- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Stop making the “the play was non reviewable “ argument.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:28 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:28 am
Every play is “reviewable”. Umps can get together and change a call. It’s VIDEO review that’s not allowed.
now they got EVERYTHING else wrong. Catcher was not touching or in front of the bag and even if you think he was the batter had clearly backed out and given up on swinging meaning you can’t call catcher interference!
now they got EVERYTHING else wrong. Catcher was not touching or in front of the bag and even if you think he was the batter had clearly backed out and given up on swinging meaning you can’t call catcher interference!
24
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:31 am to 1609tiger
quote:
now they got EVERYTHING else wrong. Catcher was not touching or in front of the bag
I want the SEC to show teams where the catcher should have been positioned.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:33 am to 1609tiger
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 ..
This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 7:35 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:33 am to 1609tiger
Wait what happened?
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:35 am to 1609tiger
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"
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:38 am to 1609tiger
quote:
even if you think he was the batter had clearly backed out and given up on swinging meaning you can’t call catcher interference!
It was a bullshite call but this ^^^ needs to stop being said. The rule is clear. Catcher touches home plate or is in front of home plate without the ball, it is automatic interference. Does not matter what the batter does.
This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 7:39 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:47 am to 1609tiger
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
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
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:50 am to DaBike
quote:
I want the SEC to show teams where the catcher should have been positioned.
it ought to be a picture of the play, Neal played it perfectly. didn't tocuh/step on or cross home plate. was pretty textbook.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:50 am to Eighteen
I will never believe any reasoning except that the SC coach started chirping.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:51 am to Archibald Henderson
It was a designed play by the SC coach. He was hoping to get that call.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:52 am to Eighteen
It probably came initially from the SC coach. He has the right to appeal certain types of calls. The umps can get together and discuss. A call can be reversed if they deem warranted. So certain calls are reviewable just non video review.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:54 am to 1609tiger
Don't forget, it was the SC coach that brought it up between innings.
So, it was "reviewed."
Total horseshite and while I am glad LSU won, their winning saved the SEC from a crushing embarrassment. It would almost have been better for them to have to eat the shite sandwich.
So, it was "reviewed."
Total horseshite and while I am glad LSU won, their winning saved the SEC from a crushing embarrassment. It would almost have been better for them to have to eat the shite sandwich.
This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 7:57 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:06 am to udtiger
Once again nothing wrong with reviewing certain calls if the SC coach objected to a call. Just can’t use video which needs to change for scoring plays.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:19 am to 1609tiger
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.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:21 am to 1609tiger
quote:
Every play is “reviewable”. Umps can get together and change a call. It’s VIDEO review that’s not allowed.
As the announcers said later every play that results in a scored run should be reviewable a la NFL/CFB...
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:25 am to Eighteen
Jay being available today is the only concession you’re going to get. That’s about as far as the sec is going to go to say “yeah we fricked up”. Even the sec umps guy they had in the booth led with “I’m not going to discuss if the call was correct.” They certainly have no issue doing so when it is correct.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:29 am to lovinLSU
Any scoring play should be reviewable
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:29 am to 1609tiger
The problem here isn’t whether it could be reviewed, it’s that it was reimagined.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:32 am to Eighteen
quote:
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?
or a 3rd option
he "saw"* Neal step on the plate and it was brought to his attention about the rule and the umps discussed to make sure the rule says what it says.
*now obviously he didn't see that since it never happened, but if that's what he always thought he saw in full speed real time, then this scenario could have potentially happened.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:48 am to elprez00
quote:
“I’m not going to discuss if the call was correct.”
Said another way, "I'm never going to admit that they completely botched that call."
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News