PDA

View Full Version : How many games will this cost Brett Lawrie?



Pages : [1] 2

powersackers
05-16-2012, 03:39 AM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120515&content_id=31385244&vkey=news_tor&c_id=tor

Terrible calls, terrible reaction by Lawrie and the fan. But if Miller would do his job a bit better it wouldn't have happened.

757690
05-16-2012, 03:53 AM
Got to love the human element of the game. No need to use technology to help the umps make the right call. :rolleyes:

OnBaseMachine
05-16-2012, 04:12 AM
I love Lawrie's intensity. I wish the Reds had drafted him in 2008.

The umpire should be suspended too for being that awful. Neither of those pitches were anywhere near the strikezone. He cost the Blue Jays a baserunner in a one run ballgame in the 9th inning. Umpiring has been awful this season.

GAC
05-16-2012, 05:45 AM
Not defending the umpire, but simply stating the reality of the game because we see it happen all the time. You've got a 3-1 count, you think the next pitch is ball four, you drop the bat and start to jog to 1B only to hear the strike call. Even if the pitch, however close, was a ball, it's not the batter's call, but the ump's. And most umps - call it ego, arrogance, whatever - "you tryin' to show me up?" - just don't like it when batters are basically trying to make the call for them. So it's not surprising that on the next pitch, if it's close, the ump will ring him up just to let him know whose in charge of calling ball/strikes.

Again. Not saying it's right. Just part of the game.

camisadelgolf
05-16-2012, 06:04 AM
I'm pretty sure that video was a lot more entertaining than a computer accurately calling ball/strike. I'm not saying this is necessarily how things should be, but I'm saying that I enjoy the human element of the human game.

757690
05-16-2012, 06:36 AM
I'm pretty sure that video was a lot more entertaining than a computer accurately calling ball/strike. I'm not saying this is necessarily how things should be, but I'm saying that I enjoy the human element of the human game.

If that was Votto or Bruce, or any other Red, instead of Lawrie, would it still be as entertaining for you?

dougdirt
05-16-2012, 07:53 AM
I love Lawrie's intensity. I wish the Reds had drafted him in 2008.

The umpire should be suspended too for being that awful. Neither of those pitches were anywhere near the strikezone. He cost the Blue Jays a baserunner in a one run ballgame in the 9th inning. Umpiring has been awful this season.

Strike three was actually pretty close to being a strike. It wasn't, but it was darn close.

But strike two.... not close at all.

RedFanAlways1966
05-16-2012, 08:17 AM
Throwing equipment... oh boy. Nothing worse than an adult behaving like a immature child. I do not give a darn why they threw the equipment. There is no place for it. You do it in little league or high school and it is an automatic ejection. MLB should impose an automatic ejection and 1-game suspension for throwing equipment when it is obviously done in anger (whether anger at the umpire or even anger at themself). Yes... ZERO tolerance for thrown equipment. That pretty much includes bats and helmets. Do not get me wrong, it is OK to loft the bat aside after a walk. It is more than obvious when it is done in anger.

cumberlandreds
05-16-2012, 08:48 AM
Strike three was actually pretty close to being a strike. It wasn't, but it was darn close.

But strike two.... not close at all.

That's the way I saw it too. You can't throw equipment like he did though. That will probably be a game or two or three.

mbgrayson
05-16-2012, 09:56 AM
My guess is 5, which will be appealed and reduced to 3.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:15 AM
It is well known that batters need to wait until the umpire makes the ball or strike call before running down to first base. Or at the very least pause for a second and not start running before the ball even reaches the mitt. Had Lawrie did this then this incident would not have occured.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:16 AM
The umpire should be suspended too for being that awful. Neither of those pitches were anywhere near the strikezone. He cost the Blue Jays a baserunner in a one run ballgame in the 9th inning. Umpiring has been awful this season.

Johnny Cueto and Chris Heisey both made errors in yesterdays game.

Should they be suspended also?

GoReds
05-16-2012, 10:17 AM
I enjoy the human aspect of the game, but until umpires are held accountable for their actions, these incidents are going to continue to occur.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:20 AM
Not defending the umpire, but simply stating the reality of the game because we see it happen all the time. You've got a 3-1 count, you think the next pitch is ball four, you drop the bat and start to jog to 1B only to hear the strike call. Even if the pitch, however close, was a ball, it's not the batter's call, but the ump's. And most umps - call it ego, arrogance, whatever - "you tryin' to show me up?" - just don't like it when batters are basically trying to make the call for them. So it's not surprising that on the next pitch, if it's close, the ump will ring him up just to let him know whose in charge of calling ball/strikes.

Again. Not saying it's right. Just part of the game.

Exactly, really it isn't so much trying to show the umpire up it is just the fact that the batter dropping his bat and running to 1B before a call is made can somewhat affect the umpires decision. The batter is trying to convince the umpire that there is no question it is a ball so there is no point in waiting for the call. Had the batter simply paused a second or two then this incident would not have occured.

traderumor
05-16-2012, 10:23 AM
My guess is 5, which will be appealed and reduced to 3.Maybe not with Das fired ;)

Sea Ray
05-16-2012, 10:25 AM
My guess is 5, which will be appealed and reduced to 3.

Exactly. He'll be suspended for a few games and the incident will be forgotten. I do hope somebody either in MLB or the Umps union make Bill Miller sit down and see how awful his calls were and that it'll affect his performance report

Edskin
05-16-2012, 10:30 AM
I watched it a couple of times and I actually think he probably was trying to hit the ump with his helmet; or at least his intention was to get it darn close. Not sure how you can spike a batting helmet directly at someone's feet and then say you had "no intention" of hitting him. I think it was a case of "well, I know I can't just peg him with it, but maybe if I spike it and it takes a lucky bounce...." :)

Not gonna lie; I like it. Even though baseball is not nearly as violent or physical as football, hockey, or even basketball, I've always found baseball to contain a lot of machismo. Tons of alpha male type stuff from tobacco usage to language to clubhouse rituals, etc.

The little unwritten macho rules of game are entertaining to me. Did Lawrie act appropriately? Absolutely not. But did I like it? Well, yeah, I kinda did :)

mdccclxix
05-16-2012, 10:41 AM
First reaction, at least 5 games. You don't violently throw things at umpires, lol. I'd be perfectly okay with 10-15 games. It's just too much. Personally, I'm glad we didn't draft this loon.

REDREAD
05-16-2012, 10:47 AM
Maybe not with Das fired ;)

:lol:

757690
05-16-2012, 10:54 AM
Johnny Cueto and Chris Heisey both made errors in yesterdays game.

Should they be suspended also?

Sometimes, when players make dumb plays that cost their team a win, they get to ride the bench for a game or two. So yes, sometimes making a mistake results in not playing, as it should.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 11:02 AM
Sometimes, when players make dumb plays that cost their team a win, they get to ride the bench for a game or two. So yes, sometimes making a mistake results in not playing, as it should.

A player making several dumb plays could very well get sent down. However with few exceptions one dumb play will not get someone benched.

I am all for a system that sends umpires down to the minors if they are not performing well, but punishing an umpire for one bad call which was earlier suggested is not a good idea.

757690
05-16-2012, 11:03 AM
Exactly, really it isn't so much trying to show the umpire up it is just the fact that the batter dropping his bat and running to 1B before a call is made can somewhat affect the umpires decision. The batter is trying to convince the umpire that there is no question it is a ball so there is no point in waiting for the call. Had the batter simply paused a second or two then this incident would not have occured.

I know that's the unwritten rule, but it's a dumb rule. Umps shouldn't let a player's actions determine how they make a call. They should be bigger than that.

I can understand it if the player moves when the ball is still in the air, but once the ball crosses the batter, the ump should already know his call. Of course a batter should wait for the ump's call, but failing to do so shouldn't result in a punishment of a call bring made against them.

757690
05-16-2012, 11:09 AM
A player making several dumb plays could very well get sent down. However with few exceptions one dumb play will not get someone benched.

I am all for a system that sends umpires down to the minors if they are not performing well, but punishing an umpire for one bad call which was earlier suggested is not a good idea.

I agree, but there are other options besides sending an ump or player down to the minors. A suspension of one game for an ump would like being out of the lineup for one game for a player.

I have seen many managers take a player out of a game, during the game, for one bonehead play. Maybe umps do get suspended for making bad calls, we'll never know, but they should when the occasion merits it. To be honest, I don't think that was such a bad call by the ump to deserve a suspension, however.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 11:12 AM
I know that's the unwritten rule, but it's a dumb rule. Umps shouldn't let a player's actions determine how they make a call. They should be bigger than that.

I can understand it if the player moves when the ball is still in the air, but once the ball crosses the batter, the ump should already know his call. Of course a batter should wait for the ump's call, but failing to do so shouldn't result in a punishment of a call bring made against them.

I agree an ump shouldn't let a players action affect the call but in reality it can and does. In a split second you have to make a decision on a pitch what to call. Having a batter tell you and everyone watching what he thinks the pitch was can and will affect the call. If a pitch is borderline and I am having a hard time deciding if it was a ball or strike then the easy thing for the umpire to do in the instance above was to just let the batter have first base as opposed to calling him back and bringing attention to myself. If you think the umpires should just turn a blind eye to the batters reaction then you are setting up the strong likelyhood that every single batter on close pitches will do what Lawrie did.

When I have instances like above I generally tell the batter not to run before the pitch is called. However this is MLB and that courtesy is likely not going to be given to the batters by the umpire.

OnBaseMachine
05-16-2012, 01:02 PM
I don't agree with Keith Law often but in this case I do.

The solution is not to suspend Brett Lawrie for ten or twenty games. The solution is to get the damn calls right.

https://twitter.com/#!/keithlaw

Plus Plus
05-16-2012, 01:07 PM
I agree, OBM. The strike 2 call was, after seeing the overhead camera, at least an entire baseball width between the plate and the mitt, making the pitch what... 4-6" outside?

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 01:11 PM
I agree, OBM. The strike 2 call was, after seeing the overhead camera, at least an entire baseball width between the plate and the mitt, making the pitch what... 4-6" outside?

I hope you realize the umpire was sending a message to Lawrie not to run before the pitch was called.

OnBaseMachine
05-16-2012, 01:15 PM
From the overhead view, it appeared the strike two call actually crossed over the chalk line marking the left handed batters box. It had a to be around six inches outside. If Lawrie was a LH hitter, that pitch probably would have grazed him. It's simple really, don't make garbage calls and these types of things won't happen. That umpire may have cost the Blue Jays a win.

OnBaseMachine
05-16-2012, 01:16 PM
I hope you realize the umpire was sending a message to Lawrie not to run before the pitch was called.

Hopefully that ump is suspended for a few games then because expanding the strike zone by 6+ inches to "send a message" is unacceptable.

Plus Plus
05-16-2012, 01:17 PM
I hope you realize the umpire was sending a message to Lawrie not to run before the pitch was called.

If that is actually what happened, then that umpire should be fired immediately for putting himself above the rules of the game.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 01:18 PM
Hopefully that ump is suspended for a few games then because expanding the strike zone by 6+ inches to "send a message" is unacceptable.

A batter trying to deceive the umpire into thinking a pitch is a ball is also unacceptable.

Plus Plus
05-16-2012, 01:18 PM
A batter trying to deceive the umpire into thinking a pitch is a ball is also unacceptable.

There was no deception. The pitch was 6" outside and the catcher had to lunge at it. It is a fact that it was a ball.

westofyou
05-16-2012, 01:24 PM
If that is actually what happened, then that umpire should be fired immediately for putting himself above the rules of the game.

Welcome to human umpiring, personally I kind of like it... Variance is a nice aspect of existence, at least IMO

But some want robots, others don't

This is a nay

http://blogs.thescore.com/mlb/2012/05/16/why-robot-umpires-are-not-the-answer/

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 01:24 PM
If that is actually what happened, then that umpire should be fired immediately for putting himself above the rules of the game.

This has been going on forever so good luck trying to get the ump fired.

Lets stop and think about this. If we allow the batters to run on every single 2 strike pitch they do not swing at do you realize what a mockery the game would become? Batters are routinely taught to look down and see if the 3rd strike was caught or not to see if they can advance to first base, so if we are going to turn a blind eye to a batter trying to deceive an umpire into thinking a pitch was a ball then you will see team deliberately teaching batters to run to first base on any strike 2 pitch reasonably close to the zone.

Instead here is a better idea. Lets have the batter pause a second or two and let the umpire make the call instead of intentionally trying to deceive him. I know the batter will be a second or two later getting to first base but the reality is the game will be run and called alot smoother.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 01:27 PM
There was no deception. The pitch was 6" outside and the catcher had to lunge at it. It is a fact that it was a ball.

It is not a ball until the umpire decides it is.

So it is ok to get that extra second jump on a pitch 6" outside but how about 3" outside? Is that ok?

Lets maybe instead pause an extra second and wait for the call.

Plus Plus
05-16-2012, 01:30 PM
This has been going on forever so good luck trying to get the ump fired.

Lets stop and think about this. If we allow the batters to run on every single 2 strike pitch they do not swing at do you realize what a mockery the game would become? Batters are routinely taught to look down and see if the 3rd strike was caught or not to see if they can advance to first base, so if we are going to turn a blind eye to a batter trying to deceive an umpire into thinking a pitch was a ball then you will see team deliberately teaching batters to run to first base on any strike 2 pitch reasonably close to the zone.

Instead here is a better idea. Lets have the batter pause a second or two and let the umpire make the call instead of intentionally trying to deceive him. I know the batter will be a second or two later getting to first base but the reality is the game will be run and called alot smoother.

I may have overstated my position on umpiring in MLB because of this incident. Generally, I appreciate the human element. I think it makes pitching a lot more of a science and a lot less about hitting tiny targets that are unchanging.

However, this incident is absolutely insane. Votto will routinely drop his bat as soon as a fourth ball passes by his ankles, and I have no problem with that. Of course, I don't want any batter running to first after a 3-ball pitch no matter where it crosses. However, with this specific incident, the ball was obviously outside, and I don't have a problem with Lawrie leaving the box after the obviously terrible outside pitch that is a ball 9999999999 times out of 10000000000.

If the umpire called the pitch a strike because he thought it hit the plate, then I suppose the "umpires need glasses etc." stereotype lives on for another day.

