The tag

2,859 Views | 50 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by JJxvi
Mort Rainey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How ****ing dumb is that popped off the base rule? It completely defeats the spirit and the purpose of replays. And no surprise, it finally came back to bite MLB in the ass tonight. But at least it didn't overshadow an otherwise classic game or anything...
TexAgsSean
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not dumb. He wasn't on the bag, the glove (with the ball) was touching him, therefore he is out.
Know Your Enemy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yeah. God forbid they call a runner out who was tagged when he wasn't on the base.
Beat40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Junkhead said:

Yeah. God forbid they call a runner out who was tagged when he wasn't on the base.


The dude slid straight into the bag. He wasn't doing a swim move or sliding to the side of the bag to sneak and hand or foot in. He slide straight into the bag and is foot popped up for half a second because the base is rigid.

If he's sliding into home this way, he is, without question, safe.

By the rule, yes, he is out. Doesn't mean the rule isn't being interpreted with common sense or that it doesn't need to be reviewed.

let me ask you this: youre tasked with writing a tag rule after seeing a play like that. Do you write the rule to where that guy is out in that situation? When the only way to tell is by replay?
Know Your Enemy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
He's out and the rule was perfectly applied. I can't understand how anyone can argue against it. You can't compare it to home because it's a completely different scenario like the goal line in football.
Beat40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm arguing against it because I think it lacks common sense.

I understand it the rule was applied correctly as written, but I'm arguing that the rule is stupid in a situation like this where a guy is sliding straight into a bag and his foot pops off because the bag has no give.
Know Your Enemy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If you're tagged when you're not touching the base you're out. Wanting that changed is one of the dumbest ****ing things I've ever heard.
TexAgsSean
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Beat40 said:

Junkhead said:

Yeah. God forbid they call a runner out who was tagged when he wasn't on the base.


The dude slid straight into the bag. He wasn't doing a swim move or sliding to the side of the bag to sneak and hand or foot in. He slide straight into the bag and is foot popped up for half a second because the base is rigid.

If he's sliding into home this way, he is, without question, safe.

By the rule, yes, he is out. Doesn't mean the rule isn't being interpreted with common sense or that it doesn't need to be reviewed.

let me ask you this: youre tasked with writing a tag rule after seeing a play like that. Do you write the rule to where that guy is out in that situation? When the only way to tell is by replay?


What about the guy that has his foot off the bag for 3/4 of a second instead of 1/2 a second? Should we grant pity on him, too? You can call the rule dumb if you want, but it is pretty simple.

If you're not touching the base and you're tagged then you are out. Regardless if you're an inch away or a mile away. Out.

Doesn't mean the rule is being interpreted with common sense? It's plain as day - there is only one way to interpret the rule. See paragraph 2.

And if I were tasked writing the rule then I would keep it the same. If they have an issue with calling it only because they can review it then they shouldn't have brought reviewing into baseball, cause now it makes the game a lot longer. But they did. And the rule is still that you're out if you're tagged and not on the bag.

So quit crying about it - this is baseball.
TexasRebel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The issue is with not-quite-obvious replay overturning an obvious on-field call... either way it goes.

In addition, why can that be reviewed, but an even more obviously inaccurate ball/strike call stand without question?

There is a time and place for replay in baseball. That pickoff attempt was not one of either.
Know Your Enemy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The replay was obvious or the call wouldn't have been changed.
mazag08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Junkhead said:

The replay was obvious or the call wouldn't have been changed.


They had to sync up two camera angles and zoom in to see that the glasses be was barely touching him for the split second the foot was off.

That's not obvious.
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The rules are the same as they always were.
Ag_07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Three points I have on the tag issue..

A) The rule isn't dumb. You're off the bag then you're out. It's the simplest rule in baseball. That doesn't need to be changed.

B) I still don't know how they saw clear convincing evidence that tag was on him. Even with the synced up views from those angles it's hard to tell the tag was on him when his foot was off.

C) Replay needs to be tweaked. I think maybe they need to do away with the whole calling the dugout and having your guys tell you yes or no. That will eliminate the challenging of guys being tagged with their foot an inch off the bag. If managers have to go on gut feel and player feedback they won't be challenging this kind of stuff and it's a non issue. Not sure if there's a way to police guys looking at a replay and relaying that info down to the dugout but I think that's what the issue is. When you have a staff member sitting in an office with a monitor looking at every replay in slow motion telling you when to challenge then yeah you're gonna split hairs and catch things.

TLDR - The rule isn't what's stupid. The replay process is.
Know Your Enemy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
mazag08 said:

Junkhead said:

The replay was obvious or the call wouldn't have been changed.


They had to sync up two camera angles and zoom in to see that the glasses be was barely touching him for the split second the foot was off.

