Are you kidding me?
JMB · October 12, 2005 at 3:29 pm · Filed Under General baseball
There are two baseball games tonight, Game 1 of the NLCS and Game 2 of the ALCS. They’re both on at the same time, on the same channel. FOX, MLB, you guys are the best. No, really. I’d much rather have you tell me what game to watch than be given the choice. You guys know best, anyway. Thanks!
Comments
145 Responses to “Are you kidding me?”
Wow, that’ll be a heckuva muddled picture! On the bright side, I was so torn about which one to watch tonight I was gonna watch C-Span instead. Whew! Crisis averted. Thanks, MLB.
I believe those with cable can watch the other game on FX.
Words cannot describe the genius of FOX. Aside from “Arrested Development”, is there any reason why the entire News Corporation shouldn’t be blown off the face of the earth?
This is retarded. I assume we’ll get Angels-Sox because we’re an “AL city”?
Maybe they’re trying to encourage the use of MLB.TV.
Canadians, incidentally, can watch either. Rogers Communications (owner of the Toronto Blue Jays) operates 4 regional sports channels – East, Ontario, West, and Pacific – but they’re all available nationwide. Angels-ChiSox is on East and West. Cards-Astros is on Ontario and Pacific.
Uhh — not quite. Some markets get AL game on Fox, others get NL, and the opposite game is on FX.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/4983860
Here, AL game is on Fox, NL game is on FX. It’s stupid that they are playing both at the same time . . . but they are showing them both to the whole US.
… if you have cable/satellite and that provider has FX
Steve – didn’t they cancel Arrested Development?
no, arrested development is still alove and kicking, for now
I wonder why Ontario gets the other game?
At least the Cards-Stros game was the one I wanted to watch anyway…but still…
So which broadcast will not have McCarver? By the way, F/X is channel 247 or 248 on DirecTV for those of you with that particular satellite service.
The other 2% of the nation won’t be watching anyway.
Maybe they’re trying to encourage the use of MLB.TV.
Haven’t they been blacking out the mlb.tv games during the live showings? I’m not sure because I’ve only tried watching them once since the playoffs started, but it sure did look like they were all blacked out live.
Hmmm. For the Seattle area, both the DirecTV and KCPQ websites say “Teams TBA” – my guess says AL game on Fox and NL game on FX here…
D’oh. Just read David‘s link. AL it is on Fox in Seattle…
This is a real bummer for your local FOX affiliate. You’ve got a rare chance to snag a large share of your potential viewers, and your network steals away half your target demographic on its cable channel.
This sort of thing doesn’t bug me so much in the first round, but by golly, by the time you get to the LCS you should be able to watch both games on regular TV and at (even slightly) different times.
Remember a few years back when some first round games were on ABC Family, which at the time many markets didn’t get?
jason
WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY THINKING??? Nothing quite like making the second most important series inaccessible. I’ve got a satellite and no FX with my package. Even if I did, why would Bud think ridiculously crazed baseball fans, such as most everyone who visits this site, would not want to watch EVERY playoff game. Furthermore, what about that fringe fan that ONLY watches the playoffs? Did MLB learn how to market its game from the McCall-Donnelly Region Little League?
pissed,
shirts
In case we’ve all forgotten, Fox/FX has done this years past. My remote control batteries will burn out tonight.
The ABC Family thing was idiotic. I remember that.
There was actually a huge public outcry in Canada last winter when the CBC chose to air only the evening draw of the Brier (the men’s curling championship) on their main network. The other draws (each day usually had 3) got dumped on an obscure digital cable channel that no one got.
I was pissed. I missed a lot of good curling.
17: McCall, Donnelly, New Meadows, and Council share a little league program which advertises with a barrage of posters at elementary and middle schools followed by handouts that kids take home at elementary and middle schools.
And because there is nothing better to do, people actually watch those games, even the non-tournament regular season games.
So it’s better.
Looks like Canadians have a low threshold for huge public outcry.
I prefer having both games played in prime time as opposed to having one played in the afternoon during the work week. This way, I can head to the gym and see two games at once. Seeing some of both games (or at the bare minimum, having the option of which to watch) is preferrable to having no choice in the matter.
Don’t get between a Canadian and a sport played on ice.
Hockey was on strike. Curling was all we had.
Looks like Canadians have a low threshold for huge public outcry.
This was last winter. Remember, last winter there was no hockey. Without the NHL, there’s nothing else to do in most of Canada during the winter except watch curling. You can only go out to Tim Horton’s and Canadian Tire so often. Canadians were already pissed (in the American sense) they had nothing to watch while they sat around getting pissed (in the Canadian sense) and writing their names in the snow. So limiting the viewing of curling would leave a lot of Canucks really angry (you can tell an angry Canadian because he doesn’t apologize to you when you step on his foot like he normally would).
Be happy that you get any game at all. I just had my house packed out and I lost my Japanese cable so I am without any playoff. Although I am not sure which game they would show on NHK. Oh well I should be in the states for the WS.
Just be glad baseball has innings, not quarters. Once the games get out of synch, there will generally be action on one channel while commercials are on the other.
You can only go to Tim Horton’s and Canadian Tire so often.
You’d be amazed how often one can go to Tim Horton’s.
So I have DirecTV and am in the Seattle area. Channel 13 is showing Los Angeles-Chicago (OK) but Channel 248 (FX) and Channel 246 (FX2) which have games on are BOTH blacked out!?!