If the umpire called the pitch a strike, knowing it was a ball, only because Lawrie left the batters box without counting to "two-Mississippi," then the game has been cheapened just a little bit more than it already has been in recent years (see: ASG that counts, ASG ending in a tie, managers wearing uniforms and being a source of mockery, lack of instant replay, unbalanced scheduling, no salary cap or attempt to work towards parity, and on and on).

Vottomatic
05-16-2012, 01:30 PM
Wow. The ump sucks. Neither pitches were strikes. And Lawrie didn't mean to hit him with the helmet, he was just throwing it down.

Frankly, I love Lawrie's intensity. And I've seen wayyyyy too many bad strike zones and strikes called and not called this season. Squeezing our pitchers has become a disease with the umps calling Reds games. Inconsistent strike zones have become a disease too.

OnBaseMachine
05-16-2012, 01:31 PM
A batter trying to deceive the umpire into thinking a pitch is a ball is also unacceptable.

Lawrie wasn't trying to deceive anyone. It was quite obvious to anyone with a set of eyes that it was ball 4.

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 01:31 PM
The umpires job is to call the game, not become part of it... If he had issue with Lawrie leaving before he made the call on 3-1, then let him know after the game or the next day. Players/managers, unlike umps are held accountable for their performance. Miller can screw this call up for the next 5 years and nothing is done to him, no suspension or fine. If this is a marginal major league player, calls like this can be the difference between staying in the show and riding a bus. Who knows, maybe if Lawrie starts a rally the Jays win the game and a game or two makes a difference in the Jays making the playoffs.

I understand that umps will miss a call and I understand it is part of the game... It can't be taken personal! If Miller's performance doesn't put him at risk then he has no reason to change. He can be CB Bucknor or Joe West and keep screwing up without fear being held accountable... The players and the managers are the guys at risk, they have everything riding on these games! The umps are paid well to do a job, they need to do it the best they can and give guys a fair shake... Not teach them a lesson! Call the game the best you can, don't be an antagonist or confrontational, and be honest not arrogant when you have to make a tough or close call. Players and managers will respect that give you the benefit of the doubt when you mess one up! Start teaching lessons in 1 run games during the 9th inning and this is what happens.

Plus Plus
05-16-2012, 01:32 PM
It is not a ball until the umpire decides it is.

So it is ok to get that extra second jump on a pitch 6" outside but how about 3" outside? Is that ok?

Lets maybe instead pause an extra second and wait for the call.

I will bet my bottom dollar that you will see a walk in tonight's Reds game where the batter doesn't wait in the batters box to hear the umpire call ball four before walking towards first base. Players always start towards first on obvious fourth balls, as the pitches in question were in this video.

OnBaseMachine
05-16-2012, 01:33 PM
I may have overstated my position on umpiring in MLB because of this incident. Generally, I appreciate the human element. I think it makes pitching a lot more of a science and a lot less about hitting tiny targets that are unchanging.

However, this incident is absolutely insane. Votto will routinely drop his bat as soon as a fourth ball passes by his ankles, and I have no problem with that. Of course, I don't want any batter running to first after a 3-ball pitch no matter where it crosses. However, with this specific incident, the ball was obviously outside, and I don't have a problem with Lawrie leaving the box after the obviously terrible outside pitch that is a ball 9999999999 times out of 10000000000.

If the umpire called the pitch a strike because he thought it hit the plate, then I suppose the "umpires need glasses etc." stereotype lives on for another day.

If the umpire called the pitch a strike, knowing it was a ball, only because Lawrie left the batters box without counting to "two-Mississippi," then the game has been cheapened just a little bit more than it already has been in recent years (see: ASG that counts, ASG ending in a tie, managers wearing uniforms and being a source of mockery, lack of instant replay, unbalanced scheduling, no salary cap or attempt to work towards parity, and on and on).

Excellent post. That's how I feel, and you summed it up way better than I could have.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 01:37 PM
Lawrie wasn't trying to deceive anyone. It was quite obvious to anyone with a set of eyes that it was ball 4.

Perhaps Lawrie wasn't trying to deceive the umpire or maybe he was. Who knows? However if the umpire lets this act continue throughout the game then don't kid yourself and think teams won't be doing it nonstop.

Once again, wait a second or two for the call to be made. I realize it makes players giddy as a school girl to reach base but pausing and letting the umpire make the call will fix the problem above . I promise the umpire won't let play continue until the runner is at first base so if it takes an extra second or two for the runner to get to first base I am sure the umpire will wait.

GoReds
05-16-2012, 01:39 PM
Instead here is a better idea. Lets have the batter pause a second or two and let the umpire make the call instead of intentionally trying to deceive him. I know the batter will be a second or two later getting to first base but the reality is the game will be run and called alot smoother.

In the NBA, players flop to the ground like they were hit by a Mack truck, trying to draw a charge. Soccer plays act like other players have broken their legs when tripped (and worse). Punters will drop like flies to the ground feigning injury if a defensive player has even incidental contact.

The point is, the onus of responsibility lies with the umpire/referee, not the player. The umpire must decide if what he sees is true or false and make the decision based on that alone. The idea that this umpire decided to step outside of that context is inexcusable.

The way that Lawrie acted was also inexcusable. Both were wrong to react the way they did and both should be punished in a similar manner. Unfortunately, the way things are structured, we will only ever hear about discipline as it relates to Lawrie and that is also wrong.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 01:43 PM
The umpires job is to call the game, not become part of it... If he had issue with Lawrie leaving before he made the call on 3-1, then let him know after the game or the next day. Players/managers, unlike umps are held accountable for their performance. Miller can screw this call up for the next 5 years and nothing is done to him, no suspension or fine. If this is a marginal major league player, calls like this can be the difference between staying in the show and riding a bus. Who knows, maybe if Lawrie starts a rally the Jays win the game and a game or two makes a difference in the Jays making the playoffs.

I understand that umps will miss a call and I understand it is part of the game... It can't be taken personal! If Miller's performance doesn't put him at risk then he has no reason to change. He can be CB Bucknor or Joe West and keep screwing up without fear being held accountable... The players and the managers are the guys at risk, they have everything riding on these games! The umps are paid well to do a job, they need to do it the best they can and give guys a fair shake... Not teach them a lesson! Call the game the best you can, don't be an antagonist or confrontational, and be honest not arrogant when you have to make a tough or close call. Players and managers will respect that give you the benefit of the doubt when you mess one up! Start teaching lessons in 1 run games during the 9th inning and this is what happens.

Please answer this question.

What could possibly be hurt by the batter waiting a second or two for the call to be made?

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 01:47 PM
In the NBA, players flop to the ground like they were hit by a Mack truck, trying to draw a charge. Soccer plays act like other players have broken their legs when tripped (and worse). Punters will drop like flies to the ground feigning injury if a defensive player has even incidental contact.

The point is, the onus of responsibility lies with the umpire/referee, not the player. The umpire must decide if what he sees is true or false and make the decision based on that alone. The idea that this umpire decided to step outside of that context is inexcusable.

The way that Lawrie acted was also inexcusable. Both were wrong to react the way they did and both should be punished in a similar manner. Unfortunately, the way things are structured, we will only ever hear about discipline as it relates to Lawrie and that is also wrong.


In my world the NBA and pro soccer would fix the above problems. David Stern addressed the flopping issue last weekend and trust me he wants it banned. If you want MLB to have a rule requiring batters to stay in the box till the call is made then I would be all for it. Untill then, this is the way it is and it is for the long term it is for the better.

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 01:52 PM
Why does he have to wait a second or two? If the ump makes the call in a timely fashion then all it is is a misunderstanding on Lawrie's part... Every player has taken the false step towards first, every pitcher has taken the the step towards the dugout. Why does he have to wait? Many guys are taught to drop their bat and hustle to first... Lawrie took a pitch that should be a ball 100% of the time. He knows the strikezone and should not have to wait on the umpire.

Answer this:
How often do guys wait on a pitch in the dirt or over their head?

IMO, this pitch is no different! It's clearly a ball... If the ump screwed up then he needs own up to it, not turn around and call the next pitch a strike because Lawrie took off. The umpire, not Lawrie screwed up! All Lawrie did wrong is lose his composure after he felt that Miller and done him wrong... and maybe done him wrong intentionally if he was teaching him a lesson!

Which person is more wrong?

mdccclxix
05-16-2012, 01:53 PM
It was only 3 inches off the plate. Not only that, it should have been a 2-2, not a 3-1 count, had Lawrie not seen the benefit of a borderline ball. This is a common thing in baseball. Do you see any pitchers outside of roided up Clemons or crazy Zambrano act this violently because they're squeezed? It's unacceptable and Lawrie goes on a short list I would't want to be on after this clown act.

http://blogimages.thescore.com/djf/files/2012/05/lawriefreakout.gif

mdccclxix
05-16-2012, 01:55 PM
Called strike 3 was a fair call, nasty pitch.

GoReds
05-16-2012, 01:57 PM
In my world the NBA and pro soccer would fix the above problems. David Stern addressed the flopping issue last weekend and trust me he wants it banned. If you want MLB to have a rule requiring batters to stay in the box till the call is made then I would be all for it. Untill then, this is the way it is and it is for the long term it is for the better.

But then you are asking the umpires to make decisions based on behavior, which is gray, instead of balls and strikes, which is binary. I don't want the umpire to be in that position because the result will look similar to what we saw last night when the umpire decided to do exactly what you are advocating.

Keep it simple:

Is the pitch a strike? If yes, then call "STRIKE", else "BALL". That should be the end of it.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 02:02 PM
Why does he have to wait a second or two? ?

Because in the best interest of the game waiting a second or two will eliminate batters trying to deceive umpires into calling a borderline pitch a ball.

However lets have it your way and let the batter get that extra second jump to first base. I mean I can't possibly imagine a team trying to gain an advantage by mandating or encouraging every batter to run to first base on 3 ball pitch they did not swing at. I am sure Tony LaGenius would never of approved of such shenanigans.

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 02:03 PM
Called strike 3 was a fair call, nasty pitch.

Had his zone been consistent all night? Obviously not if he missed one earlier in the AB... When guys careers depend on these calls or the "game of inches" they are going to be upset. Be honest about what you see or think you see, but don't hold it against someone for not waiting the correct amount of time before heading towards first base. Throw the player out and let him get fined, but don't think you're above question as an ump when your call can influence the game.

RedFanAlways1966
05-16-2012, 02:14 PM
Because in the best interest of the game waiting a second or two will eliminate batters trying to deceive umpires into calling a borderline pitch a ball.

I respect your standing up for the umpires, George. How about catchers who quickly move their gloves to make a ball seem to be a strike? That is more deceptive than batters who take off early IMO. It all seems minor though when comparing those things to "call it right". A ball is a ball... and should never be a strike to show the hitter who is in charge or to make a point. I hope Miller just made a human error and was not being holier than though with the strike call.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 02:18 PM
I respect your standing up for the umpires, George. How about catchers who quickly move their gloves to make a ball seem to be a strike? That is more deceptive than batters who take off early IMO. It all seems minor though when comparing those things to "call it right". A ball is a ball... and should never be a strike to show the hitter who is in charge or to make a point. I hope Miller just made a human error and was not being holier than though with the strike call.

If I have a catcher moving his mitt to get strikes then I will tell him he needs to stop that because he will get more calls if he catches it right. It works everytime.

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 02:20 PM
Because in the best interest of the game waiting a second or two will eliminate batters trying to deceive umpires into calling a borderline pitch a ball.

However lets have it your way and let the batter get that extra second jump to first base. I mean I can't possibly imagine a team trying to gain an advantage by mandating or encouraging every batter to run to first base on 3 ball pitch they did not swing at. I am sure Tony LaGenius would never of approved of such shenanigans.

Best interest of the game or the umpire?

If the batter is deceiving the umpire then the umpire isn't doing his job... The same thing can be said with catchers framing the pitch.

If the batter needs to wait so he doesn't deceive the ump then the catcher shouldn't be able to frame the pitch.

If it's a strike, call it a strike... If it's a ball, call it a ball! Do what your eyes and brain tell you to do!

And if I'm a manager and the umpire can be tricked by running quickly to first, then by george my team is going to be running quickly on every 3 ball count!

Also Lawrie didn't do anything to deceive the ump... He was leaning towards first because the pitch was outside and he looked excited he had worked a walk, possibly to start a rally... He flipped the bat and took off, no deception at all! If Miller took offense to that, then I have no problem with Lawrie taking offense to his strikezone!

Crumbley
05-16-2012, 02:23 PM
Another unaccountable low level authority figure who gets off on punishing those who don't kiss his ring. Should go into politics.

Caveman Techie
05-16-2012, 02:23 PM
I'm sorry, but waiting a second or two for a call isn't required. How many umpires out there don't even call balls but just remain silent for balls? I know it's not as prevalent today, but they do still exist. Should the batter remain in the batters box till told by the umpire to take his base?

This umpire put his ego above the game and that's a shame.

Team Clark
05-16-2012, 02:26 PM
I'm all for respecting the game but I get a little "giggly" when I see an umpire get "checked" like that. When Carl Everett head butted Ron Culpa in Boston I was tickled pink. I wouldn't teach my kids or players to do it.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 02:28 PM
And if I'm a manager and the umpire can be tricked by running quickly to first, then by george my team is going to be running quickly on every 3 ball count!

!

I would say during the course of a game a 3 ball count probally comes up a good 30-40 times, so seeing batter after batter dropping his bat and trotting to first base regardless of where the pitch is, only to be called back to the plate on a called strike ought to be pretty entertaining.

I know, how about taking an extra second and give the umpire the respect of time to make the call? Oh thats right, they shouldn't have to.

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 02:28 PM
If I have a catcher moving his mitt to get strikes then I will tell him he needs to stop that because he will get more calls if he catches it right. It works everytime.

The best catchers do this without being noticed by the umpire... Also if my catcher tells me the ump says such things then we are going to have a problem. Call where the ball crosses the plate as best you can, and do it as consistently as possible. The hitters will adjust, the pitchers will adjust, and the catchers will adjust... Giving a catcher "incentive" to get calls because of how his catching/framing style suits how you call a game would give me the reason to question your calls. Call the game, that's it... Ball, strike, safe, out... If you do that as best you can then you won't have a problem from 99% of coaches or players. Dictating how you want the ball caught or how a guy goes to first after ball 4 will cause many more problems than just doing your best.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 02:33 PM
I'
This umpire put his ego above the game and that's a shame.

