's category. Suck on that, Selig.

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

QUOTE(2314 @ May 21 2010, 11:33 PM) [snapback]562465[/snapback]
The problem was Wash didn't ask for a review.
But, in Wash's defense, the ump told him he was CERTAIN what he saw and I can see why Wash didn't argue after he was told that.
And I don't buy the bleeding-heart BS some of you are putting out.
It was complete arrogance of the umps and crew chief that kept it from review.
Somebody should get suspended - without pay of course.
Only a wuss would disagree.
Or somebody who hates Dallas sports h34r: And those of you on here who are like that need to shut your pie holes and respect the fact that 90 percent of us on the board are Dallas/Fort Worth sports fans.



Whatever. Blather on, and enjoy your little world where you know it all..

 

[2314@work]

QUOTE(OmniscienceFrog @ May 22 2010, 03:15 AM) [snapback]562480[/snapback]
Whatever. Blather on, and enjoy your little world where you know it all..

It's the self-important like you that really put a black eye on this board.
Now, run along. I hear your wife calling you :laugh:

 

[Houston Frog]

I'm with 2314 on this one. If you're going to assure everyone that a play needs no review because you are 100% positive you got it right, you better not have completely botched the call. How was he so positive he got it right, whenever he so clearly got it wrong? Is he that arrogant that he assumes there's no way his initial impression of what occurred could possibly be wrong.

Just review the play. If anything, you're letting yourself off the hook for a possible botched call. At worst, you waste 4 minutes of everyones' time... BFD

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

QUOTE(2314 @ May 22 2010, 07:52 AM) [snapback]562500[/snapback]
It's the self-important like you that really put a black eye on this board.
Now, run along. I hear your wife calling you :laugh:


I think I'M self-important? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

That's rich, considering the source.


I put a black eye on this board? Who just got back from board vacation again?

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

QUOTE(Houston Frog @ May 22 2010, 07:53 AM) [snapback]562501[/snapback]
I'm with 2314 on this one. If you're going to assure everyone that a play needs no review because you are 100% positive you got it right, you better not have completely botched the call. How was he so positive he got it right, whenever he so clearly got it wrong? Is he that arrogant that he assumes there's no way his initial impression of what occurred could possibly be wrong.


The point that seems to elude some is that he didn't "assure" anybody that he got the call right. He made the call as he saw it. He told the crew chief what he saw and the crew chief stood with his call. NOBODY on the field requested a review of it, so what are the umpires supposed to do, go to a video review of every close play they think they got right?

I guess they could go to the NHL system and have a central video office that monitors all the games and rules on every close decision by phone.

 

[2314@work]

QUOTE(OmniscienceFrog @ May 22 2010, 06:35 PM) [snapback]562626[/snapback]
The point that seems to elude some is that he didn't "assure" anybody that he got the call right. He made the call as he saw it. He told the crew chief what he saw and the crew chief stood with his call. NOBODY on the field requested a review of it, so what are the umpires supposed to do, go to a video review of every close play they think they got right?

I guess they could go to the NHL system and have a central video office that monitors all the games and rules on every close decision by phone.

You do know how to read?
Read my friggin' earlier post and you will know THE CREW CHIEF CAN ASK FOR A REVIEW AT ANY TIME.
Obviously, you are one who has convinced himself you just know it all.
Oh to be blessed with such intelligence.
I hear your wife calling you. Hurry, hurry, hurry! :laugh:

 

[TEUFELI]

QUOTE(2314 @ May 22 2010, 11:29 PM) [snapback]562640[/snapback]
You do know how to read?
Read my friggin' earlier post and you will know THE CREW CHIEF CAN ASK FOR A REVIEW AT ANY TIME.
Obviously, you are one who has convinced himself you just know it all.
Oh to be blessed with such intelligence.
I hear your wife calling you. Hurry, hurry, hurry! :laugh:


You know what is interesting about a call made 2 nights ago (which ultimately didnt affect the outcome of a freaking MAY MLB game) and a pissing contest between d bag college football interweb posters?

Nothing.

Move on girls...