Anyone seeing the same thing or know where I go to see the NL game?
I haven’t checked my set yet, but DirectTV feeds the entire nation the East Coast feed of many cable channels, including FX, USA, and TNT. So DirecTV users (like myself) might be screwed out of a game.
Adam S, I have DirecTV and am in the Seattle area and am getting both. AL on 13, NL on 248.
This is one of these days where my insane tv setup comes in handy. Mmmmmmmm Picture in Picture.
How about game threads for the post season?
Even with the M’s out, I’d still like to commune with the insightful members of this board.
Any chance of getting something up for tomorrow?
I was actually hoping the Sonics v Blazers would be on tonight. Oh well…
MLB really ought to do better than this. I don’t know anyone who prefers having two games on at the same time, and there are certainly a lot of dedicated fans of the game who would appreciate being able to watch both games in their entirety.
I really wish they’d just put both games up on mlb.tv in cases like this. I’d even go so far as to purchase a postseason package that would allow me to watch all the games on the internet live, if only they’d let me.
Hmm…I’m in Atlanta, my FX is blacked out too. Who knows which fool it is decides this kinda thing? I wonder why baseball’s not so popular anymore. But whatever man. I’ll just go watch poker on Travel Channel.
ugggghhhh and the innings have to end at the exact same time so a feller can’t flip to the other game. This sucks.
Arrested Development got reduced from 22 to 15 episodes, signalling the kiss of death. I hope HBO picks it up because it is too expensive to go to FX.
Since they’re not explaining very well in the Fox, go figure, is it customary for the umpire to signal out on K-PB’s? That seems to be the weirdest thing about the botched call here in the bottom of the 9th. I don’t see how it’s very fair to the fielding team to have the umpire make an out call and then expect the fielders to determine on their own whether or not the ball hit the ground.
And now the Sox win it after the bad call. Talk about the officials affecting the game. Of course, if you’re Josh Paul, and it’s even that close, I say you should tag the batter-runner, but the Angels still got the short end of that stick.
Oughta start selling episodes through the iTunes store….
‘Aside from “Arrested Developmentâ€Â, is there any reason why the entire News Corporation shouldn’t be blown off the face of the earth?’
Well, let’s see, there’s The Family Guy (Cancelled, then revived due to popular demand, once it was clear what dumbasses they were.)
Firefly (Uh, wait, they cancelled that too…in mid-season…after running the episodes in the wrong order. Hmmm….)
The Simpsons…are not what they used to be.
Ooh, ooh, but what about Nanny 911!
Yeeeah.
Josh Paul should have tagged him on the ass anyway. Not smart baseball. It’s like an OF catching a disputed trapped/not trapped ball with two outs and then throwing it into the crowd before the ump signalled out. You just can’t assume with umpires.
Reminds me of the Fisk/Armbrister non-interference play call in ’75. Fisk was right on the rules, but stupid for not avoiding Armbrister and then hoping the ump was paying attention when his throw to 2B went awry.
Josh Paul should have tagged him on the ass anyway. Not smart baseball. It’s like an OF catching a disputed trapped/not trapped ball with two outs and then throwing it into the crowd before the ump signalled out. You just can’t assume with umpires.
No, it’s not, because the umpire did signal out. Twice.
The umps screwed up badly. There’s absolutely know way you can expect Josh Paul to tag the runner out just in case the ump was kidding as he called the runner out. Once the ump says the man’s out, that’s it. Walk off the field.
Probably the worst call in a playoff game since the Jeffrey Meier home run.
“You just can’t assume with umpires.”
Sure, but Paul didn’t necessarily have to assume anything in this case. The umpire made seperate gestures for strike three and then the fist pump for out. Is he not even allowed to assume that the ump actually means it when he signals something? Unless I hear that the book says to make the out call for a K-PB, or a K-WP, even if the runner advances safely, I’m even more convinced after thinking about it for a while that the Angels really, really got screwed here. Obviously, it would have been better for Paul to make the tag, but it shouldn’t have come to that.
But what about A.J. pierzynski, either he heard something from the ump, or what, because he began to walk to the dugout, with like two steps, then realized something turned and ran to first. It wasn’t an instant reaction, was there something from the ump that made him realize he was not out?
No, no, A.J. admitted after the game that he went because a similar situation happened to him last year, when he was catching in San Francisco. It was that play that caused him to give the run to first a try tonight.
Lots of guys hesitate to first on the K-PB. You get so focused on hitting the pitch, that it’s easy to be disappointed you missed the pitch (especially, I would imagine, for an emotional guy like A.J.), and then, after a bit, the light bulb goes off in your head that tells you first base is open if you can make it. Also, if memory serves, on the postgame interview, Pierzynski said he didn’t hear anything from the umpire, and was going because he knew the pitch was low and might have been in the dirt.
Just watched the umpires press conference…..the entire crew appearing to be rationalizing the huge gaffe by Doug Edding very well. I learned something new today: the various motions an umpire makes when making calls are called “mechanics”. I guess that sounds better than “sh*t an ump says when calling balls and strikes”. What I found interesting is that, when a ball hits the ground on a third strike, an ump will normally yell “no catch”, which Edding did not do in this case. My personal opinion is that he called him out (or, to be percise, used the same “mechanic” to call A.J. out), and when he ran to first, decided right then and there that it hit the ground first.
