- 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
re: Stop making the “the play was non reviewable “ argument.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:50 am to Number2
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:50 am to Number2
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.
Well there is a rule that states that if a batter leaves the box while the pitcher is delivering the pitch it is automatically called a strike! If they would have enforced this rule (they could have) the batter would have been out and the inning over without awarding a run.
2
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:51 am to HighRoller
That’s not what the SC coach said in his press conference. He said they saw a similar play in another game where that rule came up so when his runner was called out, he thought he’d bring up to ump for consideration. The steal home wasn’t purposefully done by the coach to use that rule.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:52 am to DaBike
quote:
I want the SEC to show teams where the catcher should have been positioned.
I want the SEC to explain how a catcher is supposed to realize what is happening, catch a 90 MPH pitch, and remember exactly how to position his body the exact right way in the highly rare situation when a base runner is stealing home.
This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 8:54 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:53 am to kobsa
quote:
That’s not what the SC coach said in his press conference. He said they saw a similar play in another game where that rule came up so when his runner was called out, he thought he’d bring up to ump for consideration. The steal home wasn’t purposefully done by the coach to use that rule.
Would you have any interest in a bridge? I have one for sale and am willing to cut you one hell of a deal.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:07 am to WackyChris
quote:
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.
They should at least put that photo of Neal at the plate into the Rule Book as a demonstration of 'How it should be done" - let that be the everlasting final comment on the original decision.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:08 am to 1609tiger
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.
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.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:08 am to kobsa
quote:
That’s not what the SC coach said in his press conference. He said they saw a similar play in another game where that rule came up so when his runner was called out, he thought he’d bring up to ump for consideration. The steal home wasn’t purposefully done by the coach to use that rule
You can’t be this naive lol
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:09 am to lovinLSU
quote:
they use video review for every base but home plate?.
Is it just me or does that seem like the most important base?
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:10 am to 1609tiger
quote:
Once again nothing wrong with reviewing certain calls if the SC coach objected to a call.
When have you ever seen a coach question an umpire leading to them changing a call they made?
Umps are notoriously stubborn and rarely let a coach challenge them and then say “hmmm you’re right we screwed up” without it being an officially video reviewable call
This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 9:11 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:14 am to kobsa
quote:
He said they saw a similar play in another game where that rule came up so when his runner was called out, he thought he’d bring up to ump for consideration
SO they are admitting that they were doing a 'how about if this happened' kind of review of all the possible things that MIGHT have happened and persuaded the umpire to agree - yeah that MIGHT have happened and since I didnt see any REAL EVIDENCE that it DIDN'T happen, I guess I'll have to go along with your supposition that nobody can prove you are WRONG without doing a TV review, which is against the Holy RULEBOOK, so YES - YOU WIN -
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:27 am to kobsa
quote:Acrually if you listen carefully, the SC coach was very coy about how that play was executed and "refused to comment" on the strategy "in case they want to use it again." He was also very complimentary to the umps and said more than once that they got ithe call right. He basically admitted that bringing up that rule was part of the plan if the steal to homewas not successful.
That’s not what the SC coach said in his press conference. He said they saw a similar play in another game where that rule came up so when his runner was called out, he thought he’d bring up to ump for consideration. The steal home wasn’t purposefully done by the coach to use that rule.
The batter for that play was also in the conference and when asked about it, said he had no idea what was going on, which is why he mistakenly stepped out of the box during the pitch. That should have ended the inning immediately before enforcing any other rule.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:41 am to 1609tiger
They were clearly communicating over their headsets with somebody.
and somebody was watching on TV.
and somebody was watching on TV.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:42 am to HotBoudin
quote:
They were clearly communicating over their headsets with somebody.
what headsets?
they don’t wear earpieces and never once went under the ramps or by the dugout to get a headset.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:43 am to 1609tiger
I have been saying for years that SEC umpires are some of the worse in the business and they prove me right every week.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:51 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
yeah that MIGHT have happened and since I didnt see any REAL EVIDENCE that it DIDN'T happen, I guess I'll have to go along with your supposition that nobody can prove you are WRONG without doing a TV review, which is against the Holy RULEBOOK, so YES - YOU WIN -
I said it in another thread. It’s absolutely insane that this happened. I don’t think I’ve ever seen this happen in all of sports where a coach argues a call that was made and the refs decided to go along with it (outside of official challenges)
“shite did you see it? No. Did you? Nah me either. What about you? Nope? Well we have to believe what this coach is telling us. PLAY OVERRULED!”
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:52 am to TDTiger225
quote:
Acrually if you listen carefully, the SC coach was very coy about how that play was executed and "refused to comment" on the strategy "in case they want to use it again."
They absolutely knew of the issue in the other game and said “let’s do this and if th same things happened we can argue it”
Posted on 5/26/24 at 9:54 am to TackySweater
SEC still doing damage control this morning. “Everything was done by the rule book and was the correct call.”
Posted on 5/26/24 at 10:09 am to 13
quote:No there’s not.
Well there is a rule that states that if a batter leaves the box while the pitcher is delivering the pitch it is automatically called a strike!
See rule 7b and penalty for b.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 10:18 am to LSUnKaty
I can’t understand how the refs could call it one way and then change without video review of the call. The SC coach brings it up and they know there are certain key points you would have to check off to agree with the SC coach.
It was bs and the SC coach did it on purpose. Trying to steal home was an absolutely idiotic play anyways. He knew he was going to be successful on the play and was doing it with the idea of protesting rules.
It was bs and the SC coach did it on purpose. Trying to steal home was an absolutely idiotic play anyways. He knew he was going to be successful on the play and was doing it with the idea of protesting rules.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 10:29 am to 13
quote:
Well there is a rule that states that if a batter leaves the box while the pitcher is delivering the pitch it is automatically called a strike! If they would have enforced this rule (they could have) the batter would have been out and the inning over without awarding a run.
Specific rule trumps a general rule. The rule they applied is specific to a squeeze or a steal of home. So, again, doesn’t matter what the batter does. When there is an attempted steal of home and the catcher steps on or in front of the plate without the ball, it is automatic interference. That specific rule trumps any general rule you think might apply.
This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 10:35 am
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News