Who saw the Braves game last night (8/08)? (1 Viewer)

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

Game tied 2-2 in 5th.

Furcal on 1st, 3-1 on batter.

Furcal takes off for second. Pitch is RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE. Home plate umpire signals (distinctive) strike and yell strike.

Throw gets Furcal at second and 2nd base umpire calls him out.

Then...home plate umpire waves off the strike, sends batter to first and, therefore, Furcal is safe.

Needless to say, Bobby gets tossed.

If anyone sees any write up or explanation on this, please explain.

 

[dparker713]

Gameday

If you click to the particular at bat, you'll note that the pitch f/x data has the 5th pitch as a borderline strike at best - not right down the middle. It was an odd sequence of hand signals, but the call is entirely defensible.

The angle of a typical broadcast makes it difficult to see the horizontal location of a pitch, though the alternative of a camera directly behind the pitcher makes it difficult to see the verticle location of a pitch.

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

Gameday

If you click to the particular at bat, you'll note that the pitch f/x data has the 5th pitch as a borderline strike at best - not right down the middle. It was an odd sequence of hand signals, but the call is entirely defensible.

The angle of a typical broadcast makes it difficult to see the horizontal location of a pitch, though the alternative of a camera directly behind the pitcher makes it difficult to see the verticle location of a pitch.

I was watching it live, not reading it off of some data service. It was clearly and without debate a strike.The umpire CALLED IT A STRIKE. Handmotion AND verbal.

It is entirely INdefensible.

 

[dparker713]

Gameday

If you click to the particular at bat, you'll note that the pitch f/x data has the 5th pitch as a borderline strike at best - not right down the middle. It was an odd sequence of hand signals, but the call is entirely defensible.

The angle of a typical broadcast makes it difficult to see the horizontal location of a pitch, though the alternative of a camera directly behind the pitcher makes it difficult to see the verticle location of a pitch.

I was watching it live, not reading it off of some data service. It was clearly and without debate a strike.The umpire CALLED IT A STRIKE. Handmotion AND verbal.

It is entirely INdefensible.

Unless you think the MLB messed with the pitch f/x data (which I can guarentee you someone would blog about), your only argument is that you are able to determine the location of a pitch better than cameras recording the flight of the ball at 32 frames per second and a professional umpire standing over the shoulder of the catcher. You do realize that the normal shot over a pitcher's shoulder greatly colors the view of the strike zone. The 5-15 degrees make a good lefty slider look other worldly and make balls look like strikes.Im certain you didnt hear the ump call strike, so has this verbal call been claimed by McCann or Either, you know, guys actually in position to hear?

Regardless of what he may have initially called or signaled, he has the final say in the matter and made the call a ball before the next pitch was thrown. And the call he eventually made is probably the right call.

 

[The Kansas Comet]

It was bizarre - I was watching and was ticked that Furcal got thrown out and then he kept standing at second base. And then Ethier starts walking to first even though it clearly looked as if the ump called the pitch a strike. Cox had every right to be irate about that call (both would score on Blake's home run). Scully was surprised by the call as well and said on the broadcast that when the umpires reviewed the game later, they would be embarrassed. That's about as strong a statement about a call as you'll hear from Vin.

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

Gameday

If you click to the particular at bat, you'll note that the pitch f/x data has the 5th pitch as a borderline strike at best - not right down the middle. It was an odd sequence of hand signals, but the call is entirely defensible.

The angle of a typical broadcast makes it difficult to see the horizontal location of a pitch, though the alternative of a camera directly behind the pitcher makes it difficult to see the verticle location of a pitch.

I was watching it live, not reading it off of some data service. It was clearly and without debate a strike.The umpire CALLED IT A STRIKE. Handmotion AND verbal.

It is entirely INdefensible.