I had a queasy feeling that the ump gave Pierznski some kind of indication too. Post 42 above indicates he saw two different out gestures, the second being the out pump.
The way I seen it was less a pump but more a gesture for the batter to run to first.
I didn’t like it, it imediately stunk to me.
Even 9 & 10 year old catchers in Mustang Ball are taught to tag the runner or toss it to first to avoid an ambiguous ump call on dropped thirds for balls near the dirt. The stakes for the ump being wrong are too high.
Whether Josh Paul was “right” or not on the call does not permit him to be a lazy ass.
When they showed the zoomed in replay on Fox, it appeared that the ball went from what was going to be on the edge of the mitt to the palm as Paul caught it. The ball looked to jump suddenly as it entered his glove, which in the outfield would have been a borderline trap. They showed the replay a few times…so I’m pretty sure I saw what I saw. Either way, the naked eye (sans zoom) couldn’t really have picked it up with certainty anyway.
That was the single worst call I’ve seen in all the time that I’ve been watching baseball.
The umpire clearly signaled that Pierzynski was out. Yes, hindsight is able to say “he should’ve tagged him anyway”, but are you really expecting catchers to tag batters on every called third strike, just incase the umpire is going to change his mind? (and that’s pretty much what appeared to have happened)
Umpires are taught to wait to signal an “out” call – like on a close play at the plate, you wait to see not only that the tag beat the throw but that the catcher held onto the ball. The reason for this is that you – the umpire – look like a dork if you signal out, the ball comes out, and you have to change your call. However, you DO change your call in that case.
“Out” calls can be changed, unlike a call for “foul ball” – if you call a ball foul, it’s foul, even if it’s hit to dead center field. That’s because your “foul” call kills the play. So though the umpire did signal out, it does not mean that play stops, and it’s not impossible to change that call. It’s not a dead ball.
I believe the umpire clearly was in error here, both on the premature ‘out’ call (his mechanics were bad) and on changing that call, since the ball WAS caught and the umpire could not have seen it otherwise. So bad call, but nothing more.
But even if you think that somehow the Eddings had reason to change his call, and decides to change his call, shouldn’t he signal safe *before* Pierzynski reaches the base? Because no matter what he claims in his press conference, he clearly signalled ‘strike three’ and then ‘out.’
Terrible call. But maybe Chicago’s getting a little karmic compensation for losing to the M’s when Guillen bunted with his foot on the plate.
Please, Chicago was gonna lose that series anyway regardless of the Guillen play.
Response to #2
Please MLB, I beg of you!
Make ABC your second non-cable network, you already have a deal with Disney owned ESPN/ESPN2 anyways.
I’m sick of having to find where the @#$*# FX is.
Fisk/Armbrister non-interference play call in ‘75
The umpire who blew that call (Larry Barnett, if I remember right) was being booed during introductions in Boston for 15 years after he made that horsesh1t non-call on the cheating Armbrister. I wonder if Angels fans will even remember to boo the clown who blew this call day after tomorrow.
Some random thoughts of my own on tonight:
Sorry to those who couldn’t get both games. Now on my Charter cable system out here, FSN has gone completely dark (not even ad nauseum reruns of poker and The Sports List). If the FOX folks decided to farm the other game to FSN instead of FX, the sh*t would’ve hit the fan in Ellensburg tonight.
Here’s a reason to not blow News Corp. off the face of the earth – at least not yet – they’re officially not renewing The Simple Life. Now if they bring back Hell’s Kitchen for a second season in place of Paris and Nicole’s idiotic exploits, then I’d be in favor of sending Rupert Murdoch on a guided missile towards the netherworld.
Is it me, or have there been more controversial calls made by the umpires in the last week than in the last five postseasons combined? Pierzynski was right to run to first base, but that doesn’t make Eddings’ call right. I’ve never been a big fan of Eddings as an umpire anyway. I try not to rip umpires for their strike zones because they all do a better job behind the plate on judging balls and strikes than I ever could. But isn’t that a situation where an emphatic point at the batter and several closings of the hand is most appropriate, not to mention a loud “You swung, you swung?” Or is that not the proper way for an umpire to handle that situation? I saw the point to the side by Eddings. To me, that indicates Pierzynski swung and that Eddings thought the ball hit the ground. If Eddings yelled loud enough for Paul to hear, the tag would’ve occurred. If he yelled, “He swung but that ball was trapped,” then we would’ve had a close play at first base. To me, that’s the time for an umpire to take charge and Eddings in my mind didn’t, and this is a guy who I’ve always considered one of the more confrontational umps in the game. He certainly can rage with the best (or worst) of them. The end result: the inning continues, Crede doubles off the wall three pitches later, and the game’s over. Scioscia amazingly said in the post-game press conference that there still shouldn’t be replay in baseball. But on calls like that, as well as any fair/foul call, potential home runs, or a play at the plate, I really think it might be high time for replay. Just my opinion; doesn’t mean Selig would consider it.
By the way, I wonder if Scioscia would do somthing nuts on Friday night like hand in a lineup card before the game where Eddings is listed in the White Sox’ lineup, which of course would be grounds for ejection. Normally I wouldn’t like it, but I think he’d fire up the Angels and their already angry fans. Not to mention, he has a good bench coach to relay Scioscia’s signs from the tunnel in Joe Maddon.