Likely no ego at all. He simply is keeping the game fair by not allowing the batters to deceive him into calling a borderline pitch a ball.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 02:34 PM
The best catchers do this without being noticed by the umpire... Also if my catcher tells me the ump says such things then we are going to have a problem. Call where the ball crosses the plate as best you can, and do it as consistently as possible. The hitters will adjust, the pitchers will adjust, and the catchers will adjust... Giving a catcher "incentive" to get calls because of how his catching/framing style suits how you call a game would give me the reason to question your calls. Call the game, that's it... Ball, strike, safe, out... If you do that as best you can then you won't have a problem from 99% of coaches or players. Dictating how you want the ball caught or how a guy goes to first after ball 4 will cause many more problems than just doing your best.

You coach at what level?

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 02:39 PM
I played college ball and I saw many of the same umpires over and over... The only guy that I ever saw have a consistent problem was a little dude that was always on a power trip. Whether he developed this because of his size or if this was how he thought the game should be umpired, I don't know... I do know that I watched him throw out at least 15 different coaches and players over the course of a couple of seasons. His strikezone and his out/safe calls didn't start most arguments, his attitude and his arrogance did. He would be vindictive towards players or coaches because of such things like not "waiting a second or two" and because a fan may have yelled something about a call.

The guys that called the game and didn't become part of the game rarely had a problem... There is nothing in the umpire handbook that says you have to be confrontational if you are questioned on a call. If you're honest about the call, and don't try to act like you are above reproche then most coaches and players will not take issue with you.

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 02:40 PM
You coach at what level?

The HS level and played college ball

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 02:44 PM
The HS level and played college ball

What college conference? Might be my old assignor.

Anyway in central Indiana at the HS level, coaches have no problem with me telling the catchers how the ball needs to be caught because they know and that I and our association want to call strikes. So any info I give the catcher on how to catch the ball they welcome. I have been umpiring for 15 years and never once have I had a problem with a coach over this. However if a coach does complain to me about telling his catcher how to catch then I will respectfully stop talking to the catcher, but those low pitches that the catcher is not framing but dropping his mitt to the ground with will most certainly be called balls.

dougdirt
05-16-2012, 02:51 PM
I still don't understand why how or where a catcher receives the ball comes into play. The strikezone isn't two feet behind home plate.

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 02:59 PM
I'm not trying to tell you how to call a game... I didn't mean to come off like that, and honestly as a coach I've very rarely said a word to an umpire. I also view HS umps and college umps different from MLB. I don't think there is much room if any for the actions of Lawrie in the amature game, nor do I feel like the actions of umps like Joe West are needed from the umpire side of things. The point I was trying to make is, the only thing I want from an umpire is to call the game the best he can and as consistently as he can... I also would rather umpires leave the coaching part to me, and I mean that as respectfully as possible. If you wanted to say something to me about the catcher or whatever, I'd be fine with that. But I don't want the kid changing something to suit an umpire, especially if I feel the umpire may be going against something I have taught. Your time and help at the amature level is appreciated and needed. My point is the umpires job is to call the game, don't teach lessons, don't coach, don't be confrontational... Call the game to the best of your ability and don't be vindictive, don't be arrogant or an antagonist if you are questioned respectfully about a call.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 03:01 PM
I still don't understand why how or where a catcher receives the ball comes into play. The strikezone isn't two feet behind home plate.

Tracking

The next part of calling balls and strikes is keeping your head still. Your eyes are like a box camera and a box camera cannot take a good picture of the ball if the box is moving. Many umpires move their head without realizing it. We often have to literally hold our students’ heads still because they cannot tell themselves that their head is moving.. The eyeballs (as opposed to the head) follow the ball from the pitcher’s hand and see it all of the way into the catcher’s mitt.* This is called tracking. It is not easy and it is unlikely that amateurs who have not been specifically schooled in this will do it correctly.

Tracking is not natural or instinctive. Here are some problems and proposed solutions:
http://www.umpire.org/writers/plate1.html

dougdirt
05-16-2012, 03:18 PM
Tracking

The next part of calling balls and strikes is keeping your head still. Your eyes are like a box camera and a box camera cannot take a good picture of the ball if the box is moving. Many umpires move their head without realizing it. We often have to literally hold our students’ heads still because they cannot tell themselves that their head is moving.. The eyeballs (as opposed to the head) follow the ball from the pitcher’s hand and see it all of the way into the catcher’s mitt.* This is called tracking. It is not easy and it is unlikely that amateurs who have not been specifically schooled in this will do it correctly.

Tracking is not natural or instinctive. Here are some problems and proposed solutions:
http://www.umpire.org/writers/plate1.html

I am still trying to figure out what any of that has to do with if the ball crossed the plate in the strikezone. Nothing the catcher does changes whether the ball crossed the plate between the hallow of the knee and whatever the top of the zone is actually defined as.

Major League umpires are often fooled by how a guy catches the ball too. As you know, since we have discussed it before. But it shouldn't be that way at all.

mdccclxix
05-16-2012, 03:19 PM
Had his zone been consistent all night? Obviously not if he missed one earlier in the AB... When guys careers depend on these calls or the "game of inches" they are going to be upset. Be honest about what you see or think you see, but don't hold it against someone for not waiting the correct amount of time before heading towards first base. Throw the player out and let him get fined, but don't think you're above question as an ump when your call can influence the game.

I can appreciate the magnitude of just one at bat at the MLB level for a young player, but I think you're overstating the significance of a missed call here and there. It evens out as they say. Win some and lose some. Thems the breaks. That one at bat is a perfect example. The pitcher and the batter got variously squeezed. We know which one acted like a complete jerk about it.

Nasty_Boy
05-16-2012, 03:30 PM
I can appreciate the magnitude of just one at bat at the MLB level for a young player, but I think you're overstating the significance of a missed call here and there. It evens out as they say. Win some and lose some. Thems the breaks. That one at bat is a perfect example. The pitcher and the batter got variously squeezed. We know which one acted like a complete jerk about it.

I understand that... What if the ump called strike 3 because Lawrie took off early after strike 2?

I also watched Frank Francisco come off the mound Sunday going crazy at an ump for squeezing him... Francisco may have been feeling the pressure of losing his closer job. I get why these guys lose it from time to time, especially if they feel the umpire is doing it to them out of spite.

I have no problem with Lawrie reacting like that... I also have no problem with him being suspended a game or two. Likewise, Miller should be suspended if he called Lawrie out because he took off quickly to first. IMO, Miller and other umpires need their performance judged just like ballplayers.

dougdirt
05-16-2012, 03:33 PM
I can appreciate the magnitude of just one at bat at the MLB level for a young player, but I think you're overstating the significance of a missed call here and there. It evens out as they say. Win some and lose some. Thems the breaks. That one at bat is a perfect example. The pitcher and the batter got variously squeezed. We know which one acted like a complete jerk about it.

But they shouldn't have to be. We can accurately call balls and strikes every single time. We have been able to for 15 years or so now. But here we are, still dealing with missed calls, even if they only happen 5 times a game, they matter.

CySeymour
05-16-2012, 03:43 PM
But they shouldn't have to be. We can accurately call balls and strikes every single time. We have been able to for 15 years or so now. But here we are, still dealing with missed calls, even if they only happen 5 times a game, they matter.

Nothing wrong with wanting to get the call right.


However, after awhile, wouldn't that also make things kind of boring? Blown calls lead to people talking, which leads to publicity.

bucksfan2
05-16-2012, 03:49 PM
I am still trying to figure out what any of that has to do with if the ball crossed the plate in the strikezone. Nothing the catcher does changes whether the ball crossed the plate between the hallow of the knee and whatever the top of the zone is actually defined as.

Major League umpires are often fooled by how a guy catches the ball too. As you know, since we have discussed it before. But it shouldn't be that way at all.

Doug have you ever umpired a game?

dougdirt
05-16-2012, 03:52 PM
Nothing wrong with wanting to get the call right.


However, after awhile, wouldn't that also make things kind of boring? Blown calls lead to people talking, which leads to publicity.

Bad publicity isn't always good. Blown calls suck.

_Sir_Charles_
05-16-2012, 03:52 PM
But they shouldn't have to be. We can accurately call balls and strikes every single time. We have been able to for 15 years or so now. But here we are, still dealing with missed calls, even if they only happen 5 times a game, they matter.

So what's the solution? Computerized ball/strike calling? I can't recall the name of it (queztec or something). Is that system actually in place...ANYWHERE?

Look, I get frustrated just like everybody else about bad calls, but I just don't think the game would look, feel or sound right if we took umps out of the equation. If we're going to go by the numbers, we might as well just hang 'em up and play strat-o-matic. It's a human game and I'd prefer we leave the human element IN the game. Errors, egos, frustrations and all.

dougdirt
05-16-2012, 03:55 PM
So what's the solution? Computerized ball/strike calling? I can't recall the name of it (queztec or something). Is that system actually in place...ANYWHERE?

Look, I get frustrated just like everybody else about bad calls, but I just don't think the game would look, feel or sound right if we took umps out of the equation. If we're going to go by the numbers, we might as well just hang 'em up and play strat-o-matic. It's a human game and I'd prefer we leave the human element IN the game. Errors, egos, frustrations and all.

Questec and Pitch F/X are covering all of the stadiums.

The human element in the game is the players. They still have to play. They have to throw, catch, hit, walk, run and all of that jazz. The human element should be left to them, not the guys enforcing the rules both correctly and incorrectly.

The umps can still be there and make the calls. But in particular, the strikezone, should be called by the 'computers' that can get it right every time.

_Sir_Charles_
05-16-2012, 04:02 PM
Questec and Pitch F/X are covering all of the stadiums.

The human element in the game is the players. They still have to play. They have to throw, catch, hit, walk, run and all of that jazz. The human element should be left to them, not the guys enforcing the rules both correctly and incorrectly.

The umps can still be there and make the calls. But in particular, the strikezone, should be called by the 'computers' that can get it right every time.

That's not what I mean. I mean are those computerized systems being used to actually call ball/strikes anywhere. I know they're being used for tracking and for evaluating the umps and such. But are they being used in actual games anywhere?

And if they were, how would that work? The ump wears a head set and relays what the computer tells him? Or he just stands there and waits for a play at the plate to occur while the scoreboard updates the ball/strike count? I want accuracy just as much as the next guy, but I simply can't put my head around the feasibility of this actually working.

CySeymour
05-16-2012, 04:02 PM
But in particular, the strikezone, should be called by the 'computers' that can get it right every time.

Are you sure?

GoReds
05-16-2012, 04:08 PM
So what's the solution? Computerized ball/strike calling?

I'd be happy with a system that periodically grades umpires throughout the year and rewards penalizes them accordingly.

I have to believe that calls and teamwork would improve dramatically if the umpires knew that their actions were subject to review and potential disciplinary measures.

If players are held accountable, it only makes sense that umpires are held accountable as well. Neither was without fault in this instance.

mdccclxix
05-16-2012, 04:14 PM
Are you sure?

It's a good question, I've seen some pretty bad computer results, even recently. I can just see half way through the game the crowd is going nuts as the strike zone is consistently terrible. "Okay now, reset the caliper, okay now flip the magic doohicky, okay play ball! (i'm going to read a magazine)"

dougdirt
05-16-2012, 04:16 PM
That's not what I mean. I mean are those computerized systems being used to actually call ball/strikes anywhere. I know they're being used for tracking and for evaluating the umps and such. But are they being used in actual games anywhere?

And if they were, how would that work? The ump wears a head set and relays what the computer tells him? Or he just stands there and waits for a play at the plate to occur while the scoreboard updates the ball/strike count? I want accuracy just as much as the next guy, but I simply can't put my head around the feasibility of this actually working.

What do you mean are they being used in actual games anywhere? Gameday uses them every day, with a strikezone showing on the website for each batter that is defined by the rulebook.

Now, there are corrections that occasionally need to be made to the camera system. But, it is something that can be done rather easily and checked before each game to make sure it is right.

I would back a headset that tells him the call. Just like I would back an umpire in a booth, like college football, who can buzz the field ump when he wants to review a play that he thinks they have gotten wrong on the bases or a foul or a home run.

dougdirt
05-16-2012, 04:16 PM
Are you sure?

Yes. I am 100% sure.

_Sir_Charles_
05-16-2012, 04:30 PM
What do you mean are they being used in actual games anywhere? Gameday uses them every day, with a strikezone showing on the website for each batter that is defined by the rulebook.

I mean is there anywhere, at any level, where the results of those computerized readings are being USED in the game? Overseas, high school, whatever. Where the calls are being done by the computer and NOT by the ump. I know the systems are in place, but are they being utilized IN THE GAME anywhere?


Now, there are corrections that occasionally need to be made to the camera system. But, it is something that can be done rather easily and checked before each game to make sure it is right.

I would back a headset that tells him the call. Just like I would back an umpire in a booth, like college football, who can buzz the field ump when he wants to review a play that he thinks they have gotten wrong on the bases or a foul or a home run.

I would be 100% against that plan. I can deal with reviews and such to get plays fixed. But I just can't see a headset-relay system working in a timely manner to get ball/strikes efficiently. Everybody's wanting to speed up the game, this would slow it down quite a bit IMO.

CySeymour
05-16-2012, 04:30 PM
It's a good question, I've seen some pretty bad computer results, even recently. I can just see half way through the game the crowd is going nuts as the strike zone is consistently terrible. "Okay now, reset the caliper, okay now flip the magic doohicky, okay play ball! (i'm going to read a magazine)"

Exactly. My point is not to assume the computers are always right. They are build by humans, after all.

757690
05-16-2012, 04:35 PM
Exactly. My point is not to assume the computers are always right. They are build by humans, after all.

Perfection doesn't have to be the goal. Just improvement.

757690
05-16-2012, 04:43 PM
That's not what I mean. I mean are those computerized systems being used to actually call ball/strikes anywhere. I know they're being used for tracking and for evaluating the umps and such. But are they being used in actual games anywhere?

And if they were, how would that work? The ump wears a head set and relays what the computer tells him? Or he just stands there and waits for a play at the plate to occur while the scoreboard updates the ball/strike count? I want accuracy just as much as the next guy, but I simply can't put my head around the feasibility of this actually working.