Unless you think the MLB messed with the pitch f/x data (which I can guarentee you someone would blog about), your only argument is that you are able to determine the location of a pitch better than cameras recording the flight of the ball at 32 frames per second and a professional umpire standing over the shoulder of the catcher. You do realize that the normal shot over a pitcher's shoulder greatly colors the view of the strike zone. The 5-15 degrees make a good lefty slider look other worldly and make balls look like strikes.Im certain you didnt hear the ump call strike, so has this verbal call been claimed by McCann or Either, you know, guys actually in position to hear?

Regardless of what he may have initially called or signaled, he has the final say in the matter and made the call a ball before the next pitch was thrown. And the call he eventually made is probably the right call.

It was a strike. However, even if you believe it to be borderline, or even a ball, that is entire immaterial. The umpire CLEARLY called it a strike. I will go back and try to find out who said it but the story quoted at least 3 people that heard it including Cox. His strike motion is clear and distinctive...and he called it a strike.

 

[derek245583]

I saw it...

It was a strike...

The ump called it a strike....

No debate about the second thing.

 

[dparker713]

Gameday

If you click to the particular at bat, you'll note that the pitch f/x data has the 5th pitch as a borderline strike at best - not right down the middle. It was an odd sequence of hand signals, but the call is entirely defensible.

The angle of a typical broadcast makes it difficult to see the horizontal location of a pitch, though the alternative of a camera directly behind the pitcher makes it difficult to see the verticle location of a pitch.

I was watching it live, not reading it off of some data service. It was clearly and without debate a strike.The umpire CALLED IT A STRIKE. Handmotion AND verbal.

It is entirely INdefensible.

Unless you think the MLB messed with the pitch f/x data (which I can guarentee you someone would blog about), your only argument is that you are able to determine the location of a pitch better than cameras recording the flight of the ball at 32 frames per second and a professional umpire standing over the shoulder of the catcher. You do realize that the normal shot over a pitcher's shoulder greatly colors the view of the strike zone. The 5-15 degrees make a good lefty slider look other worldly and make balls look like strikes.Im certain you didnt hear the ump call strike, so has this verbal call been claimed by McCann or Either, you know, guys actually in position to hear?

Regardless of what he may have initially called or signaled, he has the final say in the matter and made the call a ball before the next pitch was thrown. And the call he eventually made is probably the right call.

It was a strike. However, even if you believe it to be borderline, or even a ball, that is entire immaterial. The umpire CLEARLY called it a strike. I will go back and try to find out who said it but the story quoted at least 3 people that heard it including Cox. His strike motion is clear and distinctive...and he called it a strike.

So he either clearly called it a strike when he believed it was a ball all along, or he changed his mind before the next pitch. Either way, its his final call that matters. The immaterial thing is his initial call.

 

[dparker713]

I saw it... ok, so did alot of people

It was a strike... its borderline at best according to pitch f/x and a ball according to the ump's final call

The ump called it a strike.... initially, then he called it a ball

No debate about the second thing.

Its an odd play no doubt, but Jurjens just didnt make the pitches he needed to - you're going to get some calls for and against you. All in all, everything turned out fine for the Braves - A) the won the game B) Soriano came in and looked good after his bad outing C) Bobby Cox added to his record for getting tossed.

 

[derek245583]

The ump called it a strike.... initially, then he called it a ball

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

The ump called it a strike.... initially, then he called it a ball

He voted for it before he voted against it.Now, Derek, my man, how many times in your life have you seen an umpire demonstratively call a pitch a strike...and they say, "no, wait, that was a ball"?

 

[derek245583]

The ump called it a strike.... initially, then he called it a ball

He voted for it before he voted against it.Now, Derek, my man, how many times in your life have you seen an umpire demonstratively call a pitch a strike...and they say, "no, wait, that was a ball"?

I have umpired baseball for 8-9 years. I have been watchin baseball for 20+ years....I have never once seen something like that. I would never even consider changing my mind in a HS game...and this guy did it in a major league game. I have no idea how that is even remotely acceptable.

 

[RnR]

Here's the video evidence. LINK

Completely unacceptable.

dparker playing the role of "dolt" pretty well in this thread. "Everything is alright because the Braves won anyway."