#56 “cheating Armbrister”? lol. I think the 1985 version of C. Fisk would have made the correct play. Dodge Armbrister, grab the ball and get the sure out. (I definitely did not feel that way at the time).
Having been recently to the Big A, I don’t think the Angels fans will remember the ump’s name. Did Orioles fans remember the name of the ump who blew the non-interference call on JC Martin when he was out of the baseline at the end of Game 4 in 1969? Yet another non-call benefitting a NY team.
It will definitely give the umpire schools something to talk about.
Well, sure, the 1985 version of Fisk would have known from experience that the umpires would have let Armbrister cheat.
After the umpires got together in Game 6 last year and got both the Bellhorn HR and the A-Rod slap play called right, I thought things were headed in the right direction. And I was delighted to see Cano get rung up for runner’s interference when leaving the lane in Game 5, since the Yankees have far too long gotten away with interference that gets lauded as “heads-up play.”
Now it’s back to “Same as it Ever Was.”
And you’re spot on about the fans at the Big A. As long as they get their fireworks and Rally Monkey, everything’s copacetic with them.
Were I an Angels fan, I’d be livid. But the Angels annoy the hell out of me, and I’m sure Mike Soscia is as dumb as a rock, so I’m revelling in schadenfraude right now.
I don’t think the ump excelled, but I think he might actually have been correct in calling that the third strike hit the dirt before Josh Paul caught it (having seen many replays, it’s certainly debatable) and he was also consistent in his ‘mechanics’. He used the clenched right fist pump to signal ‘Strike’ not ‘Out’. He pulled the same move on K1 and K2. He didn’t call Pierzynski out.
Bah. Bloody Angels. Bloody Murdoch. To hell with the lot of them.
I’m not sure how you could have seen replays of that pitch, Colm, and thought it was debatable.
Every angle that I saw that they showed, it was very clearly in his glove with at least two inches to spare above the ground.
It looked to me like he caught the ball.
But if Josh Paul doesnt want to tag him or throw it to first base, then too bad.
Plus it wasn’t the umpires fault the the Angels let Ozuna steal second and it wasn’t the ump’s fault that the first hung a curve right over the heart of the plate for Crede to cream.
The Angels deserve every bit of this, and I think its hilarious.
first=pitcher
….somehow
The call didn’t certainly lose the game for anyone. It would have just gone into extra innings and Chicgo could still have won. Who knows, right? But bad call, I guess that is part of the game unless we want HAL and K zone getting together to be umps:
H: “I’m sorry Dave but that was strike three, you’re out.”
D: “Damn it, Hal! That was a bad call.”
H: “K-zone and I don’t make mistakes, Dave.”
D: “Then eat this!” (Dave takes the bat and proceeds to destroy Hal causing a 10-game suspension which is later reduced to 7 by the Hologram of Bud Selig)
I thought the umpire points towards first on dropped third strikes.
From what I saw in the replay, I think Eddings did point at first base……right when Pierzynski was about 5 feet away. By then Paul had already dropped the ball, and walked away.
As soon as the ump gave the fist pump, the players in the field are correct to assume it was an out. The Angels should have appealed immediately to the third base ump but didn’t. The umpiring crew also didn’t get together to make the correct call, instead banding behind their crewman’s wrong decision in a pathetic show of sheep-think. MLB should be ashamed of this.
It was an awesome game. Totally demonstrative of why I hate the Angels. Bunch of arrogant whiners. Instead of just accepting that Josh Paul f***ed up they want to blame the umps.
I don’t know if you remember when (I think it was Donnelly) was nailed for pine tarring the ball and everyone just wanted to bag on Frank Robinson. Scoscia almost fought him. the whole town railed against Robinson instead of f***ing the cheating pitcher and his crooked coach.
It’s also reminiscent of the game they lost to the A’s where K-Rod dropped the toss back to the mound and the runner scored from 3rd.
They think they’ve got it in the bag but don’t finish the play. That’s the Angels, if you ask me.
Everyone keeps saying that it “clearly was a bad call…” Bull Sh**! I watched it ten times and ten times I saw the ball bounce in the dirt in front of the glove. ESPN loves the Angels. ESPN radio here is DEVOTED to the Angels. Their like the “flagship” or some sh*t.
Whatever you believe you saw, the ump made a bad call. He didn’t call “no catch” repeatedly, which is what they’re supposed to do. He did the ‘out’ gesture.
If your argument is that catchers should tag every batter every third strike, no matter what the ump calls, on the chance that something like this happens, well… that’s not a good argument.
Well, he didn’t call “out” which is what the catcher should be waiting to hear. The catcher needs to make sure it is an out before tossing the ball in and leaving the field. He can’t assume it’s an out just because he thinks he caught it and the batter swung. Why would A.J., a catcher himself, run if he didn’t have reason to think he could? It’s a grey area where the catcher’s responsibility is to make sure the batter is out.
In answer to your question: Sort of. If the runner is going to try to press it and there is any question: Yes. You can’t assume an out. You have to make sure. That kind of play happens all the time. The only difference being that usually the catcher just gets up and throws the ball to first.
If you go to mlb.com and watch the “Escobar fans the side” clip, you can see the home plate umpire using the fist pump motion to indicate an out.