First, it doesn't need to be a headset. A buzzer that the ump can hold, or put in his pocket will work fine. It buzzes, it's a strike. In terms of speed, think of how fast Google works. Before I can finish typing a word, it's giving me options. we're talking nano seconds.

Second, I would just have the computer let the ump know if it crossed over the plate or not. Then the ump can decided if it was in that hitter's strike zone in terms of height. If that's all he has to focus on, the ump's job will be much easier, and he will be much more accurate. And you still have a human element for those who want that.

_Sir_Charles_
05-16-2012, 04:44 PM
First, it doesn't need to be a headset. A buzzer that the ump can hold, or put in his pocket will work fine. It buzzes, it's a strike. In terms of speed, think of how fast Google works. Before I can finish typing a word, it's giving me options. we're talking nano seconds.

Second, I would just have the computer let the ump know if it crossed over the plate or not. Then the ump can decided if it was in that hitter's strike zone in terms of height. If that's all he has to focus on, the ump's job will be much easier, and he will be much more accurate. And you still have a human element for those who want that.

Much closer to acceptable. I still want the ump to have the final say. If we utilize it as a tool the ump can use to assist him, fine. If we use it as a way to phase out umps...big "no".

Big Klu
05-16-2012, 05:11 PM
Your umpiring crew for tonight's game:

Home plate:
http://www.goodietwosleeves.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/hal.jpg



First base:
http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/images/8/2010/01/uls_rnb5wm4.jpg



Second base:
http://starwarstheoldrepublic.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/R2-D2-star-wars.jpg



Third base:
http://www.ecouterre.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/robocop-537x402.jpg

Crumbley
05-16-2012, 05:13 PM
^^ Ha!

_Sir_Charles_
05-16-2012, 05:21 PM
Nice Klu. :O)

Big Klu
05-16-2012, 05:27 PM
Don't argue fair/foul calls--the 1B and 3B umpires are packing!

Reds1
05-16-2012, 05:33 PM
I love Lawrie's intensity. I wish the Reds had drafted him in 2008.

The umpire should be suspended too for being that awful. Neither of those pitches were anywhere near the strikezone. He cost the Blue Jays a baserunner in a one run ballgame in the 9th inning. Umpiring has been awful this season.

I totally agree that ump should be suspended. They won't do that. His helmet just bounced the wrong way, but he was cool the 1st time. Twice in one game - like someone else said - love the intensity. EAch game means something. I hope it doesn't cost him too much.

AtomicDumpling
05-16-2012, 05:41 PM
This has been going on forever so good luck trying to get the ump fired.

Lets stop and think about this. If we allow the batters to run on every single 2 strike pitch they do not swing at do you realize what a mockery the game would become? Batters are routinely taught to look down and see if the 3rd strike was caught or not to see if they can advance to first base, so if we are going to turn a blind eye to a batter trying to deceive an umpire into thinking a pitch was a ball then you will see team deliberately teaching batters to run to first base on any strike 2 pitch reasonably close to the zone.

Instead here is a better idea. Lets have the batter pause a second or two and let the umpire make the call instead of intentionally trying to deceive him. I know the batter will be a second or two later getting to first base but the reality is the game will be run and called alot smoother.

The umpire does not have the right to intentionally make a bad call because he doesn't like a player's actions.

Lawrie was not trying to deceive the umpire. He was merely taking the base that he had clearly earned. The umpire either let his ego get in the way and intentionally made a terrible call, or he just flat-out blew the call. Either way the umpire embarrassed himself in front of millions of baseball fans that have seen the play on TV. Then he intentionally made a bad call on the next pitch too so he could show up Lawrie. It was an extremely shameful display by an overemotional umpire. I think the umpire should be fired.

This umpire intentionally altered the outcome of a major league baseball game in an unfair way. An umpire intentionally abusing his power because his ego got bruised is unacceptable to me as a sports fan. We need umpires that make the right calls even when their ego gets bruised. Too many umpires abuse the power that is entrusted to them. Just bring up another umpire from the minors and get rid of those that abuse their power.

bucksfan2
05-16-2012, 05:43 PM
I totally agree that ump should be suspended. They won't do that. His helmet just bounced the wrong way, but he was cool the 1st time. Twice in one game - like someone else said - love the intensity. EAch game means something. I hope it doesn't cost him too much.

See I don't think much should happen to the ump. The calls were bad, but they weren't awful. Both were pitches that were boarderline at best but had some late action back over the plate. I think when Lawrie prematurly ran to first base on the first boarderline pitch he lost the benefit of the doubt on the second pitch. It probably shouldn't be that way but it has been that way in baseball for a century or more.

In every sport you are taught at an early age not to show up the umpires. Once you do that you lose the benefit of the doubt in most situations. There are very few umps who can 100% separate emotions from the game.

As for the suspension Lawrie sould get hammered. He may not have meant to hit the ump with his helmet but he did.

jojo
05-16-2012, 05:48 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120515&content_id=31385244&vkey=news_tor&c_id=tor

Terrible calls, terrible reaction by Lawrie and the fan. But if Miller would do his job a bit better it wouldn't have happened.

Lawrie should get 3 games for inadvertently hitting the ump and Miller should get 5 for incompetence.

mdccclxix
05-16-2012, 05:53 PM
I think it looks totally clear he threw the helmet in the umps direction. There was intent there to intimidate.

The 2nd strike was a missed call, not anything malicious by the ump, especially considering the ump gave him a ball on a borderline pitch prior in the at bat.

As for strike 3, it was on the computer's line. Nasty pitch. Sure he's going to ring him up a little stronger after the guy ran half way to first base the pitch before. Umps are like that. If there were a review process to reign them in, fine. But to me it's just the way the game is. The only one out of line was Lawrie, and he was waaayyy out of line.

Orenda
05-16-2012, 06:05 PM
The umpire does not have the right to intentionally make a bad call because he doesn't like a player's actions.

Lawrie was not trying to deceive the umpire. He was merely taking the base that he had clearly earned. The umpire either let his ego get in the way and intentionally made a terrible call, or he just flat-out blew the call. Either way the umpire embarrassed himself in front of millions of baseball fans that have seen the play on TV. Then he intentionally made a bad call on the next pitch too so he could show up Lawrie. It was an extremely shameful display by an overemotional umpire. I think the umpire should be fired.

This umpire intentionally altered the outcome of a major league baseball game in an unfair way. An umpire intentionally abusing his power because his ego got bruised is unacceptable to me as a sports fan. We need umpires that make the right calls even when their ego gets bruised. Too many umpires abuse the power that is entrusted to them. Just bring up another umpire from the minors and get rid of those that abuse their power.

meet the new boss, same as the old boss

Reds Fanatic
05-16-2012, 06:32 PM
It is a 4 game suspension though he is appealing it.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7938830/toronto-blue-jays-brett-lawrie-suspended-four-games-plans-appeal

OnBaseMachine
05-16-2012, 06:40 PM
It is a 4 game suspension though he is appealing it.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7938830/toronto-blue-jays-brett-lawrie-suspended-four-games-plans-appeal

Glad to see the suspension wasn't outrageous.

And with that comes this hilarious tweet from Old Hoss Radbourn.

If four games is the going rate for throwing a helmet at an ump then allow me to suggest the 12-game/spear to the chest suspension.

https://twitter.com/#!/OldHossRadbourn

Tony Cloninger
05-16-2012, 09:56 PM
Exactly, really it isn't so much trying to show the umpire up it is just the fact that the batter dropping his bat and running to 1B before a call is made can somewhat affect the umpires decision. The batter is trying to convince the umpire that there is no question it is a ball so there is no point in waiting for the call. Had the batter simply paused a second or two then this incident would not have occured.

That was a clear Ball......and a lot of hitters would have done the same thing.
Umpires like this have no business calling balls and strikes if they are that bad at it.
Not an excuse to lose it like Lawrie did.....but B & S calls are very important to the game and there are some bad ones out there....at it.

Tony Cloninger
05-16-2012, 10:03 PM
Questec and Pitch F/X are covering all of the stadiums.

The human element in the game is the players. They still have to play. They have to throw, catch, hit, walk, run and all of that jazz. The human element should be left to them, not the guys enforcing the rules both correctly and incorrectly.

The umps can still be there and make the calls. But in particular, the strikezone, should be called by the 'computers' that can get it right every time.

100% agree and have been saying this for several years.

Caveman Techie
05-16-2012, 10:07 PM
Sorry George, but the strike two call was not the batter trying to decieve the umpire, that was a ball by 4 inches. The argument could be made about the strike 3 call, but I haven't seen that high of a strike zone in the majors.....well ever.

This umpire blew the call and then he made the player pay the price for it.

Roy Tucker
05-16-2012, 10:11 PM
I think there is a lot of blame to pass around.

The strike 2 call wasn't a very good call, but these things happen. For Lawrie to take off to first was a natural reaction. Happens all the time. If this was all it was, then things would have been fine. The batter mutters "sorry ump" and that's that.

But, after watching the replay, the ump put a little too much mustard on his strike 3 call. I do think he was trying to punish the batter for showing him up. JMO, but that doesn't belong at the MLB level.

And then Lawrie was totally out of line for what he did no matter what the call. Maybe a few sharp words on your way to the dugout, but let it go. The helmet throwing was way out of line and suspension-worthy.

jojo
05-16-2012, 10:14 PM
I think there is a lot of blame to pass around.

The strike 2 call wasn't a very good call, but these things happen. For Lawrie to take off to first was a natural reaction. Happens all the time. If this was all it was, then things would have been fine. The batter mutters "sorry ump" and that's that.

But, after watching the replay, the ump put a little too much mustard on his strike 3 call. I do think he was trying to punish the batter for showing him up. JMO, but that doesn't belong at the MLB level.

And then Lawrie was totally out of line for what he did no matter what the call. Maybe a few sharp words on your way to the dugout, but let it go. The helmet throwing was way out of line and suspension-worthy.

Clearly Lawrie lost it and thus lost the moral authority. But that was very bad umping.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:22 PM
Sorry George, but the strike two call was not the batter trying to decieve the umpire, that was a ball by 4 inches. The argument could be made about the strike 3 call, but I haven't seen that high of a strike zone in the majors.....well ever.

This umpire blew the call and then he made the player pay the price for it.




The umpire is sending the message not to run to first base till the call is made. As long as the pitch isnt in the dirt or way out of the strikezone the ump is going to ring it up to send a message to him and the other hitters not to pull the Bush League silliness of trying to deceive the ump..

Roy Tucker
05-16-2012, 10:24 PM
Clearly Lawrie lost it and thus lost the moral authority. But that was very bad umping.

I agree. If there was such a thing as a letter of reprimand, then the ump would have deserved one. A poorly handled situation.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:26 PM
I still don't understand why how or where a catcher receives the ball comes into play. The strikezone isn't two feet behind home plate.

It has to do with tracking the pitch from the pitchers hand to the catchers mitt. If the catchers mitt is moving or not in clear view so the ump can see it is hard to track the pitch. I know many people think the umpire should only follow the ball to the plate and ignore anything that happens after that but that just doesn't work.

jojo
05-16-2012, 10:27 PM
The umpire is sending the message not to run to first base till the call is made. As long as the pitch isnt in the dirt or way out of the strikezone the ump is going to ring it up to send a message to him and the other hitters not to pull the Bush League silliness of trying to deceive the ump..

It's not really that uncommon especially when the call is so blatantly obvious. A reasonable person can disagree that the behavior was bush legue or meant to show up the ump. I dont think there is a case for that pitch being reasonably called a strike. Frankly that call should not be missed by a quality ump.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:31 PM
Clearly Lawrie lost it and thus lost the moral authority. But that was very bad umping.

Do you think the next time Miller calls a game the players will be running to first base before ball four is called? The obvious answer is no, so I have a hard time seeing how anyone would call that bad umpiring.

Johnny Footstool
05-16-2012, 10:32 PM
Do you think the next time Miller calls a game the players will be running to first base before ball four is called? The obvious answer is no, so I have a hard time seeing how anyone would call that bad umpiring.

Is it his job to make sure players don't run to first before a ball is called? No. It's his job to call each pitch correctly.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:36 PM
It's not really that uncommon especially when the call is so blatantly obvious. A reasonable person can disagree that the behavior was bush legue or meant to show up the ump. I dont think there is a case for that pitch being reasonably called a strike. Frankly that call should not be missed by a quality ump.

I have never heard in this instance where it would be considered showing up the umpire. In my experiences teams use it to try to deceive the umpire into thinking a borderline pitch was an obvious ball. Trust me, if the pitch is borderline and in a split second I am not sure what to call, a runner already 2-3 steps down the line can affect what I will call. Yes, the umpire wants to make the right call but it is easy to just let the runner go as opposed to calling him back to bat and focusing attention and grief on myself.

jojo
05-16-2012, 10:37 PM
Do you think the next time Miller calls a game the players will be running to first base before ball four is called? The obvious answer is no, so I have a hard time seeing how anyone would call that bad umpiring.

It's bad umping because he blew calls. He wasnt good at his job. Umps who think the job is more than being anonymous and impartially calling the game as accurately as humanly possible are bad umpires.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:40 PM
Is it his job to make sure players don't run to first before a ball is called? No. It's his job to call each pitch correctly.

Yes but a batter running to first base before the call was made can factor in my decision if the pitch should be called or not. Should it affect my decision? Of course not but until you have been in that situation where you have to tell the batter to come back to homeplate and have the focus and grief directed toward you then you will realize alot of times the easy way out is to let him go to first base.

jojo
05-16-2012, 10:42 PM
I have never heard in this instance where it would be considered showing up the umpire. In my experiences teams use it to try to deceive the umpire into thinking a borderline pitch was an obvious ball. Trust me, if the pitch is borderline and in a split second I am not sure what to call, a runner already 2-3 steps down the line can affect what I will call. Yes, the umpire wants to make the right call but it is easy to just let the runner go as opposed to calling him back to bat and focusing attention and grief on myself.

The pitch was borderline in the opposite batters box. It was an embarrassing missed call.

Catchers frame pitches all the time. Why isn't that considered trying to deceive the ump. It's because it's not as big of a display as Lawrie heading to first...

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:47 PM
Umps who think the job is more than being anonymous and impartially calling the game as accurately as humanly possible are bad umpires.