That's not obvious.
Don't care, won NLDS.
Mike Elko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Junkhead said:

If you're tagged when you're not touching the base you're out. Wanting that changed is one of the dumbest ****ing things I've ever heard.
We actually agree on something...

Fly the W! What a game/series/season.
R-Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's always been the rule.

But from 1890 until 2010 (or whenever they started doing replay)...that guy is safe and...

1. TV probably doesn't even show a replay because he beat the throw to the bag by such a wide margin.

2. Nobody would have even considered that he would be out

How many times in a game now does the 1st baseman come off the bag a split second early on a routine ground ball? I bet I see it half a dozen times per game. I am almost certain Gurriel did it on the final out of Game 4 on Monday because Altuve threw him a lollipop and got him off balance. The runner is out by 20 feet. Are you telling me that you're going to review that play and call him safe?

I want to see games decided by actual plays. Pitching, hitting, fielding. Not having to use frame by frame replays to determine the guy was off the bag for a fraction of a second.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Don't care, won NLDS.

Being fair also, Javy got called out on a similar play last year. There's a fangraphs piece today that basically just whines that it's not baseball because we get it technically right (and references this Javy play).

Both plays were technically right. Getting the call right > having some human get it wrong and you like it that way.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I am almost certain Gurriel did it on the final out of Game 4 on Monday because Altuve threw him a lollipop and got him off balance. The runner is out by 20 feet. Are you telling me that you're going to review that play and call him safe?
They should. Umps should have never let 1st basemen get away with stepping off before the ball gets there.
Philip J Fry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The only thing questionable about the call is saying there was clear evidence to over turn it.
R-Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
diehard03 said:

Quote:

I am almost certain Gurriel did it on the final out of Game 4 on Monday because Altuve threw him a lollipop and got him off balance. The runner is out by 20 feet. Are you telling me that you're going to review that play and call him safe?
They should. Umps should have never let 1st basemen get away with stepping off before the ball gets there.
I just disagree. Him coming off the bag a fraction of a second early has no bearing on the play. Now if the throw pulls him off the bag, then that's a totally different story. And if it's a bang-bang call at first, then if review shows he's off the bag, then sure, he's safe.

That's not baseball to me. I don't want to win that way and I sure as hell don't want to lose that way. I just don't see how you can do that and let guys behind the plate calls balls that are six inches off the plate or well below the knees strikes.

I would accept the compromise of not allowing guys upstairs to watch replays and then phone down to the dugout to the manager to challenge. If it's that close, there really ought to be some risk to challenging it. If you're willing to use your challenge on a Mickey Mouse call like that and you get a cheap out, then fine but now maybe you've lost the opportunity to challenge something later on that is more significant.
Know Your Enemy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm 1000% in favor of robot balls & strikes.
Schrute
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Philip J Fry said:

The only thing questionable about the call is saying there was clear evidence to over turn it.
This X1000. That play should have been left as called on the field. If the original call would have been out, then keep it as an out - and vice versa.
Ag_07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Schrute said:

Philip J Fry said:

The only thing questionable about the call is saying there was clear evidence to over turn it.
This X1000. That play should have been left as called on the field. If the original call would have been out, then keep it as an out - and vice versa.

Yep.

There was just no way to definitively tell with that view from straight behind the play if the tag was on him. Only way to see for sure would've been some sort of side view to determine if the glove was actually touching him.

It's physically impossible to see from that rear angle.
bjork
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Rizzo applied the tag on his leg and swiped through. He didn't hold the tag. The still is on the backswing of the tag.



No way there's conclusive evidence.
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The idea that first baseman regularly come off the bag early is laughable. It may look like that to you, but the reality is that playing first base you have instantaneous feedback from both the bag and the ball hitting your glove so you can leave the bag at the instant the ball hits the glove. It just looks like they leave early to you. If some manager wants to waste a challenge on that go ahead (its a perfectly reviewable play, just like the turn at second base is now), there's a reason you don't see any challenges, its because first baseman just really don't leave the bag early unless they get pulled off by the throw.
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I also disagree that this slide would "always be called safe without replay" if the umpire was on this side of the bag like that second replay, I think he would have called him out, you can see his foot come off the bag in regular speed. There are some plays with like pop up slides or slides over the bag on steals at second that I dont think any ump would ever catch, but this isnt one, IMO.
Ag_07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Exactly.

Now hold your right hand up in front of your face. Hold your left hand up just in front of it.

There is no way to physically tell if your hands are touching.

That's essentially what we're dealing. Did he probably have the tag on him? Yeah chances are that yes he was tagged, but to say that's definitive is flat out wrong.
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

What about the guy that has his foot off the bag for 3/4 of a second instead of 1/2 a second? Should we grant pity on him, too? You can call the rule dumb if you want, but it is pretty simple.