It appears he changed his mind when he saw AJ running for first. That’s an awful reason to change a call.
The fist motion is irrelevant from the point of view of the catcher and the hitter. Neither see it. They go off of sound. There’s no way to know what he said. According to the ump and the hitter, he didn’t say “out.” Argue ’til you’re blue in the face, you can’t prove he said something he maintains he didn’t. All these umps have different motions. What matters is the communication. Paul is the one who misunderstood. You can say the ump wasn’t demonstrative and loud enough to let Paul know, but you have to admit that Paul is wrong for assuming he knew.
You’re right, in that we don’t know if he said “out” or not, but everyone agrees that he didn’t say “no catch”, either. Since that is customary (if not required) to be said at a time when the ball is drooped — and the hitte ris eligible to run to first — it is clear the umpire allowed the turn of events to occur without knowing for sure whether the ball hit the ground or not. And since video replys CLEARY show it was in the glove, then the fault lies with Eddings.
I have to admit no such thing. Say you’re Paul. You catch the ball, the ump calls strike three but (possibly) does not call out. AJ goes for the dugout, and the fielders break for the dugout, having seen the ump’s sign.
There’s no blame to be assigned to Paul at that point.
And I don’t know what replays you’re watching, but at best, it’s not amazingly clear, as you state, that Paul trapped the pitch.
If the catcher is going to tag every runner no matter where he catches the ball, I don’t see how that’s much different than saying the batter should start walking to first base after every 3-2 pitch he takes, since he can’t trust that what the umpire rules is actually what he means.
And no, this kind of play does not happen all the time. In all the years and years I’ve watched baseball, I have never EVER seen a home plate umpire rule a batter out with a hand gesture and then rule that same batter-runner safe when he trots to first base after he’s been ruled out. Even if you think the catcher screwed up, the umpire clearly didn’t give the rest of the Angels a fair chance to make the play. If the umpire hadn’t pumped his fist, then Escobar would have picked the ball up and thrown it to Erstad.
And frankly, I don’t care about the Angels, but as a fan of baseball in general, I was robbed of a fair finish to a close playoff game. The fact that baseball seems to be taking this less seriously than a tied exhibition game appalls me.
Why are people arguing with a guy who tanked his own credibility in his first post by laying out his absolute distaste for the Angels?
Let him be. He’s wrong. We all know that.
Has anyone looked at replays of the other (at least one in that game) instances of the ball being in the dirt on strike three? I could concede the ump screwed up if he made some other type of gesture on a similar call. Otherwise I have to believe, as Eddings stated, that he was making the ‘strike three’ gesture — not the ‘out’ gesture.
“When in doubt, tag him out.”
Uh, Dave? How’s your credibility when it comes to commentary on all things Mariners?
I think the video shows a trap. Especially the ultra-slow video they repeated. It is not possible from the angle and the picture detail to say for certain where the plane of the dirt is, but it is very clear that the ball definitely moves UPWARD right at the end, into the glove. The camera angle can fool the eye into thinking you can see glove between the ball and the dirt, but the camera angle cannot explain the upward jerk of the ball right at the end. I think it touched the ground.
However, the umpire’s reaction was wrong. He shouldn’t be making the “out” gesture unless he’s sure it’s out, and he certainly should be calling something out loud, since that catcher can’t really see him anyways. He hesitated, and on the face of it I’d say he reversed his own call nearly instantaneously. Indecisiveness is not a good umpire trait, especially in situations where people are waiting on him to call the play.
But I do agree that the catcher should have tagged anyways, if there’s even the slightest hint of doubt. You see it all the time; the catcher tags the batter as an afterthought even on cleanly caught balls that are marginal. This was not a cleanly caught ball.
But, regardless of what the camera shows us in ultra-slow-mo, the ump doesn’t have that view; his job is to make his judgement known as soon as possible.
Ump mistake, catcher mistake. There’s plenty to argue about, but it’s hardly the worst call of all time. I’ve seen hundreds of worse calls, on tags at second base or throws to first base. The difference isn’t whether the ump made an error or not, it’s that he wasn’t quickly decisive.
The ball doesn’t have to actually touch the ground to move upward in the catcher’s glove. It appeared plain to me that Paul had the webbing of his glove between the ground and the ball, and when the ball hit the webbing it was kicked up because the webbing was sitting on the ground. But really, I think the whole catch/no catch thing should be a moot point right after Eddings signals out.
I would also say this is much worse than any sort of judgement call I’ve ever seen. I can forgive a guy for seeing something wrong. But for making a call, changing it without giving a team the fair chance to make a play, forsaking a chance to fix it, and then lying about it afterward? It’s a fraud if Eddings is allowed to umpire the rest of the LCS.
Simon,
People have looked back at video of even that particular game, and that is clearly Eddings’ out call. And if that’s *not* an out call when Eddings makes it, he should be fired for incompetence, because anyone who watches baseball considers that a signal for an out.
Then what’s the ‘strike’ call look like, dude?
Why don’t you go look it up?
Mat,
So he didn’t make the (in his explanation) ‘strike 3′ call when the ball was in the dirt earlier in the game? If not, he should be fired.
Simon,
Here’s an idea. Stop being a prick, and go do your own research. There’s huge threads on this all over the place. People looked back through the archives, and Eddings made the same call throughout the game to reference “strikeout” as he did in the 9th inning on Pierzynski’s.