Part of being anonymous and impartial is demanding the players do not attempt to deceive the umpire into thinking a borderline pitch is a ball or strike. Sometimes a point needs to be made to the players that deception will not be tolerated.

I still have not heard an intelligent answer as to what the harm is in expecting the batter to take a second or two to wait for the call before advancing to first base? The best answer I got was "he doesn't have to wait" So what is the harm in expecting the batter to wait for the call other than the batter wants to intentionally deceive the ump?

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 10:58 PM
The pitch was borderline in the opposite batters box. It was an embarrassing missed call.

Catchers frame pitches all the time. Why isn't that considered trying to deceive the ump. It's because it's not as big of a display as Lawrie heading to first...

Framing can also affect a call on the defense in a negative way. Many instances a catcher will try to frame a low pitch for a strike when where the pitch was caught at already was a strike. If the catcher reaches down and obviously pulls the pitch up several inches then I am going to know he likely framed it and is not going to get the call.

Certain kinds of framing isnt always a good thing.

http://baseballtips.com/framing.html

jojo
05-16-2012, 11:07 PM
Umping is hard. That's why we know the names of he guys in blue in the majors- its easy because there aren't many of them to memorize.

But the pitch sequence against Lawrie made umps look bad IMHO.

Team Clark
05-16-2012, 11:44 PM
I still don't understand why how or where a catcher receives the ball comes into play. The strikezone isn't two feet behind home plate.

As a former, long time catcher I can say that where the catcher catches the ball has everything to do with what is called by the umpire. It's the finishing point, momentary pause and reactionary cue for the ump. Should it be that way? Nope. Just is.

jojo
05-16-2012, 11:52 PM
The ump has just a fraction of a millisecond longer than the batter to see a pitch. It's not an easy job. But it is easier than trying to see and hit a pitch.

George Anderson
05-16-2012, 11:53 PM
As a former, long time catcher I can say that where the catcher catches the ball has everything to do with what is called by the umpire. It's the finishing point, momentary pause and reactionary cue for the ump. Should it be that way? Nope. Just is.

:beerme:

I have felt like Mr. Douglas on "Petticoat Junction" for years trying to get this point across to the natives.

Screwball
05-17-2012, 12:03 AM
Part of being anonymous and impartial is demanding the players do not attempt to deceive the umpire into thinking a borderline pitch is a ball or strike.

But it wasn't borderline. At all.


Sometimes a point needs to be made to the players that deception will not be tolerated.

Ok, I guess, but there wasn't any deception. The pitcher threw the pitch well out of the zone, so Lawrie was taking 1st base.


I still have not heard an intelligent answer as to what the harm is in expecting the batter to take a second or two to wait for the call before advancing to first base? The best answer I got was "he doesn't have to wait" So what is the harm in expecting the batter to wait for the call other than the batter wants to intentionally deceive the ump?

What's the harm in calling a ball a ball? Because it may allow future "deceit" on balls thrown in the opposing batter's box? Cool, good umpiring.

I guess I don't understand the double standard here. It's not alright for Lawrie to leave for 1st base early because it may be "deceitful", but it is, apparently, alright for the umpire to intentionally deceive everyone else by knowingly calling a ball a strike. All in the name of sending a message on a pitch that would've missed a two foot wide plate. Got it.

Roy Tucker
05-17-2012, 12:12 AM
So George, I'm curious. Do you think the ump handled all parts of that sequence as he should have?

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 12:31 AM
I guess I don't understand the double standard here. It's not alright for Lawrie to leave for 1st base early because it may be "deceitful", but it is, apparently, alright for the umpire to intentionally deceive everyone else by knowingly calling a ball a strike. All in the name of sending a message on a pitch that would've missed a two foot wide plate. Got it.

The umpire was not being deceitful. He was sending a message to future batters not to do what Lawrie did by leaving the box before the call is made. It may suck for the batter to get screwed on that one pitch however the overall benefit will be that the game will not turn into a circus with batter after batter trying to deceive the ump by sprinting to first base on every ball 3 pitch. Alot of you think it wont happen, but trust me it will. Any advantage a team can get no bigger how big or small, they will take.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 12:40 AM
So George, I'm curious. Do you think the ump handled all parts of that sequence as he should have?

I cant speak for MLB umpires because the relationship between players, coaches and umpires is very different than the amateur level I do. If this instance happened to me at the amateur level, I may let the first kid go to first base on a borderline pitch or I may call him back and tell him to stay in the box till the pitch is called. I may tell the coach in between innings to have his players stay in the box till the pitch is called. However if the problem still isn't fixed after I did all these proactive things then I would have no problem at all doing what Miller did. I gaurantee the problem will be fixed real quick.

jojo
05-17-2012, 12:42 AM
If an umpire purposely blows a call, the sanctity of the game is harmed greatly. I'd think it would be grounds for being fired.

Patrick Bateman
05-17-2012, 12:46 AM
The umpire was not being deceitful. He was sending a message to future batters not to do what Lawrie did by leaving the box before the call is made. It may suck for the batter to get screwed on that one pitch however the overall benefit will be that the game will not turn into a circus with batter after batter trying to deceive the ump by sprinting to first base on every ball 3 pitch. Alot of you think it wont happen, but trust me it will. Any advantage a team can get no bigger how big or small, they will take.

C'mon man, this is coming off too far as being umpire apologist. There is no way the umpire in that situation is going to make an example of Lawrie for such an obvious ball. Guys do this all of the time, and I have never seen the ump call the batter back with a strike for that reason alone. Usually when that happens it is very borderline and the batter was wrong to jump immediately.

In this case, I have no problem with Lawrie making the jump to first so soon. I mean, it's human instinct to do so when it's so obvious. The ump got the call wrong... plane and simple, I don't buy for a second here there was extenuating motives. The only circus in town was that Lawrie had a better handle on the strikezone than the guy sitting directly behind it.

Johnny Footstool
05-17-2012, 12:53 AM
The umpire was not being deceitful. He was sending a message to future batters not to do what Lawrie did by leaving the box before the call is made. It may suck for the batter to get screwed on that one pitch however the overall benefit will be that the game will not turn into a circus with batter after batter trying to deceive the ump by sprinting to first base on every ball 3 pitch. Alot of you think it wont happen, but trust me it will. Any advantage a team can get no bigger how big or small, they will take.

The umpire should "send a message" within the context of the rules. Warn the batter. Call the managers out and tell them that unless their players show some respect, he'll start calling the game by the book -- forcing batters to actually keep both feet inside the batter's box while batting, not granting the batter a timeout the next time he steps out of the box, all that other stuff that is at the umpire's discretion, but gets ignored.

What the umpire shouldn't do is ignore the rules just to send a message. The ump isn't bigger than the game.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 12:53 AM
If an umpire purposely blows a call, the sanctity of the game is harmed greatly. I'd think it would be grounds for being fired.

If a player purposely tries to deceive an umpire, the sanctity of the game is harmed greatly. I'd think it would be grounds for being fired

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 12:55 AM
The umpire should "send a message" within the context of the rules. Warn the batter. Call the managers out and tell them that unless their players show some respect, he'll start calling the game by the book -- forcing batters to actually keep both feet inside the batter's box while batting, not granting the batter a timeout the next time he steps out of the box, all that other stuff that is at the umpire's discretion, but gets ignored.

What the umpire shouldn't do is ignore the rules just to send a message. The ump isn't bigger than the game.

Earlier in the thread I suggested a rule that the batter must have both feet in the box till the call is made.

Screwball
05-17-2012, 12:57 AM
The umpire was not being deceitful.


Sure he was.

Deceit:

1. The action or practice of deceiving someone by concealing or misrepresenting the truth.

2. A dishonest act or statement.

He may have had good reasons for it (and even that's debatable), but the umpire was certainly being deceitful if, as you contend, he intentionally called a strike a ball.


He was sending a message to future batters not to do what Lawrie did by leaving the box before the call is made. It may suck for the batter to get screwed on that one pitch however the overall benefit will be that the game will not turn into a circus with batter after batter trying to deceive the ump by sprinting to first base on every ball 3 pitch. Alot of you think it wont happen, but trust me it will. Any advantage a team can get no bigger how big or small, they will take.

The intent behind the blatant miscall may have been noble, but the onus is on the ump to find a way to prevent any such nonsense by the players within the established rules of the game. Making up their own rules in order to send messages should be considered unacceptable. Umpires have an enormous amount of power that, if misused, has the potential to ruin the game.

Besides, these are professionals at the highest level -- they should act like it (Lawrie included).

jojo
05-17-2012, 12:58 AM
If a player purposely tries to deceive an umpire, the sanctity of the game is harmed greatly. I'd think it would be grounds for being fired

Then every catcher in the game should be fired. BTW Lawrie didnt purposely try to deceive the umpire.

TheNext44
05-17-2012, 01:03 AM
If a player purposely tries to deceive an umpire, the sanctity of the game is harmed greatly. I'd think it would be grounds for being fired

A player's job is to win baseball games. An umpires job is to uphold the sanctity of the game and make sure it's played by and according to the rules.

If a player is deceitful, he should be punished according to the rules of the game (balk called, called out for interference, etc), if an umpire is deceitful, he no longer is an umpire.

dougdirt
05-17-2012, 01:09 AM
It has to do with tracking the pitch from the pitchers hand to the catchers mitt. If the catchers mitt is moving or not in clear view so the ump can see it is hard to track the pitch. I know many people think the umpire should only follow the ball to the plate and ignore anything that happens after that but that just doesn't work.

I get that you are an umpire, but you couldn't be more wrong here. The catchers mitt isn't crossing home plate or the catcher would last two swings, tops, before his hand was broken. Don't look at where the catcher caught the ball. Look at where it crossed home plate. That is where the strikezone begins and ends. Not 5 feet in front of the plate. Not 2 feet behind it. At home plate.

dougdirt
05-17-2012, 01:11 AM
As a former, long time catcher I can say that where the catcher catches the ball has everything to do with what is called by the umpire. It's the finishing point, momentary pause and reactionary cue for the ump. Should it be that way? Nope. Just is.

While I agree with what you are saying, my point was that it shouldn't be that way at all. Unfortunately, it is. And the fact that it doesn't have to be, but still is, is very dumb.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 01:12 AM
Sure he was.

Deceit:

1. The action or practice of deceiving someone by concealing or misrepresenting the truth.

2. A dishonest act or statement.

He may have had good reasons for it (and even that's debatable), but the umpire was certainly being deceitful if, as you contend, he intentionally called a strike a ball.



The intent behind the blatant miscall may have been noble, but the onus is on the ump to find a way to prevent any such nonsense by the players within the established rules of the game. Making up their own rules in order to send messages should be considered unacceptable. Umpires have an enormous amount of power that, if misused, has the potential to ruin the game.

Besides, these are professionals at the highest level -- they should act like it (Lawrie included).

As stated earlier, MLB needs a rule where the runner must be in the box till the call is made. I know my idea of the batter voluntarily giving the umpire a whole 2 seconds to make the call is so radical and so extreme we can't possibly consider it. So instead I would support MLB making a rule where the batter can't leave the box till the call is made.

Problem solved.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 01:17 AM
Then every catcher in the game should be fired. BTW Lawrie didnt purposely try to deceive the umpire.

I was being sarcastic in suggesting players should be fired for deception.

You may be right that Lawrie didn't purposely try to deceive the ump, or you may not be right, no one knows but him. Regardless if the ump lets him run before the pitch is called then trust me the this situation will get abused real quick by Tony LaGenius type managers.

dougdirt
05-17-2012, 01:19 AM
I was being sarcastic in suggesting players should be fired for deception.

You may be right that Lawrie didn't purposely try to deceive the ump, or you may not be right, no one knows but him. Regardless if the ump lets him run before the pitch is called then trust me the this situation will get abused real quick by Tony LaGenius type managers.
Only a poor ump is going to be deceived by a player going towards first base. Why is the umpire even there if he is going to let the batter tell him the strikezone? That is the part I still don't get. Who cares if he tries to deceive you? Do your job and it doesn't matter if he does cartwheels to first base if it is a strike.

TheNext44
05-17-2012, 01:20 AM
As stated earlier, MLB needs a rule where the runner must be in the box till the call is made. I know my idea of the batter voluntarily giving the umpire a whole 2 seconds to make the call is so radical and so extreme we can't possibly consider it. So instead I would support MLB making a rule where the batter can't leave the box till the call is made.

Problem solved.

There would need to be an exception for swinging strikes on balls in the dirt, and wild pitches in general. Besides that, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 01:28 AM
A player's job is to win baseball games. An umpires job is to uphold the sanctity of the game and make sure it's played by and according to the rules.

If a player is deceitful, he should be punished according to the rules of the game (balk called, called out for interference, etc), if an umpire is deceitful, he no longer is an umpire.

Having players intentionally trying to deceive the umpire makes upholding the sanctity of the game and making sure it is played by the rules a much more difficult task than if they didn't try to deceive.

We can do either of the following:

A) Have MLB make a new rule where the batter cannot leave the box till the call is made.
B) Have teams encourage their batter to stay in the box for a whole 2 seconds till the call is made. (Cruel and vicious idea I know)
C) Let the batter run to first base anytime he wants on a ball 3 pitch because their will be absolutely no repurcussions to this happening 10-20 times a game.

Now which should we do?

Johnny Footstool
05-17-2012, 01:30 AM
Earlier in the thread I suggested a rule that the batter must have both feet in the box till the call is made.

That's fine. Make it a rule, and enforce that rule.

You also suggested that the ump intentionally turn balls into strikes in order to send a message. That's not fine.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 01:40 AM
Only a poor ump is going to be deceived by a player going towards first base. Why is the umpire even there if he is going to let the batter tell him the strikezone? That is the part I still don't get. Who cares if he tries to deceive you? Do your job and it doesn't matter if he does cartwheels to first base if it is a strike.

An umpire is human and things mentioned above can factor in an umpires decision. Should it matter ? Absolutely not but again umpires are human and in a split second where you have to make a decision it makes it difficult to call it a ball when the batter is 3 feet already down the line. Perception when umpiring is very important and whether you believe it or not, the truth is the batter helped give the umpire the perception the pitch was a ball.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 01:44 AM
That's fine. Make it a rule, and enforce that rule.

You also suggested that the ump intentionally turn balls into strikes in order to send a message. That's not fine.

