Stop making the “the play was non reviewable “ argument.

Change the fricking rule then.. EVERY questionable play should be VIDEO REVIEWABLE..they use video review for every base but home plate?.. TOTAL BS… Humans make MISTAKES… frick them ..

quote:

---

Every play is “reviewable”. Umps can get together and change a call. It’s VIDEO review that’s not allowed.

---

an umpires group chat has never in the history of the game been called a "review"

I’d argue the home plate ump did “review” this play in his head and change his own call, which is what makes it even worse

He without a doubt in real time signaled out as the players all walked off the field



So the options at this point since he didn’t make the judgement call on the spot

1) heard another field umpires view/judgement (how the hell could that be their call) or

2) he replayed it in his head after the SC coach complained and he overturned his own judgment call minutes after the play which is completely asinine and ridiculous

If it’s not challengeable and judgement call why can they change their minds minutes later?

Needs to be answered

quote:

---

Every play is “reviewable”. Umps can get together and change a call. It’s VIDEO review that’s not allowed.

---

Re-view means to view again.

Every play is not reviewable and this play was not reviewed.

My issue is they did it so far after the fact and I don't know how Neal interfered when the guy knew he was out and pulled up before Neal even tagged him.

It wasn't some bang bang play at the plate where you could say he was impeded from touching home by Neal. He straight up quit running and didn't even attempt to slide or touch home, he just stopped.

I have been saying for years that SEC umpires are some of the worse in the business and they prove me right every week.

quote:

---

Every play is “reviewable”. Umps can get together and change a call. It’s VIDEO review that’s not allowed.

---

From the NCAA baseball rule book (emphasis added in bold):

quote:

---

APPENDIX E: GETTING THE CALL RIGHT

Getting the Call Right without the use of video review

Section 1: Following are general guidelines for this policy:

a. NCAA rule 3-6-g states, “No umpire shall criticize or interfere with another umpire’s decision, unless asked by the one making it; however, if there is a misinterpretation of a rule, it should be brought to the umpire-in-chief.” Therefore, except in special situations such as those outlined in the next paragraph, the umpire making the call must be the one to seek assistance of a partner.

. . .

f. Judgement calls, which have traditionally not been subject to reversal, include steal and other tag plays (except if the ball is dropped without the umpire’s knowledge, as discussed above); force plays (when the ball is not dropped and the foot is not pulled); balls and strikes (other than check swings). This practice shall continue. Also, some calls cannot be reversed without creating larger problems.

Overall, umpires are urged to seek help on reversible plays in which they may have erred by not seeing a crucial element of the play. Such meetings, while necessary, should be infrequent and not become a substitute for umpires seeking proper angles, exercising sound judgement and having the conviction to stay with a call the umpire believes was properly made.

---

The idea that every play can be “reviewed” by the umpires, after a call is made on the field, is not true. The rule book clearly says that certain judgement calls should not be subject to reversal. Again, this is a section about umpire conferences without the use of video review.

Furthermore, the next page of the rule book (Getting the Call Right with the use of video review) lists the specific circumstances that are eligible for overturn with video evidence:

quote:

---

13. Catcher’s interference with the batter’s swing except on a squeeze play or steal of home.

---

The NCAA thought that this specific play was such a judgment call that they felt the need to specifically disqualify it from review, even with video evidence. I don’t think it’s a stretch, then, to say it should also fall under E.1.f. which says steal and other tag plays cannot be overturned on the field. Note that tag plays can be overturned with video review. Meaning the standards for calls that can be overturned on the field are actually more stringent than the standards for calls that can be reversed through video review.

Why would it be OK for a plate umpire to change his mind from memory 10 minutes later (or another umpire 90+ feet away to overturn) if the NCAA felt that even video evidence wasn’t good enough?

quote:

---

Every play is “reviewable”.

---

Are you really this clueless? Everyone knows the phrase "the play is nonreviewable" means the play is not allowed to be video-reviewed. All plays are subject to discussion by the umps and reversal as a result. They did that on the play in question to reverse the out-at-home call, incorrectly in my opinion.

Give it a rest.

It was reviewable, cause they reversed their call on the field….they called the runner out