Jimmy Caple addresses the subject as well…
Wow, guys. I never thought you’d take it so personally for me to disagree with you. I can see that I’m in the minority, but I’m not the only one saying that it’s not conclusive that Eddings messed up. A strike call and an out call pretty much look the same. What is so special about this play is the very strangeness of Paul assuming an out. bye.
The most ridiculous part, IMO, is that if Pierzynski had just laid off that lousy pitch like a good boy, he would have walked and none of this crap would have happened.
I’m going to avoid the inanity of simon saying that everyone hates him just because he happens to be wrong, and address one particular thing brought up both here, and in the Caple article that was linked; that the ball moved upward at the end of the shot seen.
http://www.acclaimimages.com/_gallery/_SM/0037-0501-1307-1712_SM.jpg
That’s a picture of a catcher’s glove (I looked for a picture of Paul’s glove in this particular instance, but couldn’t find one that showed things with adequate clarity). They’re all structurally similar, with those large padded areas around the outside of the pocket.
What you see, at the end of that section of film, I believe to be the beginning of Josh Paul squeezing the glove closed, and the ball being pushed upward in the glove towards the pocket area in the center, which is what the structure of the glove is intended to cause.
How on earth do a strike call and an out call look the same?
The ump made two distinct gestures in two different directions. He did his strike call to his right, then brought his arm around and did an unmistakable out call toward the mound.
Frankly, I don’t even see why there is another side to this. That ump clearly called him out, then changed his mind when he saw AJ running.
Unacceptable.
And I’m not even sure why that catcher is taking so much flak. Surely we don’t want catchers tagging out every batter after strike three? That would get annoying.
Whether the ball was caught cleanly or not is almost irrelevant… but for the record (and I was rooting for the Sox, by the way) the “upward motion” on the ball was what happened when it hit the rather large lip on the catchers mitt and went up into the center… which is exactly what the mitt is designed to do.
Wow, Jeff. I haven’t seen anyone say that about the mitt in all the coverage I’ve seen and you post the exact same thing one minute before I do. You’re sneaky, I’m going to keep an eye on you.
I can see that I’m in the minority, but I’m not the only one saying that it’s not conclusive that Eddings messed up.
Ah, the logical fallacy of argumentum ad numerum, the “appeal to numbers”. See, he can’t be wrong, because other people agree with him.
Don’t just look at the video, look at how the umpire motions in other parts of the game. In the 6th inning when Konerko strikes out swinging, the umpire pointed (meaning that’s his called 3rd strike motion) and doesn’t pump his fist until after Konerko is tagged. The pump is the same exact motion he did after the swinging strike in the 9th, meaning that any reasonable person on the field would think the umpire is calling Pierzynski out on strikes.
I’d like to mention that the Umpire has continually stated he only made his 3rd-strike call. He’s lying and he should be fired.
“The ump made two distinct gestures in two different directions. He did his strike call to his right, then brought his arm around and did an unmistakable out call toward the mound.”
In a post-game interview, the umpire stated that the arm motion to his right was to indicate a swing with no contact, and the clenched fist was the strike. I haven’t reviewed every pitch to see if that’s the case, but Harold Reynolds appeared to have reviewed quite a few, and agreed with him (not that that means much).
But if you watch the video of the Pierzynski call (on mlb.com’s front page), he did make the clenched fist motion.
Here’s a clip of his motions for a Rowand strikeout with a trapped ball:
http://www.cossentino.com/corey/rowand.avi
Notice the fist pump after the tag? So yes, he has two distinct motions: the right arm outstretched, indicating a strike 3, and a fist pump indicating an out. He did both of those things on the Pierzynski call and the fact that he’s denying it even with conclusive video evidence either means he’s stupid enough to hope that nobody notices or he just doesn’t really remember. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt by assuming the latter, but if that’s the case, he shouldn’t even be commenting on it.
Knuckles… Reyonlds made that analysis right after the game… and it was wrong. The gesture to his right is his strike call, not a “swing with no contact” call.
And the gesture to the front was unmistakable, inarguably a universal “out” call.
And, just becuase it was telling, the umps exact words were:
“My interpretation is that was my ‘strike three’ mechanic, when it’s a swinging strike.”
Any shrink would bet the house that there is a lie coming up after the intro “My interpretation is…”
“If you watch, that’s what I do the whole entire game. … I did not say, ‘No catch.’ If you watch the replay, you do watch me — as I’m making the mechanic — I’m watching Josh Paul, so I’m seeing what he’s going to do. I’m looking directly at him while I’m watching Josh Paul. That’s when Pierzynski ran to first base.”
Gibberish and dounle-speak.
Looking directly at WHO while he’s “watching Josh Paul”… Josh Paul?
The dude choked, thought he blew the call when AJ started running, so he changed it. Even though he had it right in the first place.
And I did look back. It was his out call. And he knows it.
Hey, I’m just repeating what he said in his post-game interview. I think the whole thing is funny as hell.
“When in doubt, tag him out.â€Â
If you’re the catcher and you know you caught the ball without trapping it and the umpire signals “out” as he had the entire game (and your teammates see the motion as well), why would there be any doubt of him being out?
Oh, I know you were, Knuckles. My disdain is directed entirely at the umpire staff and ESPN. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.
That press conference was so ugly an example of responisibility-avoidance and political double-speak it made me itch.