Nor is it ok to have throngs of batters running to first base on every ball 3 pitch before the call is made. Fix that problem then we don't have to worry about the second one.

kaldaniels
05-17-2012, 01:57 AM
Subconsciously it has to get under many a umpires skin if a batter runs to first before the call is made. So if I am a batter I make it a point to show the umpire some respect and wait for the call...it just may help me out in the future, and at what cost?

Not that is not the ideal way we want the system to work, but that's how I would act under the current system. Not going to fight tooth and nail on this with you guys, just how I would do it.

AtomicDumpling
05-17-2012, 02:08 AM
It had absolutely nothing to do with Lawrie trying to deceive the umpire into calling the pitch a ball. It had everything to do with an egotistical umpire making a very poor call and getting upset when the player showed him up for it. Then he took his mistake to another level by abusing his power to bait the player with another intentionally blown call. The umpire humiliated himself in front of millions of people and stained his reputation badly.

I would not trust or respect any umpire who thinks that is OK. I have not seen any good excuses yet. Good umpires are not influenced in any way by the batter, pitcher or catcher. Only bad umpires let emotions influence their calls. Only bad umpires get suckered into changing the strike zone by the framing of the catcher's glove.

Brett Lawrie should have been suspended for at least 10 games for throwing his helmet at the umpire. He is very lucky to have gotten only a 4 game suspension for his tantrum. A player has to realize he is going to get screwed by poor umpiring on a regular basis. You just have to learn to live with it because that is the way it is in baseball from Little League to high school to college to the minors to the majors.

AtomicDumpling
05-17-2012, 02:09 AM
dp

Brutus
05-17-2012, 02:25 AM
Questec and Pitch F/X are covering all of the stadiums.

The human element in the game is the players. They still have to play. They have to throw, catch, hit, walk, run and all of that jazz. The human element should be left to them, not the guys enforcing the rules both correctly and incorrectly.

The umps can still be there and make the calls. But in particular, the strikezone, should be called by the 'computers' that can get it right every time.

For the record, even the people that implement the technology say it's not perfect.

Brutus
05-17-2012, 02:26 AM
The umpire does not have the right to intentionally make a bad call because he doesn't like a player's actions.

Lawrie was not trying to deceive the umpire. He was merely taking the base that he had clearly earned. The umpire either let his ego get in the way and intentionally made a terrible call, or he just flat-out blew the call. Either way the umpire embarrassed himself in front of millions of baseball fans that have seen the play on TV. Then he intentionally made a bad call on the next pitch too so he could show up Lawrie. It was an extremely shameful display by an overemotional umpire. I think the umpire should be fired.

This umpire intentionally altered the outcome of a major league baseball game in an unfair way. An umpire intentionally abusing his power because his ego got bruised is unacceptable to me as a sports fan. We need umpires that make the right calls even when their ego gets bruised. Too many umpires abuse the power that is entrusted to them. Just bring up another umpire from the minors and get rid of those that abuse their power.

Do you have any proof of this?

Brutus
05-17-2012, 02:27 AM
It's not really that uncommon especially when the call is so blatantly obvious. A reasonable person can disagree that the behavior was bush legue or meant to show up the ump. I dont think there is a case for that pitch being reasonably called a strike. Frankly that call should not be missed by a quality ump.

Get back behind the plate against a 95 MPH fastball 3 inches off the plate with no replay and we'll see how quickly you change your tune about "no excuse" when it inevitably happens to you (and it will).

AtomicDumpling
05-17-2012, 02:36 AM
Do you have any proof of this?

The Rule Book.

Brutus
05-17-2012, 03:22 AM
The Rule Book.

How does the rule book prove the umpire made a call to spite a player?

The Operator
05-17-2012, 03:28 AM
C) Let the batter run to first base anytime he wants on a ball 3 pitch because their will be absolutely no repurcussions to this happening 10-20 times a game.Unless each and every one of those 10-20 was a ball and you let them take the base, I'd imagine thew times that you called them back (because you correctly called it a strike, if it was a strike) would be more than enough to keep it from becoming a circus.

George, I think you vastly overestimate the desire of guys to draw a walk. There are many guys out there who would rather swing the bat and get a hit than to try and game an umpire into giving him a walk. Do you think Dusty "I don't want base cloggers!" Baker is gonna have his guys up at the plate concentrating on tricking an ump into giving him a walk? I don't.


Honestly, a lot of of your posts in this thread are swaying me over to the side of wanting a lot more computer involvement (not 100%) in the calling of games. I get that umpires are human, but umpires at the highest level shouldn't be influenced so much by the actions of the pitcher, catcher, batter, etc. If it's that hard to call the game by the book, maybe we need to look at a modified way of doing things.

I love tradition plenty, but not every tradition is good.

mth123
05-17-2012, 04:00 AM
An umpire is human and things mentioned above can factor in an umpires decision. Should it matter ? Absolutely not but again umpires are human and in a split second where you have to make a decision it makes it difficult to call it a ball when the batter is 3 feet already down the line. Perception when umpiring is very important and whether you believe it or not, the truth is the batter helped give the umpire the perception the pitch was a ball.

This sounds like a good argument for taking human umpires out of the equation. I was against that, but the arguments presented in this thread have pushed me over to the idea of using a mechanical system. If the countermeasure to an ump being "showed-up" (silly concept since the umps really aren't part of the show) by a player is to intentionally call strikes on the hitter as "punishment" when the pitch is off the plate, then removing the human umpire, who had his human feelings hurt, from the picture all together seems like the best root cause solution IMO.

Razor Shines
05-17-2012, 04:10 AM
Tiger Woods thinks Lawrie should respect the game and his equipment.

jojo
05-17-2012, 05:56 AM
I was being sarcastic in suggesting players should be fired for deception.

You may be right that Lawrie didn't purposely try to deceive the ump, or you may not be right, no one knows but him. Regardless if the ump lets him run before the pitch is called then trust me the this situation will get abused real quick by Tony LaGenius type managers.

The white elephant in the room is that the only line the pitch painted was the chalk for the opposing batter's box. Was Lawrie trying to deceive the ump into making the obviously correct call?

The ump had one job and he blew it. It doesn't matter if Lawrie froze like a statue for 4 seconds or charged to first like Pete Rose. Arguing that somehow Lawrie brought the obviously incorrect call on himself is just subterfuge. The ump blew that call bigtime. Either he purposely blew it to send a message or he just completely failed at his one job. No one knows but either option points to poor umping. Same scenario with the called third strike only it's bad umping to the second order because it then shows a pattern.

jojo
05-17-2012, 05:59 AM
Having players intentionally trying to deceive the umpire makes upholding the sanctity of the game and making sure it is played by the rules a much more difficult task than if they didn't try to deceive.

We can do either of the following:

A) Have MLB make a new rule where the batter cannot leave the box till the call is made.
B) Have teams encourage their batter to stay in the box for a whole 2 seconds till the call is made. (Cruel and vicious idea I know)
C) Let the batter run to first base anytime he wants on a ball 3 pitch because their will be absolutely no repurcussions to this happening 10-20 times a game.

Now which should we do?

Option four is much better and doesn't require any rule change because in fact the rule book already defines the strikezone-umps can call a ball a ball and a strike a strike regardless of that the catcher or batter does.

jojo
05-17-2012, 06:00 AM
Nor is it ok to have throngs of batters running to first base on every ball 3 pitch before the call is made. Fix that problem then we don't have to worry about the second one.

When did the occasional event turn into a throng?

jojo
05-17-2012, 06:02 AM
Get back behind the plate against a 95 MPH fastball 3 inches off the plate with no replay and we'll see how quickly you change your tune about "no excuse" when it inevitably happens to you (and it will).

Sorry Brutus. No reasonable person can argue the pitch in question was a strike. It wasn't a strike by that much.

membengal
05-17-2012, 07:07 AM
Nor is it ok to have throngs of batters running to first base on every ball 3 pitch before the call is made. Fix that problem then we don't have to worry about the second one.

What in the heck are you talking about? What a bizarre strawman. What are these "throngs of batters" who are running to 1st base on "every ball 3 pitch"?
I have no idea what you are talking about there, and frankly, are now just making stuff up in your continued jihad to always take an umpire's side, no matter how unbelievably wrong the umpire is.

Officious as all get out, as always, when an umpire's fallibility is discussed.

membengal
05-17-2012, 07:10 AM
This sounds like a good argument for taking human umpires out of the equation. I was against that, but the arguments presented in this thread have pushed me over to the idea of using a mechanical system. If the countermeasure to an ump being "showed-up" (silly concept since the umps really aren't part of the show) by a player is to intentionally call strikes on the hitter as "punishment" when the pitch is off the plate, then removing the human umpire, who had his human feelings hurt, from the picture all together seems like the best root cause solution IMO.

Yup. I now have the distinct impression umpires are capricious buttheads who apparently live to show batters up and claim their turf and are justified in doing so.

Bring on technology at that point.

membengal
05-17-2012, 07:11 AM
The white elephant in the room is that the only line the pitch painted was the chalk for the opposing batter's box. Was Lawrie trying to deceive the ump into making the obviously correct call?

The ump had one job and he blew it. It doesn't matter if Lawrie froze like a statue for 4 seconds or charged to first like Pete Rose. Arguing that somehow Lawrie brought the obviously incorrect call on himself is just subterfuge. The ump blew that call bigtime. Either he purposely blew it to send a message or he just completely failed at his one job. No one knows but either option points to poor umping. Same scenario with the called third strike only it's bad umping to the second order because it then shows a pattern.

This.

Caveman Techie
05-17-2012, 07:32 AM
The umpire is sending the message not to run to first base till the call is made. As long as the pitch isnt in the dirt or way out of the strikezone the ump is going to ring it up to send a message to him and the other hitters not to pull the Bush League silliness of trying to deceive the ump..

Then the umpire is wrong and needs to be fired. Show me in the rule book where it states the umpire has the discretion to change the rules of the game.

Brutus
05-17-2012, 09:27 AM
Sorry Brutus. No reasonable person can argue the pitch in question was a strike. It wasn't a strike by that much.

This shows you haven't umpired a baseball game because three inches at 95 MPH is not at all unreasonable to argue. The only unreasonable thing here is to argue how obvious it is when you have benefit of four slow motion replays and technology to play monday morning quarterback after the fact.

mdccclxix
05-17-2012, 09:44 AM
Lukwick took off for first on a borderline pitch last night, anyone see that?

I think the fact that many batters will use this technique when the pitch is close and they do want a free base many have subverted the call against Lawrie.

Sequence:
1) Pitch arrives on outside corner, it's close-ish
2) Batter very promptly heads to first before the call
3) Umps memory reminds him that often these pitches are really strikes, he doesn't want to be wrong or fooled by this "trick".
4) He plays it "safe" and calls it a strike.

Tough luck Lawrie. You still got owned on strike three which was on the line. Then you freaked out to make T-Plush look like a school girl.

jojo
05-17-2012, 09:46 AM
This shows you haven't umpired a baseball game because three inches at 95 MPH is not at all unreasonable to argue. The only unreasonable thing here is to argue how obvious it is when you have benefit of four slow motion replays and technology to play monday morning quarterback after the fact.

Sorry Brutus but that's just not true. You don't have to face Fernando Rodney to have a deep understanding of hitting and to appreciate it is hard and you don't have to ump Fernando Rodney to be able to accurately judge the strikezone. It's obvious in real time that the Miller totally blew the call on the fastball. A major league quality ump simply can't miss that call.

Anyone who would argue that it's reasonable to expect Miller to blow pitch location like that probably hasn't had to develop a batting eye themselves....

jojo
05-17-2012, 09:49 AM
Lets put it another way... assume the outside fastball was thrown on a two strike count. Is there anyone willing to argue that Lawrie should have swung at it?

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 09:54 AM
When did the occasional event turn into a throng?

It is an occasional event now but if there are no ramifications for doing this in the future then yes you will see players routinely try to convince/deceive the umpire that a borderline pitch was a ball. Don't kid yourself and think players and teams do not look for every advantage possible.

jojo
05-17-2012, 09:56 AM
It is an occasional event now but if there are no ramifications for doing this in the future then yes you will see players routinely try to convince/deceive the umpire that a borderline pitch was a ball. Don't kid yourself and think players and teams do not look for every advantage possible.

There is no basis in the rulebook for a ump to arbitrarily change the rules in the way you are suggesting it appropriate.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 09:59 AM
I have no idea what you are talking about there, and frankly, are now just making stuff up in your continued jihad to always take an umpire's side, no matter how unbelievably wrong the umpire is.

.

If you frequent this site with any regularity you will see I am hardly an umpire apologist as you so accuse. Just last week I ripped the umpire in the Dodger game who was out of position on the play at first. My views on umpires like CB Bucknor and Hunter Wendlestadt are pretty harsh also.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 10:01 AM
There is no basis in the rulebook for a ump to arbitrarily change the rules in the way you are suggesting it appropriate.

There is nothing in the rule book saying a batter should not stand at home plate and admire his HR but we all know that is not acceptable.

jojo
05-17-2012, 10:02 AM
There is nothing in the rule book saying a batter should not stand at home plate and admire his HR but we all know that is not acceptable.

Is it appropriate for the umpire to redefine the strikezone to teach him a lesson?

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 10:07 AM
Is it appropriate for the umpire to redefine the strikezone to teach him a lesson?

The umpire can certainly be swayed to call a borderline pitch or a not so borderline pitch a certain way so as to stop a certain behavior such as what Lawrie did that could affect the outcome of a game.

membengal
05-17-2012, 10:10 AM
If you frequent this site with any regularity you will see I am hardly an umpire apologist as you so accuse. Just last week I ripped the umpire in the Dodger game who was out of position on the play at first. My views on umpires like CB Bucknor and Hunter Wendlestadt are pretty harsh also.

I've been on the site for years, and pretty consistently you take hard-line inflexible umpire-can-do-no-wrong positions...and this is yet another example.

That you think it is appropriate to make wrong calls to "teach lessons" or whatever you want to term it is among the craziest things I have ever read on here. Bring on quest tec at that point.

membengal
05-17-2012, 10:11 AM
The umpire can certainly be swayed to call a borderline pitch or a not so borderline pitch a certain way so as to stop a certain behavior such as what Lawrie did that could affect the outcome of a game.