Listen to Vin Scully (the classiest play-by-play man in baseball) call this play. Says it all...

 

[dparker713]

The ump called it a strike.... initially, then he called it a ball

He voted for it before he voted against it.Now, Derek, my man, how many times in your life have you seen an umpire demonstratively call a pitch a strike...and they say, "no, wait, that was a ball"?

I have umpired baseball for 8-9 years. I have been watchin baseball for 20+ years....I have never once seen something like that. I would never even consider changing my mind in a HS game...and this guy did it in a major league game. I have no idea how that is even remotely acceptable.

So, if you meant to call something a ball, and instead called it a strike, or if you realized your initial reaction was wrong, its better to let the wrong call stand? See, I'd rather the call be right than worry about how the it got to being a right call. Thankfully, we could now replace umpires in the bigs with computers and get the calls right all the time, just need to get the players to accept it and then we can avoid any such situation in the future.

 

[RnR]

So, if you meant to call something a ball, and instead called it a strike, or if you realized your initial reaction was wrong, its better to let the wrong call stand? See, I'd rather the call be right than worry about how the it got to being a right call. Thankfully, we could now replace umpires in the bigs with computers and get the calls right all the time, just need to get the players to accept it and then we can avoid any such situation in the future.

I just don't understand your perspective on this call. It was atrocious. I can understand change an out/safe call after seeing the ball out of a glove, a foot off a base, etc. You don't correct a borderline ball/strike call. You make it and live with it. Especially after your hand has gone up to indicate strike on a call that directly influences the outcome of another play. Have you ever seen a ball/strike call changed prior to this play? Umps can't/won't/shouldn't do that, because the minute they start second guessing themselves on this kind of call is the minute they lose control of the game.

 

[dparker713]

So, if you meant to call something a ball, and instead called it a strike, or if you realized your initial reaction was wrong, its better to let the wrong call stand? See, I'd rather the call be right than worry about how the it got to being a right call. Thankfully, we could now replace umpires in the bigs with computers and get the calls right all the time, just need to get the players to accept it and then we can avoid any such situation in the future.

I just don't understand your perspective on this call. It was atrocious. I can understand change an out/safe call after seeing the ball out of a glove, a foot off a base, etc. You don't correct a borderline ball/strike call. You make it and live with it. Especially after your hand has gone up to indicate strike on a call that directly influences the outcome of another play. Have you ever seen a ball/strike call changed prior to this play? Umps can't/won't/shouldn't do that, because the minute they start second guessing themselves on this kind of call is the minute they lose control of the game.

A) As far as I know, MLB umps arent available for questioning, so you dont know that he second guessed himself. He could have just had a brain fart and signaled strike when he meant to signal ball. B) Seemed like the game went on just fine, he just had to eject Bobby Cox, which is hardly a rare occurance.C) The attitude that umps can't ever change their mind is part of the problem in baseball and a reason to hope for computers to become more a part of the game. MLB umps in general make alot of close calls accurately, but they are hardly infallible. If an occassional momentary reflection leads to fewer blown calls, thats a good thing for baseball. But since umps want to pretend they're incapable of making a mistake, they do stupid things like makeup calls and continue to stick to their guns despite evidence to the contrary.D) The call itself was not atrocious. The call was prefectly fine, and from replays I've seen and the gamecast it looks like a ball to me. The circumstances surrounding the call are plain odd, but its not like there was a 10 minute delay between the time the strike motion was made and the base was awarded.

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

D) The call itself was not atrocious. The call was prefectly fine, and from replays I've seen and the gamecast it looks like a ball to me. The circumstances surrounding the call are plain odd, but its not like there was a 10 minute delay between the time the strike motion was made and the base was awarded.

If that pitch looks like a ball to you, then the rest of this conversation is moot.