I felt like baseball just got invaded by a senate confirmatin hearing.
I’ll be honest, man, I loved every second of it. About the only way to get people to watch an Angels/White Sox series is to have some sort of controversy involved (let me say, for the record, that I’m also loving the fact that no baseball is being played on the East Coast right now).
Re: No east coast teams.
Me too, man, me too. From the point early in the season when it was clear the mariners were going nowhere (how early was it clear? June? April 6th? Spring training? The second they announced the pitching rotation?) hoping the Yanks and the Red Sox were elininated was all I had left to root for.
As to the call… As I said, I vaguely wanted Chicago to win. But the call was so egregiously bad…
But I guess you’re right. That blown call is the only reason I am even talking about baseball today.
Derek, I’m not even saying that I’m not wrong. That’s you. I’m just wondering why you’d (meaning you and Dave) get so defensive with the personalized attacks, and pointing out that these smears can generally cut both ways (“He’s wrong. We all know that” right next to “appeal to numbers,” and calling me a “prick” in the same sentence as “go do your own research.”)
A strike and an out are both gestured with a closed fist. He probably should have been more adamant about the ball being in the dirt. Who cares? He doesn’t have to.
No, his strike call is very different than his out call. It’s an outstretched hand with the palm down.
Saying you made an “ad numerum” isn’t a smear, because it’s true.
Simon… I can in no way speak for Derek or Dave, but if you want to know why you got the reaction you got, re-read the tone of your first posts.
It is not a matter of disagreement.
Well, lemme see here.
You say you despise the Angels, and at length espouse a series of incorrect and shifting opinions on how stupid they are for being victimized by shoddy umpiring. When challenged, you escalate the annoyingness. It goes on from there.
Now as to getting defensive over personal attacks, well, that’s the “non sequitor” fallacy. Feel free to bust out the old “ad nauseum” next.
Read your posts, Simon again, Simon. Your first one, I would have deleted, honestly. It’s two paragraphs of rambling crap not suitable for a 3rd grade message board. After I point out that your hatred of the Angels ruins your credibility, you get all pissy and try to turn the conversation to your opinion of me. Then, when others refute your claims, you turn into full prick mode (“Then what’s the ’strike’ call look like, dude?”).
You came in here, acted like a total jerk about a situation you’re in the wrong about, and got called on it.
I’m not shifting. I’m adding onto. I’m saying how stupid they are for blaming the umpires for shoddy baseball.
To Simon’s credit, I do believe that this is the first time I’ve ever seen anyone write: “ESPN loves the Angels”, and mean it.
hee hee hee
I have a high opinion of you. That’s why I come here. I was pretty excited about the game and the reactions I’ve heard. I apologize for being annoying.
Simon is working his way into posting lore. Pretty soon, he’ll be the USSM equivalent of Idiot Mike from asbs-m days.
Given that Simon (in L.A.)’s position has been vigorously refuted and yet he (without actually countering the arguments) still maintains his position…
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that even though we share the same last name, we are not related.
He must come from the Encino In L.A.’s, a suspicious Valley offshoot of the proud In L.A. family line.
Perhaps you’re parenthetically related.
John: I’m actively rooting for Chicago (not that it’s doing me any good). I don’t much care for them, to be honest, but the Angels have done their job and eliminated the Yanl. They can go have a seat now.
And then Simon showed an underlayer of class and the In L.A.’s welcomed him back with open arms.
I’ll get the fatted calf, Simon, you Tivo Mike Scosia’s pre-game explanations.
_____
By the way… mildly interesting. Well, maybe not even mildly, but an unattributed personal mini-bio of Eddings…
http://sportsbybrooks.com/dougeddings.html
I want the Angels to win, because I can’t stand the misplaced, bizarre Guillen-worship/small-ball hype over the White Sox.
If only Simon had managed to work in Ryan Howard somehow.
Ozzie’s a freak, of that there is no question. I just want a little variety in the World Series. Astros/White Sox, creating a WS matchup even greater those in 1982 and 1997.
DMZ… Good point. Every time I’ve watched him manage this season, it reminds me of my crazy uncle who got rich in a sudden flurry of insane investments.
Everybody in the family thought he was a moron his whole life, then he pulls off a string of ridiculous ventures and ends up rich and pompous.
Now, a few years later, he manages a trailer park because he gets free rent.
The only reason I vaguely root for the Sox is that I am a Mariner fan in L.A. and I am still mildly irritated by the ridiculous name change from the Anaheim Angels.
Sportsbybrooks.com claims to be the most widely read blog on the internet?
Umm, no.
Can you prove that’s not true? Therefore, it must be true!
(I’m crazy with the logical fallacies today)
There is one team in each AL division that I genuinely dislike.
East: Yankees
Central: White Sox
West: Angels
It was a bad year for me. However, my opinion of the Angels softened considerably when they signed Vlad. I love Vlad.
Anyway, I’m cheering for the Sox. I’d love to see how low scoring an Astros-White Sox world series could be. And the Angels would be insufferable if they won again. And Ozzie’s promised to retire if the Sox win the series, and that’s a plus for everyone.
“And Ozzie’s promised to retire if the Sox win the series, and that’s a plus for everyone.”
Damn fine point, Evan.