Ques tec it is. Get this kind of attitude away from the game. There is no place for it. The ump is not the show, no matter how much you think he is.

jojo
05-17-2012, 10:13 AM
The umpire can certainly be swayed to call a borderline pitch or a not so borderline pitch a certain way so as to stop a certain behavior such as what Lawrie did that could affect the outcome of a game.

But again, the fastball to Lawrie was not a borderline pitch.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 10:31 AM
Let me clarify a few things.

My old assignor who was a long time Big Ten umpire used to say there are only about 15-20 borderline pitches that you need to call that can decide a game. Now if a pitch comes in and it is a borderline pitch and if I see the batter trying to deceive me by running to first base before I am even making the call then that sends a message to both dugouts that behavior is acceptable. Do not think for a minute most umpires won't and do not not have the guts to call a batter back to the box but the reality is umpires are human and even the very best can be swayed in a situation like the Lawrie one to just let the batter advance and not cause a ruckus by calling him back. So for those 15-20 pitches when in alot of the cases you are flipping a coin on what to call you can very well be swayed by the batter to call the pitch a ball by his actions. Instead on one of those borderline pitches or not so borderline pitches when the batter does what Lawrie did you are going to be more persuaded to call the pitch a strike and send a message for future batters that actions like what Lawrie did are not going to work.

Alot of you are acting like I am dropping my pants and dumping on the Holy Grail of baseball but I am simply telling you from 15 years experience of what works and what doesn't work. I remember when I first started umpiring and was told by the veterans how to handle situations like above my reactions were similar to yours. However after 15 plus years I can tell you with certainty it may not always seem fair or right but in the long run it gets the game to be called the most fair and square.

Years ago I started chiming in and advising people on this board how to have their catchers catch the ball because it was important when trying to get a strike call. Evenj though I was doing it to be a nice guy and to be helpful,people on this board like most fans went nuts because to them how a catcher catches the ball should have no bearing on what the umpire calls. However any quality umpire will tell you that how the catcher catches the ball has a very big impact on what the umpire calls. Like it or not that is the way it is.

I used to always hate this phrase "walk a mile in my shoes" because it is very touchy feely but it very much holds true here. If you haven't strapped on the gear, been trained by some of the very best to call a baseball game then with all due respect you really don't know what you are talking about. I am not trying to be rude or confrontational but that is just the way it is.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 10:37 AM
I've been on the site for years, and pretty consistently you take hard-line inflexible umpire-can-do-no-wrong positions...and this is yet another example.

.

Less than 2 weeks ago.


That was embarrasing.

The HP umpire is running up the line to look for a potential pulled foot so why Welke and the HP ump didn't get together and get the call right is beyond me.

I just watched it again and Welke is way out of position, had he been 10' off the baseline instead of 15' plus he would have had a better angle to see the foot on the bag. Instead he was looking straight at the first baseman making the catch as opposed to an angle where he can see the play better.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95237&highlight=welke

Plus Plus
05-17-2012, 10:37 AM
Let me clarify a few things.

My old assignor who was a long time Big Ten umpire used to say there are only about 15-20 borderline pitches that you need to call that can decide a game. Now if a pitch comes in and it is a borderline pitch and if I see the batter trying to deceive me by running to first base before I am even making the call then that sends a message to both dugouts that behavior is acceptable. Do not think for a minute most umpires won't and do not not have the guts to call a batter back to the box but the reality is umpires are human and even the very best can be swayed in a situation like the Lawrie one to just let the batter advance and not cause a ruckus by calling him back. So for those 15-20 pitches when in alot of the cases you are flipping a coin on what to call you can very well be swayed by the batter to call the pitch a ball by his actions. Instead on one of those borderline pitches or not so borderline pitches when the batter does what Lawrie did you are going to be more persuaded to call the pitch a strike and send a message for future batters that actions like what Lawrie did are not going to work.

Alot of you are acting like I am dropping my pants and dumping on the Holy Grail of baseball but I am simply telling you from 15 years experience of what works and what doesn't work. I remember when I first started umpiring and was told by the veterans how to handle situations like above my reactions were similar to yours. However after 15 plus years I can tell you with certainty it may not always seem fair or right but in the long run it gets the game to be called the most fair and square.

Years ago I started chiming in and advising people on this board how to have their catchers catch the ball because it was important when trying to get a strike call. Evenj though I was doing it to be a nice guy and to be helpful,people on this board like most fans went nuts because to them how a catcher catches the ball should have no bearing on what the umpire calls. However any quality umpire will tell you that how the catcher catches the ball has a very big impact on what the umpire calls. Like it or not that is the way it is.

I used to always hate this phrase "walk a mile in my shoes" because it is very touchy feely but it very much holds true here. If you haven't strapped on the gear, been trained by some of the very best to call a baseball game then with all due respect you really don't know what you are talking about. I am not trying to be rude or confrontational but that is just the way it is.

I agree with and appreciate everything you say here.

However, the pitch was not borderline in this instance. It was a clear ball.

westofyou
05-17-2012, 10:46 AM
Well I for one appreciate your POV George, umpiring, like the game looks easy

But we know that's a crock of..

membengal
05-17-2012, 10:48 AM
Less than 2 weeks ago.


That was embarrasing.

The HP umpire is running up the line to look for a potential pulled foot so why Welke and the HP ump didn't get together and get the call right is beyond me.

I just watched it again and Welke is way out of position, had he been 10' off the baseline instead of 15' plus he would have had a better angle to see the foot on the bag. Instead he was looking straight at the first baseman making the catch as opposed to an angle where he can see the play better.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95237&highlight=welke

That's one. And then your post above much better captures your views on whenever umps are discussed. The default is the umpire is right, and we can't really get it, because we haven't umped.

In any event, from your point of view Lawrie had it coming, and I find that crap. Such is life.

membengal
05-17-2012, 10:48 AM
Well I for one appreciate your POV George, umpiring, like the game looks easy

But we know that's a crock of..

No, his point of view is, umpiring is hard, no one can question it, and Lawrie had it coming.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 10:49 AM
I agree with and appreciate everything you say here.

However, the pitch was not borderline in this instance. It was a clear ball.

Well then, maybe next time Lawrie will be respectful of the umpire and wait for the call. Apparently he is a slow learner. I agree with George's last post completely. Strike 3 wasn't a bad pitch, but there went Lawrie running down the baseline before the call...I mean, how many years does one have to play baseball before they figure it out? I figured that out in little league...

At a meeting the other night, we watched a video where a veteran catcher (former backup in MLB) showed how to stick a pitch when catching it vs moving the mitt into the strike zone. It was pretty interesting and I have to admit, when the catcher starts moving his mitt after catching the pitch it sometimes makes you think that he is trying to deceive you as an umpire (which he is). If he sticks it and holds it, I have a better chance to see where that ball was and make the "correct" call, which at times may get the pitcher a few more strikes.

Carry on.

Bum

membengal
05-17-2012, 10:58 AM
By the way, I am not sure who on here claimed umping is easy. I am pretty sure no one. So not sure what greater point is being made about that, which folks are now applauding.

The greater point is what an umpire's responsibility is to the game and his profession, in terms of getting a call right. And for it to be "okay" or whatever, and that Lawrie needs to be "taught a lesson" for doing what pretty much any human playing this game has done, when a pitch is an obvious ball 4 and start to head to first, and then be called back and the obvious ball called a strike...to...what...show Lawrie and everyone that the ump is the show? I have a huge problem with that, and always have, and always will. It is indefensible to me.

westofyou
05-17-2012, 11:12 AM
Who needs a "claiming" of a position?

I've can read between the lines and after years if just that I have formed an opinion that supports that position, I respectfully will hold on to it as well

Brutus
05-17-2012, 11:13 AM
Lets put it another way... assume the outside fastball was thrown on a two strike count. Is there anyone willing to argue that Lawrie should have swung at it?

What does that have to do with anything? A strike is a strike. Whether hitters would be advised to swing at borderline pitches is a matter of strategy, not rule.

Brutus
05-17-2012, 11:14 AM
Sorry Brutus but that's just not true. You don't have to face Fernando Rodney to have a deep understanding of hitting and to appreciate it is hard and you don't have to ump Fernando Rodney to be able to accurately judge the strikezone. It's obvious in real time that the Miller totally blew the call on the fastball. A major league quality ump simply can't miss that call.

Anyone who would argue that it's reasonable to expect Miller to blow pitch location like that probably hasn't had to develop a batting eye themselves....

Actually yes you do. Because we're talking less than 3 inches off the plate according to the technology that we have right now. And you cannot appreciate how close three inches is at 95 MPH unless you've seen it up close.

To say it's not "reasonable" to argue otherwise when you've never actually seen it up close is not very prudent.

Patrick Bateman
05-17-2012, 11:16 AM
If batters really can influence the decisions of umpires by moving towards 1st base, then they should do it. No rule in the book that says they can't, and takes advantage of the human element of umpiring. If baseball wanted the correct calls, a robot would be back there. Since there isn't, and the human brain is flawed, no reason for a player not to exploit that. Not the umpire's job to referee that behaviour, as there is no rule against it.

Patrick Bateman
05-17-2012, 11:18 AM
Actually yes you do. Because we're talking less than 3 inches off the plate according to the technology that we have right now. And you cannot appreciate how close three inches is at 95 MPH unless you've seen it up close.

To say it's not "reasonable" to argue otherwise when you've never actually seen it up close is not very prudent.

If umpirining is THAT hard, and it is reasonable for an umpire to miss a call THAT badly, then it's time to go to robotic umpiring.... it's one thing for borderline calls to be missed, but we know in replay that the ump was badly wrong. Whether it is reasonable to say it's a hard job or not, we know that there was a huge, fixable flaw, that was exploited in the Lawrie at-bat.

jojo
05-17-2012, 11:21 AM
What does that have to do with anything? A strike is a strike. Whether hitters would be advised to swing at borderline pitches is a matter of strategy, not rule.

It's a central question that pokes at the heart of this "borderline notion".

Unless someone voices an opinion otherwise, i'll assume no one would've faulted him for taking that pitch. Which is exactly the point.

Sea Ray
05-17-2012, 11:22 AM
This has been going on forever so good luck trying to get the ump fired.

Lets stop and think about this. If we allow the batters to run on every single 2 strike pitch they do not swing at do you realize what a mockery the game would become? Batters are routinely taught to look down and see if the 3rd strike was caught or not to see if they can advance to first base, so if we are going to turn a blind eye to a batter trying to deceive an umpire into thinking a pitch was a ball then you will see team deliberately teaching batters to run to first base on any strike 2 pitch reasonably close to the zone.

Instead here is a better idea. Lets have the batter pause a second or two and let the umpire make the call instead of intentionally trying to deceive him. I know the batter will be a second or two later getting to first base but the reality is the game will be run and called alot smoother.

The batter can do whatever he wants. Trying to get a call is part of any sport. Calling two pitches that far out of the strike zone a strike is "not doing your job". Lawrie will deal with his minimal suspension but I bet he's glad he behaved like he did because it called to attention two horrible calls by Bill Miller. If not for his behavior we never would have heard about it. Now a lot of us fans are going to think of this everytime we see Bill Miller announced as an umpire. This turned out much better for the player than the ump

Sea Ray
05-17-2012, 11:26 AM
Actually yes you do. Because we're talking less than 3 inches off the plate according to the technology that we have right now. And you cannot appreciate how close three inches is at 95 MPH unless you've seen it up close.

To say it's not "reasonable" to argue otherwise when you've never actually seen it up close is not very prudent.

If you're saying missing these two pitches was due to human error on the part of Miller then you are insulting his skills as an ump. It'd be much more kind to him to say of course he knew it was a ball but he wanted to make a statement

Crumbley
05-17-2012, 11:26 AM
If umpirining is THAT hard, and it is reasonable for an umpire to miss a call THAT badly, then it's time to go to robotic umpiring.... it's one thing for borderline calls to be missed, but we know in replay that the ump was badly wrong. Whether it is reasonable to say it's a hard job or not, we know that there was a huge, fixable flaw, that was exploited in the Lawrie at-bat.
People with a gig that could be easily automatized probably shouldn't act like petulant man children because they got their feelings hurt by the people who, you know, actually sell tickets and are the reason the sport exists.

jojo
05-17-2012, 11:29 AM
Actually yes you do. Because we're talking less than 3 inches off the plate according to the technology that we have right now. And you cannot appreciate how close three inches is at 95 MPH unless you've seen it up close.

To say it's not "reasonable" to argue otherwise when you've never actually seen it up close is not very prudent.

I've stated umping is hard twice in this thread (now three times). But that pitch location was not hard. Miller missed a layup and if he can't be reasonably trusted to make those, he shouldn't be asked to shoot the rock.

Sorry but that call was obviously blown and it's one of the more prudent conclusions one can reach. Even you admit it was a wrong call.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 11:32 AM
I've stated umping is hard twice in this thread (now three times). But that pitch location was not hard. Miller missed a layup and if he can't be reasonably trusted to make those, he shouldn't be asked to shoot the rock.

Sorry but that call was obviously blown and it's one of the more prudent conclusions one can reach. Even you admit it was a wrong call.

What makes you think he missed it?

Sea Ray
05-17-2012, 11:35 AM
By the way, I am not sure who on here claimed umping is easy. I am pretty sure no one. So not sure what greater point is being made about that, which folks are now applauding.



Umpiring is the easiest of all the sports to officiate. In the course of a baseball game there are very few close calls and umps should be judged on those calls.

In this particular example, there are plenty of people who are skilled enough to call those pitches balls. If Bill Miller can't see that they were 3" out of the strike zone because it was thrown 95 MPH then he ought to be replaced with someone who can.

It's hard enough to hit major league pitching when it grazes the strikes zone. Do any of us want to watch the game if our hitters get rung up on pitches like that? The integrity of the game is at stake. If an ump gives calls like that then there's no reason to throw Aroldis Chapman out there.

jojo
05-17-2012, 11:38 AM
What makes you think he missed it?

Because it was clear in real time that the fastball would've broke the sunglasses Bonds' kept in his back pocket...

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 12:04 PM
Because it was clear in real time that the fastball would've broke the sunglasses Bonds' kept in his back pocket...