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

QUOTE(2314 @ May 22 2010, 11:29 PM) [snapback]562640[/snapback]
You do know how to read?
Read my friggin' earlier post and you will know THE CREW CHIEF CAN ASK FOR A REVIEW AT ANY TIME.


Yes I know how to read, and that is why I said the main point eludes you. I know the crew chief can call for a review anytime when there is a play that falls under the replay guidelines. What you are unable comprehend is that he didn't feel that a replay was called for and nobody requested one, so he didn't review it. It's very simple concept and really isn't that hard to grasp. Keep trying.

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

QUOTE(TEUFELI @ May 22 2010, 11:39 PM) [snapback]562643[/snapback]
You know what is interesting about a call made 2 nights ago (which ultimately didnt affect the outcome of a freaking MAY MLB game) and a pissing contest between d bag college football interweb posters?

Nothing.



Good, we can assume you've made your contribution then. Is it interesting now?

 

[2314@work]

QUOTE(OmniscienceFrog @ May 22 2010, 11:45 PM) [snapback]562644[/snapback]
Yes I know how to read, and that is why I said the main point eludes you. I know the crew chief can call for a review anytime when there is a play that falls under the replay guidelines. What you are unable comprehend is that he didn't feel that a replay was called for and nobody requested one, so he didn't review it. It's very simple concept and really isn't that hard to grasp. Keep trying.

Good gosh you are a "Shackite," one of the legion of kf.c boarders who has to always get in the last word, even when you are badly losing an argument.
The point is - OmniShack - is that since the crew chief saw something that didn't happen (yeah, the ball always bounces back that hard when it hits a matted fence :wacko: ) and was too arrogant to admit there was a possiblilty that His God Almighty Ump self could have used a little help in the form of the technology available to make sure the call was right.
NOT BEING THOROUGH is grounds for suspension or total termination or at least being sent down to the minors. Funny thing about MLB - Chris Davis doesn't show A COMPLETE GAME and he gets sent down. Same thing should happen to the crew chief who believes balls ricochet off foam mats the same as they do when they hit steel beams.
Go ahead, OmniShack, embarrass yourself some more and continue to argue this point with me.

 

[Houston Frog]

QUOTE(OmniscienceFrog @ May 22 2010, 06:35 PM) [snapback]562626[/snapback]
The point that seems to elude some is that he didn't "assure" anybody that he got the call right. He made the call as he saw it. He told the crew chief what he saw and the crew chief stood with his call. NOBODY on the field requested a review of it,

That's all semantics... who assured who, no one assured anyone, who requested what, who is responsible for deciding to review it, etc... the fact of the matter is that they didn't review a very questionable call, and because of it, they got it wrong and it could have cost a team a game. Also, there is no downside to reviewing the play and it was clearly questionable, just review it.

QUOTE
so what are the umpires supposed to do, go to a video review of every close play they think they got right?

No, just review all the close HR calls, pretty simple. They JUST implemented a new HR review policy for this EXACT scenario, just review it and make sure you didn't botch it. What's the downside, an extra 2.5 minutes at the ballpark? Who gives a crap

 

[TopFrog]

QUOTE
the crew chief admitted he screwed up and they should have reviewed it.


EOD ...

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

QUOTE(2314 @ May 23 2010, 07:56 AM) [snapback]562673[/snapback]
The point is - OmniShack - is that since the crew chief saw something that didn't happen (yeah, the ball always bounces back that hard when it hits a matted fence :wacko: ) and was too arrogant to admit there was a possiblilty that His God Almighty Ump self could have used a little help in the form of the technology available to make sure the call was right.





Hamilton hit a ball over the left field wall that should have tied the game 2-2. The ball hit some rods between the video board in the outfield wall and the stands and bounced up and back into the field. Second base umpire Doug Eddings called the ball live. Hamilton ended up with a double and did not score in the inning.

When manager Ron Washington came out for an explanation, Eddings said he clearly saw the ball hit the padding on the outfield wall (which is still in the field of play) and then bounce back onto the field. Washington did not ask for the umpires to review the play, and Eddings didn't ask for help from the rest of the crew.

Only after the game did DeMuth look at the replay. Upon seeing it, he acknowledged the mistake.