 

[derek245583]

A) As far as I know, MLB umps arent available for questioning, so you dont know that he second guessed himself. He could have just had a brain fart and signaled strike when he meant to signal ball. B) Seemed like the game went on just fine, he just had to eject Bobby Cox, which is hardly a rare occurance.C) The attitude that umps can't ever change their mind is part of the problem in baseball and a reason to hope for computers to become more a part of the game. MLB umps in general make alot of close calls accurately, but they are hardly infallible. If an occassional momentary reflection leads to fewer blown calls, thats a good thing for baseball. But since umps want to pretend they're incapable of making a mistake, they do stupid things like makeup calls and continue to stick to their guns despite evidence to the contrary.D) The call itself was not atrocious. The call was prefectly fine, and from replays I've seen and the gamecast it looks like a ball to me. The circumstances surrounding the call are plain odd, but its not like there was a 10 minute delay between the time the strike motion was made and the base was awarded.

A) Signal Ball? Seriously?B) So because it isnt unusual for Bobby Cox to get pitched...that means its ok? That doesnt even make sense.C) This is embarrassing. Umps dont "even things up" with makeup calls or think they are incapable of mistakes....This is just ignorance.D) The "borderline ball strike" wasnt the reason the thread was started.

 

[RnR]

Pretty clear who has and hasn't umpired and/or been heavily involved with organized baseball in this thread.

Thanks for cleaning this up for me, Derek.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Okay, after watching that, the batter was throwing his bat down to go to first as the tag was being applied at second, so this looks to be a situation where the ump, during that split second of indecision where he was deciding ball or strike, threw his hand out the way he would for a strike, and couldn't stop his arm from going out in time, but he obviously said it was a ball verbally loud enough, otherwise the hitter wouldn't have starting putting his bat down to go to first.

 

[This_Guy]

I was at the game. Extremely confused. Saw the Umpire signal the Strike, watched Furcal get thrown out, then had no idea what was going on. I've watched thousands of MLB games and can't recall ever seeing an umpire call a strike then turn around and say it was a ball. Just doesn't happen.

In fact umpires don't change calls unless they have some new information. They talk to other umpires to see if they saw something differently, managers or players will sometimes alert them to a rule interpretation they may have made incorrectly, they use the instant replay...if they get more information that tells them they were wrong they change the call. Guy didn't get any new information, didn't even acknowledge that he made the strike call, just acted like everything was normal and the Braves were bent out of shape for no apparent reason.

 

[dparker713]

A) As far as I know, MLB umps arent available for questioning, so you dont know that he second guessed himself. He could have just had a brain fart and signaled strike when he meant to signal ball.

B) Seemed like the game went on just fine, he just had to eject Bobby Cox, which is hardly a rare occurance.

C) The attitude that umps can't ever change their mind is part of the problem in baseball and a reason to hope for computers to become more a part of the game. MLB umps in general make alot of close calls accurately, but they are hardly infallible. If an occassional momentary reflection leads to fewer blown calls, thats a good thing for baseball. But since umps want to pretend they're incapable of making a mistake, they do stupid things like makeup calls and continue to stick to their guns despite evidence to the contrary.

D) The call itself was not atrocious. The call was prefectly fine, and from replays I've seen and the gamecast it looks like a ball to me. The circumstances surrounding the call are plain odd, but its not like there was a 10 minute delay between the time the strike motion was made and the base was awarded.

A) Signal Ball? Seriously? Oh you're so right, a momentary lapse in concentration is just unpossible.B) So because it isnt unusual for Bobby Cox to get pitched...that means its ok? That doesnt even make sense. You claimed the game would get out of hand if an ump acted as this ump did. This particular game settled down after Cox got tossed.

C) This is embarrassing. Umps dont "even things up" with makeup calls or think they are incapable of mistakes....This is just ignorance. I did not say umps think they are infallible, I said they pretend they are and try to project that to everyone around. Cant believe you're claiming there are no makeup calls made by umps... That is just ignorance.

D) The "borderline ball strike" wasnt the reason the thread was started. There is a difference between whether it was the right call, and how the call was made. Calling it an atrocious call implies that it was an obvious strike - it was not.