1. The KillerFrogs

ot - [ What the heck? ] joe west

Discussion in 'Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum' started by Eight, Oct 14, 2018.

  1. Another observation..... yes, that group in the studio is not good. The guys on FS1 aren’t any better either. ARod makes me want to throw stuff at the TV.
    Eight likes this.
  2. Wrong call and only made because of the Bartmann effect and an umpire that should be doing insulin commercials instead of being on a MLB field. And I am rooting for the Red Sox as I turned in my Astros card the moment the Osuna announcement was made. T8 of game three was one of the best innings of baseball ever.
  3. #63 Moose Stuff, Oct 18, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2018

    Well we disagree. I’ve watched it 10 times and I can’t say conclusively that it was the wrong call. At that point I’m defaulting to common sense which says if a fielder is trying to catch the ball get the hell out of his way. And yes, I’m aware that’s not actually in the rule book. As for Joe West, if you’re gonna make fun of him (which is fine) you should also acknowledge how good he was two nights ago when he literally called 159 out of 160 pitches correctly. That’s unheard of.
    froglash88 and MTfrog5 like this.
  4. He can do well when sedentary which is his core competency. I’d also suggest that MLB look at its “back of ticket” language about being prepared for balls entering the stands before they start expecting fans to sit on their hands. My biggest issue with the call is that it was assumed to be fan interference. I think the presumption should be with the offense in baseball (as in tie goes to the runner)
    TooColdU and Ron Swanson like this.
  5. What I think will end up happening is seats will be pushed back so these kind of plays can’t happen.
  6. When you’ve got over 300 feet of advance warning for a ball coming right at you being “prepared for balls entering the stands” should probably mean “get out of the way” more than it means “reach out and make contact with the glove of the fielder who is about to catch the ball”.
  7. It’s actaully pretty silly when you think about it...... can you imagine a fan reaching out and interfering with a back of the end zone catch in a huge postseason game? People would go apeshit and none of them would be defending the fan.

    Edit..... note to self..... “s h i t” will get filtered, “apeshit” will not.
  8. I understand the call not being overturned because it was called fan interference on the field and there wasn’t irrefutable evidence to overturn it because there was no angle to prove the fans weren’t in the field of play. That being said, I don’t think it should’ve been called fan interference on the field. I think it needs to be egregious to make that call.

    It sucks, but it is what it is.

    Unbelievable game. One of the bigger nutkicks of my sport-watching career. I think whoever wins that game wins the World Series.

    I’m going to tonight’s game. Hopefully the old adage about momentum being tonight’s starting pitcher holds true.
    ShreveFrog, Moose Stuff and MTfrog5 like this.
  9. I do agree with it should only be called fan interference when it’s obvious even though I do think the call was ultimately correct last night. Tonight should be a blast with Verlander in the mound against I guess Price? Price threw at least 3 innings warming up it seemed last night
    Ron Swanson likes this.
  10. I hope Verlander throws a 2-hit shutout through 8 and Osuna takes over in the 9th over JV’s angry protestations and balks in the eventual losing run.
    hometown frog likes this.
  11. I was against (and confused by) the Osuna trade as well and I struggle when he’s on the mound. Not enough to make me question my Astros fandom or anything, but I don’t like him.

    I was dog-cussing him during game 3 for damn sure. And that was before the grand slam.
  12. This is best picture I’ve seen and didn’t see this last night. Fan in white from other angle we know is reaching over the fence and his hands are still behind the other fans that do make contact.

    Attached Files:

  13. It was enough for me to now root for Osuna-induced torments on the organization. Mixon-esque feelings.
  14. The call should have NEVER been made on the field. Don't call anything and review it and decide then. How can a guy who is standing at a 180 degree angle to the fan and ball path tell the depth perception of whether someone is reaching over the wall? It's simple geometry and physics. I have no idea if they are forced to call something on the field, but the default should almost always (unless it's in foul ground and the ump is right there) be a homerun. The odds that he catches the ball are significantly lower than the odds that it goes into the stands.

    Once the call on the field was made it was over.

    Oh and the "foul tip" strikeout was just a remarkably corrupt call. It ended up costing James 5-6 pitches, which very well could have affected the homerun the next inning. I don't understand how baseball can have these mistakes when the game is so static.

    Oh and the strike two on Altuve that made the count 2-2 instead of 3-1 was crazy. The ball was four inches outside. And guess what, next pitch, outside and low and Altuve has to swing and pops it up. As long as they aren't using computers I get that some pitches on the edges will be incorrect, but the ball was a solid four inches outside.
    Eight and Ron Swanson like this.
  15. Also notice how far Betts’ body is from the wall. And what the hell is the fan in white looking at? Nice attempt buddy.
  16. Betts being away from the wall is my biggest argument. Contact had already been made at this point too so when it was first made he was even farther away
    Moose Stuff likes this.
  17. But then you are just rewarding the offense?

    The umpire should make the play call they think is correct, and work back from there. A ruling of a home run should not be the "default" call. The "default" call should always be whatever the umpire thinks is correct.

    In this instance there are two possible calls: Home run or an out. Why should home run be the "default" result when it could have easily been an out if there was not fan interference (in the umpires view)?
  18. Statistics. Unless I'm mistaken, there is no umpire at the back wall. So any umpire making the call is looking at it from an angle that is literally impossible to tell depth of a fan's arm.

    So, from there, it is highly more likely that Betts does not catch the ball than catch it. I mean, you saw it happen in the same game where Springer went up and the ball bounced off his glove. You better be darn sure the fan interfered if you are going to make that call on the field.

    What really should happen is the ump calls it a dead ball and they make the call on replay.

    What really really should happen is that they change the rule, and barring an egregious interference, it's a ground rule double. Changing that homerun to an out probably changed win probability by 20% or more.
    Ron Swanson likes this.
  19. Default is to not call what you cannot see. That way in all sports. Don't anticipate. Don't assume. Don't "think" what may have happened. See or not see. And yes, the default (presumption) should be that it was a HR until reviewed and declared otherwise. If a tie goes to the runner, doesn't that reward the offense? Yes it does. And that's baseball. The defense has such an overwhelming statistical advantage that it has been and should be this way. If a football official "thinks" a player is down, should he blow the whistle? No he should not.
    jake102 likes this.
  20. But just like any call on the field, the umpire needs to make an educated guess on what is the correct call. You can always end up in situations like this, where you do not have accurate or unobstructed views of the play. You can't have a situation where an umpire intentionally makes the wrong call saying "Well I am not sure; I was just hoping we would have a good camera angle". If this situation happened last night and there was no call on the field (just a dead ball) and there was no great camera angle, the replay officials would just have to make a totally arbitrary call. The system in place of sticking with the call on the field unless there is indisputable evidence to overturn seems like the most fair for all parties involved.

Share This Page