Good Posting Judge
Footballguy
Not sure why they have instant replay if they won't overturn a pretty clear-cut call.
Way to ruin baseball/the economy, Detroit.
Way to ruin baseball/the economy, Detroit.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
***Official 2013 ALDS A's v Tigers thread*** (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Doctor Detroit
- Start date
Limp Ditka
Footballguy
Michael Brown
Footballguy
Unless I'm misunderstanding the rule, I think they got it right. In order to call it a double, the fan had to have reached over the field of play and pulled it back. From the replays I saw, it looked like the ball was clearly above the yellow line, so that's out.Not sure why they have instant replay if they won't overturn a pretty clear-cut call.
Way to ruin baseball/the economy, Detroit.
In order to call it an out, the fielder has to be positioned to make an easy catch with normal effort. Reddick was flying through the air and probably wouldn't have caught the ball anyway, so that's out.
If the fan doesn't reach over, I think the ball goes above the line and/or hits of Reddick's glove and probably hits the facing of that railing in front of the fans. That's a HR according to Comerica ground rules, no?
pollardsvision
Footballguy
Holy ####. What a strikeout.
Michael Brown
Footballguy
Josh Reddick = the worst
tri-man 47
Footballguy
HR was legit, I'd say. Max!!! Scared seeing AJax batting in the ninth, but good for him to come through.
Frustrating for the A's ...the HR call, and then some bad swings in key spots at the end.
GAME 5!!!
Frustrating for the A's ...the HR call, and then some bad swings in key spots at the end.
GAME 5!!!
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
Last edited by a moderator:
Doctor Detroit
Please remove your headgear
Yeah that was a homer by the rules, it was a homer regardless of what the fan did. As soon as it happened (and while waiting 6 minutes for the crack TBS crew to show the replay), I thought about how hard it would be to have fan interference out there. Unless you're an orangutan, it wouldn't be easy.
What a game, as up and down emotionally as one game gets. Max loading up the bases then stranding them was awesome. Regardless what happens on Thursday, my team plays the Red Sux on Saturday.
What a game, as up and down emotionally as one game gets. Max loading up the bases then stranding them was awesome. Regardless what happens on Thursday, my team plays the Red Sux on Saturday.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
Good Posting Judge
Footballguy
Good Posting Judge
Footballguy
3.15
No person shall be allowed on the playing field during a game except players and coaches in uniform, managers, news photographers authorized by the home team, umpires, officers of the law in uniform and watchmen or other employees of the home club. In case of unintentional interference with play by any person herein authorized to be on the playing field (except members of the offensive team participating in the game, or a coach in the coachs box, or an umpire) the ball is alive and in play. If the interference is intentional, the ball shall be dead at the moment of the interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference.
NOTE: See Rule 7.11 for individuals excepted above, also see Rule 7.08(b).
Rule 3.15 Comment: The question of intentional or unintentional interference shall be decided on the basis of the persons action. For example: a bat boy, ball attendant, policeman, etc., who tries to avoid being touched by a thrown or batted ball but still is touched by the ball would be involved in unintentional interference. If, however, he kicks the ball or picks it up or pushes it, that is considered intentional interference, regardless of what his thought may have been.
PLAY: Batter hits ball to shortstop, who fields ball but throws wild past first baseman. The offensive coach at first base, to avoid being hit by the ball, falls to the ground and the first baseman on his way to retrieve the wild thrown ball, runs into the coach; the batter-runner finally ends up on third base. The question is asked whether the umpire should call interference on the part of the coach. This would be up to the judgment of the umpire and if the umpire felt that the coach did all he could to avoid interfering with the play, no interference need be called. If it appeared to the umpire that the coach was obviously just making it appear he was trying not to interfere, the umpire should rule interference.
3.16
When there is spectator interference with any thrown or batted ball, the ball shall be dead at the moment of interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference.
APPROVED RULING: If spectator interference clearly prevents a fielder from catching a fly ball, the umpire shall declare the batter out.
Rule 3.16 Comment: There is a difference between a ball which has been thrown or batted into the stands, touching a spectator thereby being out of play even though it rebounds onto the field and a spectator going onto the field or reaching over, under or through a barrier and touching a ball in play or touching or otherwise interfering with a player. In the latter case it is clearly intentional and shall be dealt with as intentional interference as in Rule 3.15. Batter and runners shall be placed where in the umpires judgment they would have been had the interference not occurred.
No interference shall be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk. However, should a spectator reach out on the playing field side of such fence, railing or rope, and plainly prevent the fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectators interference. Example: Runner on third base, one out and a batter hits a fly ball deep to the outfield (fair or foul). Spectator clearly interferes with the outfielder attempting to catch the fly ball. Umpire calls the batter out for spectator interference. Ball is dead at the time of the call. Umpire decides that because of the distance the ball was hit, the runner on third base would have scored after the catch if the fielder had caught the ball which was interfered with, therefore, the runner is permitted to score. This might not be the case if such fly ball was interfered with a short distance from home plate.
