re: Who/when decided that that play had to be overturned?

Chill bro, all I said was I never saw it. It was never in the original broadcast.

But the catcher has already made the tag turned and it looks like got rid of the ball…and runner nowhere in the picture…so it wasn’t immediate which is the whole point

I kept asking the same thing....... WHO wanted that reviewed. I bet lots of tigers wanna know.

[/url][/img]

The ump made the call and he is still in foul territory. Less than 3 seconds after the play. The Cocks coach got him to change his call.

Well, there it is. Officially the whole thing is bullshite if the ump signaled out and the either

1) heard another field umpires view/judgement (how the frick would the be able to see maybe Neal’s toe being a millimeter in front of the plate or

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

Umps deserve to be roasted

quote:

---

Right. So what triggered them to meet and decide to change it?

---

the USCe coach said he brought the rule up to the umps. So, he triggered it.

quote:

---

the USCe coach said he brought the rule up to the umps. So, he triggered it.

---

That’s certainly what it seems like to me.

From what I understand reading the baseball rule book, a coach or another umpire can request a conference from the umpires to discuss a potential misapplication of rules. So if there’s a call made on the field and the ump gets the outcome wrong - for example, awarding a base when the runner should have returned, or something along those lines - the umps can huddle up, check the rules, and correct the call on the field without video review.

However, judgement calls can only be overturned under certain circumstances:

1. Another umpire is 100% certain that they have additional information that the calling umpire did not have, and brings that information to the calling umpire. This is limited to specific calls such as fair/foul, catch/no catch, a bobble on a tag, etc. and these specific circumstances are listed in the rule book. This play does not fall into any of those circumstances.

2. The play is overturned on video review. This play is specifically not eligible for video review as the list of reviewable plays includes “catcher’s interference with the batter’s swing except on a squeeze play or steal of home.”

There is also a note in the section of the rule book about umpire conferences that states the following:

quote:

---

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.

---

Note that this isn’t even talking about video review, it’s talking about reversal based on information from other umpires.

So I don’t really understand how it could have been reversed on the field. The plate umpire made a spot determination that catcher’s interference did not occur. I don’t see how anyone else could have been in a better position to determine that. SC’s coach can’t challenge it. The line about “judgement calls” from the officials should have applied to the plate ump’s original decision to call the runner out.

It only makes sense if the reason they “misapplied” the rule was that the plate ump didn’t know what catcher’s interference was in the first place (since he didn’t call it on the field).

quote:

---

So a still shot of Neal showing ump the ball as ump steps toward mound and starts to signal out. Now that you’ve been shown pictures of the umpire signaling out after emphatically denying that he did, I’m not really sure where you are going with this. Are you trying to imply the ump called a balk? Are you trying to imply he was unsure of his call. What I see is a play that was so routine and an obvious out that the umpire was matter of fact and casual with his call. Which as you’ve been shown with pictures, his call was out.

---

I didn’t emphatically say anything. I said I didn’t see him called out on the broadcast..as you quoted in your earlier post.

The picture shows after the tag is made. The players separate. The catcher turns and shows the ball and still the ump isn’t yet moving to put his hands up. You need to check Websters definition of immediate again…bc you used it improperly.

Go back and watch in real-time it isn’t until almost 4 minutes into the ump pow wow that they show a shot of him calling the runner out. The picture is after the tag and turn to show that you’re wrong the ump didn’t “immediately” call anything.

I quit responding to you bc it’s stupid to have 8 posts about who saw what. I wasn’t arguing with you at any point, just stating what I saw…not sure if you’re trying to say I didn’t see that or what but have a rewatch of the action in real-time buddy. Done responding to you now.

Lord have mercy on your wife.

SC coach brought it to the ump's attention.