I think:
1) Every White Sox batter ought to get tagged with gusto on every third strike for the rest of the series, regardless of whether there’s a man at first and the number of outs. If they have a problem, let them talk to AJ. And,
2) AJ ought to see a few pitches up and in during every at bat for the rest of the series. AJ is an A-hole. In the play he cited last year in San Francisco he actually dropped the ball!
Re: John in L.A./#92:
Great minds think alike?
Sportsbybrooks.com claims to be the most widely read blog on the internet?
Sports blog. Not that I necessarily buy it – the blog ranking game is a mess from the approaches I’ve seen, both subjective and objective – but it’s a little more plausible.
Every White Sox batter ought to get tagged with gusto on every third strike for the rest of the series, regardless of whether there’s a man at first and the number of outs. If they have a problem, let them talk to AJ.
This is an outstanding idea. Sock ‘em in the head with the glove and then when they turn around, say “AJ told me to do that, go talk to your man.”
#122–Dave said:”Sportsbybrooks.com claims to be the most widely read blog on the internet? Umm, no.”
well, I see that it is either a canny self-promotion for an LA radio personality or a canny self-promotion through the use of babelicious babes
Sock ‘em in the head with the glove
Or… sock ‘em with the glove in the place where AJ kneed Stan Conte.
Re: LB/#126:
Even though you were suggesting it in somewhat of a flippant fashion, I don’t see any way that there /won’t/ be an emphatic tag on every called third strike when the White Sox are up to bat, for the rest of this series. I know I’d tell my catchers to do it, if I were the manager. Wonder if it’ll lead to any brawls.
Somewhere else today, I read another seemingly appropriate response would be for the Angels’ batters to run to first every time they strikeout. After all, you never know what those ‘mechanics’ might mean….
Why stop at first?
“Well, I saw the batter circle the bases, so I figured it must have been a home run.”
re Ozzie Guillen. I like the guy’s candour. He’s colorful, he’s entertaining. He seems as dumb as a brick, tactically, but Scoscia’s wrong a lot of the time too. Ozzie is funnier about it.
Whichever of these teams win, you’ll hear of mis-placed guff about ‘small-ball’. The White Sox hit more homers than the Red Sox for Chrissakes. They are bad at stealing bases. They’re only playing small ball because Ozzie wants them too, not because they’re good at it.
The Angels baffle me. I don’t understand how a team loaded with mediocre position players and over-rated pitchers manages to succeed. However I hope that their outstanding bullpen convinces a few other teams to follow their lead – home grown talent, no real need for Loogies.
Actually, the funny thing to me is that if StrikeGate doesn’t happen and the Angels win the game, Ozz is on the hot spot big time for smallballing his team right out of the ALCS. For those that aren’t Sox fans, I would counsel “just wait”. I’m sure Ozz will piss away 5 or 6 outs in the upcoming games by bunting guys over in the early innings or trying to steal 2nd base with such noted speedsters as Konerko and AJ.
Does anybody remember the name of the White Sox catcher in Game 1 of the 2000 ALDS when Piniella went out to talk to Mike Cameron at 1B about Keith Foulke’s move to first? Cameron held at 1B for the pitchout and then stole second on the following pitch. The pitch after that was a change up that Edgar sent into the LF stands. This was followed by another HR by Olerud.
um, you mean…. Josh Paul?
More than just tagging the Sox hitters with every K, the Angels hitters should run to first every time they strike out. Every time.
Dare the umps to pull out those “making a travesty of the game” rules.
$135: I don’t understand how a team loaded with mediocre position players and over-rated pitchers manages to succeed.
I think it helps to play in the AL West. The only thing better would be to play in the NL West.
#137: Does anybody remember the name of the White Sox catcher in Game 1 of the 2000 ALDS when Piniella went out to talk to Mike Cameron at 1B about Keith Foulke’s move to first?
It was Josh Paul, who pinch ran for Charles Johnson, and I think that the discussion with Cameron was that the M’s bench recognized a “tell” when Paul was calling for a pitchout.
You can see the game log at http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/B10030CHA2000.htm.
Postseason logs are indexed at http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/.
#137: Does anybody remember the name of the White Sox catcher in Game 1 of the 2000 ALDS when Piniella went out to talk to Mike Cameron at 1B about Keith Foulke’s move to first?
It was Josh Paul, who pinch ran for Charles Johnson, and I think that the discussion with Cameron was that the M’s bench recognized a “tell” when Paul was calling for a pitchout.
You can see the game log at http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/B10030CHA2000.htm.
Postseason logs are indexed at http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/.
Boy does that make me pine for that team. Edgar, A-Rod, Olerud, Mike Cameron, Buhner, Stan Javier and Mark McLemore for the bench. It’s a shame Moyer fell apart that year. One decent pitcher besides Freddy, and we could have got past the Yankees in the ALCS.
The Onion’s take on the ALCS: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/41612
The catcher appears to look at the umpire before tossing the ball to the mound.
How bout game 4 Konerko strikes out but is given another chance by the same up saying no swing as 1st base umpire… then homer. Molina comes up later has the same “check” swing and Eddings calls it a strike.
No one seems to have seen AJ running inside the line, which acording to baseball rules, makes him out for affecting the play/throw in game 5. Yes the ball was not in the glove but he is out for affecting the throw. Why did no one see that? In fact if he ran where he was supposed to run Escobar would have had to throw to 1st instead of trying to tag him.