By the MLB rules, I'm not sure how it's relevant whether the ball was going to hit yellow or not (I think it is pretty clear that if no fan or OF had touched it, it would've been a HR): The fan reached over a barrier and prevented a player from making a catch. And note that there's nothing in the rule that states how good of a chance the fielder had to have had of making the catch, it just has to be "plainly" interference.
So under the rule, as soon as the ball hits the fan who's reaching out, it should be dead at the moment of interference. And note that at that point, Reddick wasn't over the fence. There's a lot of give in Rule 3.16, but I don't see how the ball being a HR if nobody had touched it being relevant. Darling saying that Reddick wasn't going to catch the ball was not only not on-point with the rules, frankly, I think it's just incorrect as well.
http://larrybrownsports.com/baseball/fan-interference-victor-martinez-home-run-video/206621
No person shall be allowed on the playing field during a game except players and coaches in uniform, managers, news photographers authorized by the home team, umpires, officers of the law in uniform and watchmen or other employees of the home club. In case of unintentional interference with play by any person herein authorized to be on the playing field (except members of the offensive team participating in the game, or a coach in the coachs box, or an umpire) the ball is alive and in play. If the interference is intentional, the ball shall be dead at the moment of the interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference.
NOTE: See Rule 7.11 for individuals excepted above, also see Rule 7.08(b).
Rule 3.15 Comment: The question of intentional or unintentional interference shall be decided on the basis of the persons action. For example: a bat boy, ball attendant, policeman, etc., who tries to avoid being touched by a thrown or batted ball but still is touched by the ball would be involved in unintentional interference. If, however, he kicks the ball or picks it up or pushes it, that is considered intentional interference, regardless of what his thought may have been.
PLAY: Batter hits ball to shortstop, who fields ball but throws wild past first baseman. The offensive coach at first base, to avoid being hit by the ball, falls to the ground and the first baseman on his way to retrieve the wild thrown ball, runs into the coach; the batter-runner finally ends up on third base. The question is asked whether the umpire should call interference on the part of the coach. This would be up to the judgment of the umpire and if the umpire felt that the coach did all he could to avoid interfering with the play, no interference need be called. If it appeared to the umpire that the coach was obviously just making it appear he was trying not to interfere, the umpire should rule interference.
3.16
When there is spectator interference with any thrown or batted ball, the ball shall be dead at the moment of interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference.
APPROVED RULING: If spectator interference clearly prevents a fielder from catching a fly ball, the umpire shall declare the batter out.
Rule 3.16 Comment: There is a difference between a ball which has been thrown or batted into the stands, touching a spectator thereby being out of play even though it rebounds onto the field and a spectator going onto the field or reaching over, under or through a barrier and touching a ball in play or touching or otherwise interfering with a player. In the latter case it is clearly intentional and shall be dealt with as intentional interference as in Rule 3.15. Batter and runners shall be placed where in the umpires judgment they would have been had the interference not occurred.
No interference shall be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk. However, should a spectator reach out on the playing field side of such fence, railing or rope, and plainly prevent the fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectators interference. Example: Runner on third base, one out and a batter hits a fly ball deep to the outfield (fair or foul). Spectator clearly interferes with the outfielder attempting to catch the fly ball. Umpire calls the batter out for spectator interference. Ball is dead at the time of the call. Umpire decides that because of the distance the ball was hit, the runner on third base would have scored after the catch if the fielder had caught the ball which was interfered with, therefore, the runner is permitted to score. This might not be the case if such fly ball was interfered with a short distance from home plate.
By the MLB rules, I'm not sure how it's relevant whether the ball was going to hit yellow or not (I think it is pretty clear that if no fan or OF had touched it, it would've been a HR): The fan reached over a barrier and prevented a player from making a catch. And note that there's nothing in the rule that states how good of a chance the fielder had to have had of making the catch, it just has to be "plainly" interference.
So under the rule, as soon as the ball hits the fan who's reaching out, it should be dead at the moment of interference. And note that at that point, Reddick wasn't over the fence. There's a lot of give in Rule 3.16, but I don't see how the ball being a HR if nobody had touched it being relevant. Darling saying that Reddick wasn't going to catch the ball was not only not on-point with the rules, frankly, I think it's just incorrect as well.
http://larrybrownsports.com/baseball/fan-interference-victor-martinez-home-run-video/206621
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
I am thinking the way Sonny Gray dominated the Tigers last time out he will be starting. I am hoping it is Colon though.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
They could do like the Tigers did game 4 with Max and have Sonny warming up in the bullpen.
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
Maybe...for some reason I feel like Leyland really wanted JV to have the ball in game 5 if there was one. I have no facts or data to back that up though.