"I just looked at the replay and saw that the ball hit the back part of the wall. The deal with the replay, which is a great tool that Major League Baseball has put onto us, is a tool that I probably should have used and I did not," DeMuth told a pool reporter. "Just like a team's manager has a trust in their team, I have a trust in my umpire, and my umpire that was out on that call (Eddings) didn't feel there was any question in his mind. He felt 100 percent sure on it. He didn't come to me.

"To see this right now is very upsetting because this is a great tool that Major League Baseball has given me, has given crew chiefs, has given umpires. I can see that I did not use that tool. I didn't think there was any doubt in my partner's mind, and I've had this plenty of times before where we made the correct call and we used the tool and it showed we were correct.

"This, in my experience, is the first time me being a crew chief that obviously we made the wrong call. If he had any doubt in his mind all he has to do is come to me and we're going to video. That's how sure he was on it. There's nobody on the field that could tell. Nobody came running to me.



QUOTE(2314 @ May 23 2010, 07:56 AM) [snapback]562673[/snapback]
Go ahead, OmniShack, embarrass yourself some more and continue to argue this point with me.


I'm going to embarrass MYSELF by continuing to argue the point? :laugh: Hell, the most embarrassing part for me is arguing with someone that is clueless about the point being argued. You don't even know who made the call so why should anybody put any credence in anything you have to say about it?.

 

[2314@work]

QUOTE(OmniscienceFrog @ May 23 2010, 04:25 PM) [snapback]562779[/snapback]
Hamilton hit a ball over the left field wall that should have tied the game 2-2. The ball hit some rods between the video board in the outfield wall and the stands and bounced up and back into the field. Second base umpire Doug Eddings called the ball live. Hamilton ended up with a double and did not score in the inning.

When manager Ron Washington came out for an explanation, Eddings said he clearly saw the ball hit the padding on the outfield wall (which is still in the field of play) and then bounce back onto the field. Washington did not ask for the umpires to review the play, and Eddings didn't ask for help from the rest of the crew.

Only after the game did DeMuth look at the replay. Upon seeing it, he acknowledged the mistake.

"I just looked at the replay and saw that the ball hit the back part of the wall. The deal with the replay, which is a great tool that Major League Baseball has put onto us, is a tool that I probably should have used and I did not," DeMuth told a pool reporter. "Just like a team's manager has a trust in their team, I have a trust in my umpire, and my umpire that was out on that call (Eddings) didn't feel there was any question in his mind. He felt 100 percent sure on it. He didn't come to me.

"To see this right now is very upsetting because this is a great tool that Major League Baseball has given me, has given crew chiefs, has given umpires. I can see that I did not use that tool. I didn't think there was any doubt in my partner's mind, and I've had this plenty of times before where we made the correct call and we used the tool and it showed we were correct.

"This, in my experience, is the first time me being a crew chief that obviously we made the wrong call. If he had any doubt in his mind all he has to do is come to me and we're going to video. That's how sure he was on it. There's nobody on the field that could tell. Nobody came running to me.





I'm going to embarrass MYSELF by continuing to argue the point? :laugh: Hell, the most embarrassing part for me is arguing with someone that is clueless about the point being argued. You don't even know who made the call so why should anybody put any credence in anything you have to say about it?.

Good God OmniIdiot, I AM THE POSTER WHO STARTED THIS THREAD.
But in Shack-like fashion, you are God's gift to message boards so anything you say has to be right :wacko:
Don't go telling me what THE POINT OF MY OWN THREAD IS.
Get over yourself. You also just proved me right with your Shack-like attitude.
You may as well spend the rest of your days on The Generally Bored. You have lost cred on FFF.
BTW, I have had a blast slam-dunking you all day. :laugh:

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

QUOTE(2314 @ May 23 2010, 06:22 PM) [snapback]562796[/snapback]
Don't go telling me what THE POINT OF MY OWN THREAD IS.


OK Mr. Dense. As usual nothing penetrates that rock on your neck.

I know what your point was. It is based on ignorance, but I know what it was.

I'll try one last time. You are incapable of grasping MY POINT, and I'm sure you'll prove it again as soon as you read this.

Good god, you don't even know all the players in your own blind rants.