If you're not touching the base and you're tagged then you are out. Regardless if you're an inch away or a mile away. Out.

Doesn't mean the rule is being interpreted with common sense? It's plain as day - there is only one way to interpret the rule. See paragraph 2.



Every time a team turns a double play we re-interpret what's a clear rule and decide "what's good enough."

And we do it twice. The umpire decides whether the foot was close enough to the bag and if the fielder had the ball close enough in time to whenever the foot was close enough to the bag.

MLB is asking for threads like this because in other instances, they treat the rules the same way the OP wants this rule to be treated.
Mike Elko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
One thing's certain, Lobaton will be sliding head-first the remainder of his career.
bjork
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Can we also talk about the Baez/Wieters batter interference no call?

https://mediadownloads.mlb.com/mlbam/mp4/2017/10/13/1862903183/1507873421366/asset_2500K.mp4

Ball was past Wieters before the bat hit him. Wild pitch and the bat contact doesn't impact the runners progressing.

However, it's a dropped third strike. Ball is in-play with respect to the batter and bat contact does impede Wieter's ability to field the ball.

That's interference. Baez is out. Runners advance one base on a wild pitch. Ball is dead. Run shouldn't have counted. That's how I see it.
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TXAggie2011 said:

Quote:

What about the guy that has his foot off the bag for 3/4 of a second instead of 1/2 a second? Should we grant pity on him, too? You can call the rule dumb if you want, but it is pretty simple.

If you're not touching the base and you're tagged then you are out. Regardless if you're an inch away or a mile away. Out.

Doesn't mean the rule is being interpreted with common sense? It's plain as day - there is only one way to interpret the rule. See paragraph 2.



Every time a team turns a double play we re-interpret what's a clear rule and decide "what's good enough."

And we do it twice. The umpire decides whether the foot was close enough to the bag and if the fielder had the ball close enough in time to whenever the foot was close enough to the bag.

MLB is asking for threads like this because in other instances, they treat the rules the same way the OP wants this rule to be treated.
You are wrong. There is no neighborhood play at second base anymore. Lead runners on double plays regularly get called safe if the infielder doesnt have the ball while touching the base now and there have been video reviews of this as well. This has been in place since they started enforcing the slide rules for breaking up double plays.
Know Your Enemy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
bjork said:

Can we also talk about the Baez/Wieters batter interference no call?

https://mediadownloads.mlb.com/mlbam/mp4/2017/10/13/1862903183/1507873421366/asset_2500K.mp4

Ball was past Wieters before the bat hit him. Wild pitch and the bat contact doesn't impact the runners progressing.

However, it's a dropped third strike. Ball is in-play with respect to the batter and bat contact does impede Wieter's ability to field the ball.

That's interference. Baez is out. Runners advance one base on a wild pitch. Ball is dead. Run shouldn't have counted. That's how I see it.
Personally I think Javy should've been out after reading the rule but the home plate umpire's explanation is below.

Quote:

"Backswing interference is a play where a guy is stealing or there's a play being made a runner hindering the catch," Layne said afterward. "It was a wild pitch and went past him. That is no longer in that particular description, in my judgment. In my judgment, the passed ball changed the whole rule around to where, in my judgment, it had nothing to do with everything. Therefore, it didn't have any effect on it. In my judgment."
Quote:

"When the ball gets past him, all right, in my judgment he didn't have any more opportunity after he had a chance to field the ball," Layne said. "There was no further play that could have been made on it. The graze of the helmet didn't have anything to do, in my judgment, with anything at all, with that particular play. I understand, it's pretty much my judgment. I got together and found everybody was in agreement. That's what we went with."
Quote:

"If you look at the replay, it's clearly gone past him," Layne added. "That's where we were in our discussion and the judgment. Now, if it was right there in front of him, we'd have a different night."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/nationals-journal/wp/2017/10/12/nationals-hurt-by-crucial-missed-call-in-do-or-die-nlds-game-5/?utm_term=.f9db9a51f822
Ag_07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What about the John Jay slide into 2nd where he clearly leg whips (with contact) Murphy?

By the letter of the law I thought that was clearly interference.
Mike Elko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MLB Network spoke with an ump last night... He concluded the HP ump deemed the contact didn't affect Wieters from pursuing the passed ball. In other words, the back swing had no impact on the play as it unfolded whatsoever.

Sucks for Wieters... Terrible game behind the plate for him.
Mike Elko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag_07 said:

What about the John Jay slide into 2nd where he clearly leg whips (with contact) Murphy?

By the letter of the law I thought that was clearly interference.
Are you kidding?! They reviewed the play... Even the announcers said it was a legit slide. Jay kept in contact with the bag the entire process and was clearly in the base path. Of all the "controversial" calls, this was not one of them. Move along...
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.