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
Watching Doolittle this series I felt it was only a matter of time before the Tigers got to him. Doolittle was only throwing fastballs everytime out..and he was getting the Tigers to chase bad pitches. Doolittle seems like the kind of pitcher if you see a few games in a row you can bang him around.
My memory escapes me now but I thought the Tigers roughed him up last year too.
My memory escapes me now but I thought the Tigers roughed him up last year too.
Michael Brown
Footballguy
Yup, just checked BBR and he gave up runs in 2 of his 3 appearances last year. Gave up 5 hits and 3 runs (1 ER) in 2.2 IP
Last edited by a moderator:
MAC_32
Footballguy
I agree, season on the line, put in the ace. Yeah, he didn't have a vintage Verlander year, but he has earned the most trust on this staff. If we make it sets up for Max-Verlander games 3-4 and 6-7. Will have to beat us in 5 to avoid an elimination game vs. 2 of the best pitchers in the game.Da Guru said:
East Coast Bias
Footballguy
Gray's getting the start.Da Guru said:
Michael Brown
Footballguy
I don't know the ins and outs of the team, but wouldn't putting Martinez at C defeat the purpose of helping the defense?
whoknew
Footballguy
tri-man 47
Footballguy
Interesting. While they're at it, throw Infante to the top of the order and see what happens.
I think the Tigers will get to Gray tonight, now that they've got a game under their belt against him.
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
Infante should be at leading off regardless of any other moves. Omar does not strike out much and can work the count when needed. Jackson is killing the offense and should be batting in the 7-8 spot. Have to admit even Jackson hit was pretty lucky 0-2 and he gets the bat sawed off in his hands. That being said the odds of Omar leading off tonight are zero.
Last edited by a moderator:
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
I was just thinking last night the same thing about Omar & AJax. Flip them in the order.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Michael Brown
Footballguy
Not so much for throwing, but with his knee being ravaged like it was (and not being a very good catcher before that), and having not caught in two years...I can't imagine he can just suit up and catch like it's no big deal. I'd expect anything in the dirt to reach the backstop, and every Oakland walk or single would become a double (despite the fact that they don't run now, they WOULD if VMart was catching).
MAC_32
Footballguy
Avila hits righties well - 255/345/422 this year, 266/362/447 career. He's a liability vs. lefties. Gray throws right, so Avila needs to start at C.
There really isn't an optimal way to play this as we weaken ourselves somewhere no matter what we do, so my hope is we don't pull Miggy or V Mart (at all) and hold Peralta until Oakland inevitably brings in a lefty and put him in for Dirks.
Infante at the top of the order would be an interesting wrinkle. Put A Jacks in the 9 hole? I could get behind that.
There really isn't an optimal way to play this as we weaken ourselves somewhere no matter what we do, so my hope is we don't pull Miggy or V Mart (at all) and hold Peralta until Oakland inevitably brings in a lefty and put him in for Dirks.
Infante at the top of the order would be an interesting wrinkle. Put A Jacks in the 9 hole? I could get behind that.
Gopher State
Footballguy
JV PITCHING = $$$$$=GAMEOVER A'S simple math all day long
whoknew
Footballguy
whoknew
Footballguy
I just don't think the difference between Dirks and Avila is that great (granted, it was 80 points in OPS this year).
Its a tough call, but I would think that the difference between Dirks and Avila (plus the downgrade to Victor behind the plate) is made up by better D in LF and at 3B and semi-resting Cabrera. But who knows? Maybe nobody will hit the ball at Cabrera tonight.
Last edited by a moderator:
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Yes he could and has done it this year. That said I think Avila always gives Detroit's pitchers the most confidence back there.
teamramrod
Footballguy
JV looking very bad, only 4 Ks in the first 6 batters.
peace
peace
Good Posting Judge
Footballguy
Injury or no, that was bound to happen eventually. 
Eephus
Footballguy
11 - shared by Bret Boone (2001 ALDS) and Pat Burrell (2010 WS in 15 ABs).
But Burrell was wearing a gimp mask.
tri-man 47
Footballguy
Oof. Tough inning for Gray - Miggy's homer and a climbing pitch count. Verlander should be smelling blood now.
Gopher State
Footballguy
JV WILL SEAL THE DEAL
MAC_32
Footballguy
we know you're trying the reverse jinx but it doesn't work when you're intentionally doing it.
scoobus
Footballguy
MAC_32
Footballguy
I don't care that it was a groundball, I'm just happy he made contact.
Mario Kart
Footballguy
C'mon, Oakland. Win this one! Beane is going to go nuts.
teamramrod
Footballguy
note to the d bag behind home plate throwing his yellow hankie in the air before every pitch.....
Justin is not a gentlemen and will not come pick it up and then hand it to you with his undying love.
Act like a man.
Peace
Justin is not a gentlemen and will not come pick it up and then hand it to you with his undying love.
Act like a man.
Peace