You are suggesting that he didn't know it was a ball. Plus the only way it would have hit Bonds would have been if his fat arse was out of the batters box. There is some level of respect that the players should show the guys that are umpiring the game. I believe Miller knew it was a ball but was communicating to Lawrie that he should show some respect. Why defend this child anyway? He took a pitch at the top of the strikezone and sprinted for first and was surprised when it was called strike 3...then he throws his helmet toward the umpire and whines cause it took a bad hop? Why throw it that direction? What a punk. He needs to grow up and take responsibility for his actions. Meanwhile a bunch of people are on here calling out the umpire...comical.

Bum

Johnny Footstool
05-17-2012, 12:09 PM
You are suggesting that he didn't know it was a ball. Plus the only way it would have hit Bonds would have been if his fat arse was out of the batters box. There is some level of respect that the players should show the guys that are umpiring the game. I believe Miller knew it was a ball but was communicating to Lawrie that he should show some respect. Why defend this child anyway? He took a pitch at the top of the strikezone and sprinted for first and was surprised when it was called strike 3...then he throws his helmet toward the umpire and whines cause it took a bad hop? Why throw it that direction? What a punk. He needs to grow up and take responsibility for his actions. Meanwhile a bunch of people are on here calling out the umpire...comical.

Bum

IMO, Miller was the childish one here. He thought it was more important to make a point than to respect the rules of the game.

Patrick Bateman
05-17-2012, 12:11 PM
You are suggesting that he didn't know it was a ball. Plus the only way it would have hit Bonds would have been if his fat arse was out of the batters box. There is some level of respect that the players should show the guys that are umpiring the game. I believe Miller knew it was a ball but was communicating to Lawrie that he should show some respect. Why defend this child anyway? He took a pitch at the top of the strikezone and sprinted for first and was surprised when it was called strike 3...then he throws his helmet toward the umpire and whines cause it took a bad hop? Why throw it that direction? What a punk. He needs to grow up and take responsibility for his actions. Meanwhile a bunch of people are on here calling out the umpire...comical.

Bum

I don't think there is any question that Lawrie did not behave well in the situation.

But quite frankly, the rules of baseball do not prenalize a player with balls and strikes for their behaviour on the field. That is completely irrelevant to the discusison. He was handled with a 4 game suspension instead.

Caveman Techie
05-17-2012, 12:15 PM
You are suggesting that he didn't know it was a ball. Plus the only way it would have hit Bonds would have been if his fat arse was out of the batters box. There is some level of respect that the players should show the guys that are umpiring the game. I believe Miller knew it was a ball but was communicating to Lawrie that he should show some respect. Why defend this child anyway? He took a pitch at the top of the strikezone and sprinted for first and was surprised when it was called strike 3...then he throws his helmet toward the umpire and whines cause it took a bad hop? Why throw it that direction? What a punk. He needs to grow up and take responsibility for his actions. Meanwhile a bunch of people are on here calling out the umpire...comical.

Bum

Lawrie was wrong for reacting the way he did and almost everyone on here would agree on that. He deserves the suspension, and I'm actually surprised that it wasn't longer than four games. The point of contention is that the umpire was also wrong for calling the first ball 4 a strike, and that is something that a few on here are arguing that it a) was ok, because the ump was sending a message, or b) it was a borderline call so therefore ok for the ump to call a strike.

In answer to a), it is never ok for the ump to change the rules of the game to "send a message". If he didn't like the fact Lawrie didn't wait till he made the call then fine address that after the fact. But do not blow the call so bad that it can affect the outcome of the game. As for b) that first called strike was no where close so again it is not ok for the ump to call it a strike. The only white it crossed was the left handed batters box line. I don't care if it's a 95mph pitch or 195mph that is the easiest call to make in the world. If this umpire is so inept that he can't tell that it was a ball then he should not be umping in the MLB.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 12:27 PM
I don't think there is any question that Lawrie did not behave well in the situation.

But quite frankly, the rules of baseball do not prenalize a player with balls and strikes for their behaviour on the field. That is completely irrelevant to the discusison. He was handled with a 4 game suspension instead.

It's not irrelevant, it's just being ignored in the discussion. 4 game suspension...yeah, that will mature the child.

Who watched the game and saw how Miller was calling balls and strikes the entire game? Anyone? Anyone? If he had called that pitch a strike the entire game and was being consistent with it, then what?

It's amazing how y'all can watch 30 seconds of a game and make a black and white decision from that snippet of information...

Bum

Patrick Bateman
05-17-2012, 12:44 PM
It's not irrelevant, it's just being ignored in the discussion. 4 game suspension...yeah, that will mature the child.

Who watched the game and saw how Miller was calling balls and strikes the entire game? Anyone? Anyone? If he had called that pitch a strike the entire game and was being consistent with it, then what?

It's amazing how y'all can watch 30 seconds of a game and make a black and white decision from that snippet of information...

Bum

It's irrelvanet, because the way the MLB rule system works is that players do not get repremended by given poor in game calls. They are handled outside of the game based on suspension (or tossed out of the game). That has already been handled to the degree that satisfies MLB. There is no rule that suggests a player that is misbehaving is to be given a larger strikezone at the plate. The justifications here are getting completely ridiculous.

There are two arguments that are being made:

1. The ump screwed up twice in a row on blatant calls
2. The ump violated the rules of MLB to make a point.

Neither is acceptable under the guise of the rules of MLB, and the ump should be dealt with in either situation.

Lawrie has nothing to do with that, his situation is a compeltely independent case, and has been appropriately treated as such.

RANDY IN INDY
05-17-2012, 12:46 PM
Well I for one appreciate your POV George, umpiring, like the game looks easy

But we know that's a crock of..

:beerme: Know who you are dealing with George, and take the comments with a grain of salt. Your views on umpiring, coming from the trenches and first hand experience, are far more valuable than an opinion on a message board.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 12:49 PM
It's irrelvanet, because the way the MLB rule system works is that players do not get repremended by given poor in game calls. They are handled outside of the game based on suspension (or tossed out of the game). That has already been handled to the degree that satisfies MLB. There is no rule that suggests a player that is misbehaving is to be given a larger strikezone at the plate. The justifications here are getting completely ridiculous.

There are two arguments that are being made:

1. The ump screwed up twice in a row on blatant calls
2. The ump violated the rules of MLB to make a point.

Neither is acceptable under the guise of the rules of MLB, and the ump should be dealt with in either situation.

Lawrie has nothing to do with that, his situation is a compeltely independent case, and has been appropriately treated as such.

This is your opinion and not necessarily the opinion of MLB. I realize that because you typed it, you assume that these are facts. I also would bet you have never umpired a game and know little to nothing about it other than watching TV and then griping about it.

Carry on.

Bum

Patrick Bateman
05-17-2012, 01:07 PM
This is your opinion and not necessarily the opinion of MLB. I realize that because you typed it, you assume that these are facts. I also would bet you have never umpired a game and know little to nothing about it other than watching TV and then griping about it.

Carry on.

Bum

Is there actually a rule that states that umpires at their discretion may blatantly make inappropriate calls in order to police a player?

That is the only matter of which I presented as a fact. I am completely unaware of any such rule that states that...

It also has nothing to do with actually umpiring a baseball game and has nothing to do with the matter. The only "griping" I am doing is with the opinion that umpires should not be allowed to purposely distort the game. As far as the actual blown calls go, I understand that umpiring is not easy, and mistakes happen, but at the same time, two blatantly missed calls such as these should be investigated by MLB for considerations of quality control. I really don't see how any of that opinion is negated by me (or none of you guys) umpiring an MLB game. Neither have the guys running MLB, yet they seem to be able to be in a position to set rules....

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 01:20 PM
Is there actually a rule that states that umpires at their discretion may blatantly make inappropriate calls in order to police a player?

That is the only matter of which I presented as a fact. I am completely unaware of any such rule that states that...

It also has nothing to do with actually umpiring a baseball game and has nothing to do with the matter. The only "griping" I am doing is with the opinion that umpires should not be allowed to purposely distort the game. As far as the actual blown calls go, I understand that umpiring is not easy, and mistakes happen, but at the same time, two blatantly missed calls such as these should be investigated by MLB for considerations of quality control. I really don't see how any of that opinion is negated by me (or none of you guys) umpiring an MLB game. Neither have the guys running MLB, yet they seem to be able to be in a position to set rules....

Did you watch the entire game? How did he call that pitch the entire game? Did he call it a strike for 9 innings? Nobody on here knows do they? Strike 3 was at the top of the strike zone; why are you complaining about that? A pitch between the waist and the letters is a strike. There is more to a game than watching 30 seconds. Umpires are human and they always will be. However, if he called strike 2 a strike the entire game, then what's the rub? He's being consistent which is what the players want and what MLB wants.

Every umpire has a strike zone that is a little different. The key is to be consistent with it. There isn't one umpire that calls balls and strikes exactly the same as the rule book. Humans, when they are standing in the same spot at the same time watching the same thing all see things differently. The key is being consistent. Neither of us know whether that call was consistent with the prior 8+ innings or not.

Bum

Johnny Footstool
05-17-2012, 01:32 PM
Did you watch the entire game? How did he call that pitch the entire game? Did he call it a strike for 9 innings? Nobody on here knows do they? Strike 3 was at the top of the strike zone; why are you complaining about that? A pitch between the waist and the letters is a strike. There is more to a game than watching 30 seconds. Umpires are human and they always will be. However, if he called strike 2 a strike the entire game, then what's the rub? He's being consistent which is what the players want and what MLB wants.

Every umpire has a strike zone that is a little different. The key is to be consistent with it. There isn't one umpire that calls balls and strikes exactly the same as the rule book. Humans, when they are standing in the same spot at the same time watching the same thing all see things differently. The key is being consistent. Neither of us know whether that call was consistent with the prior 8+ innings or not.

Bum


If Miller had called those pitches strikes consistently throughout the game, would Lawrie have reacted the way he did? Most likely he wouldn't have.

Would the announcers have been so surprised by the call? No. They would have mentioned that Miller had been calling a generous strike zone all night.

jojo
05-17-2012, 01:32 PM
However, if he called strike 2 a strike the entire game, then what's the rub? Bum

You know darn well he didn't.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 01:40 PM
You know darn well he didn't.

How would I know? I never claimed to have watched more than the clip with Lawrie. He probably didn't but neither of us know that do we? Either way, I don't care. Lawrie struck out on a strike and then acted like a fool. Then all he did was make excuses for how he acted. It's an easy concept if one isn't acting like a child: let the umpire umpire, then take your base; don't throw your helmet at the umpire and blame a bad bounce for it hitting the umpire; grow up and be a man; a little respect goes a long way. The umpires deserve respect out there. No, they aren't the game, but they are doing a job that needs to be done and they get very little credit for doing it well. Players showing some respect is easy. It shouldn't be so easy to show one's arse...

Bum

The Operator
05-17-2012, 02:05 PM
There are a lot of really good arguments being made in this thread by the umpire defense team as to why we should go to a much more automated system.

Sorry, no umpire has any business "sending a message" to any player, manager, coach, anyone, for that matter - for any reason. I don't buy tickets to a game to watch Joe West do his thing, I go to watch my favorite team hopefully win a game, and with clowns like that dolling out there own form of in-game justice the outcomes of those games are sullied. Sorry, garbage like that has absolutely no place in organized sports anywhere, much less at the highest level from umpires who are supposedly the cream of the crop. It's complete and utter rubbish.

I don't care if the batter rides a crotch-rocket down to first base after the pitch gets there - if it's a ball, call it a ball. No flipping umpire is bigger than the game. No one comes to watch an ump, period.

Caveman Techie
05-17-2012, 02:07 PM
No, they aren't the game, but they are doing a job that needs to be done
Bum

A job that at least part of it can be done better using the tools now available. If they want to keep the "human element" of the game then fine, let the umpire give the indication of whether it was a ball or a strike, but the machine is making the actual call. I'm getting sick of the ever changing strike zone based upon what mood the home plate umpire is in.

jojo
05-17-2012, 02:10 PM
How would I know? Bum

After your siloquy about his strikezone throughout the game, I had assumed you had watched it.

Patrick Bateman
05-17-2012, 02:12 PM
Did you watch the entire game? How did he call that pitch the entire game?


Yes, I actually did watch the game, and no, the insane calls he was making at the end were not consistent with the rest of the game.

The Operator
05-17-2012, 02:13 PM
The umpires deserve respect out there.
Not if they're purposely blowing calls because someone has hurt their feelings.


No, they aren't the game, but they are doing a job that needs to be done and they get very little credit for doing it well.
Purposely blowing calls isn't doing one's job well. Hence no credit.


Players showing some respect is easy. It shouldn't be so easy to show one's arse...Sorry, as long as a player is abiding by the rules, there shouldn't be some arbitrary "respect level" that has to be met so that you can expect fair calls out of an ump.

If umps want batters to remain in the box, get MLB to write it into the rule book. Until then, batters aren't required to and thus shouldn't be subject to any sort of penalty, ESPECIALLY being victimized by obviously incorrect calls as punishment.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 02:14 PM
After your siloquy about his strikezone throughout the game, I had assumed you had watched it.

lol! Good one! :beerme:

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 02:23 PM
Not if they're purposely blowing calls because someone has hurt their feelings.


Purposely blowing calls isn't doing one's job well. Hence no credit.

Sorry, as long as a player is abiding by the rules, there shouldn't be some arbitrary "respect level" that has to be met so that you can expect fair calls out of an ump.

If umps want batters to remain in the box, get MLB to write it into the rule book. Until then, batters aren't required to and thus shouldn't be subject to any sort of penalty, ESPECIALLY being victimized by obviously incorrect calls as punishment.

And throwing a helmet at an umpire is the appropriate response? Hilarious. The umpire called 1 pitch that was a ball a strike and the world is ending. The child that didn't like it and took strike 3 throws his helmet at the umpire and that's not worth discussing (or irrelevant).

My favorite part of the thread is how everyone just blows past the part where Lawrie takes strike 3 and runs to first and then comes back to throw his helmet at the umpire who justifiably rang him up on a strike. He missed a strike...holy cow...Now we have 2 instances on the season where umpires missed a call. The sky is falling. In all likelihood neither "missed" call changed the outcome of the game. Again: The sky is falling.

I'm out. Y'all can bask in knowing more than everyone else about it. I disagree but when it comes to umpiring, most of y'all haven't a hint of knowledge about it. So I will crawl out of the slop and quit wrestling with the pigs. ;)

Bum

jojo
05-17-2012, 02:33 PM
I don't think anyone has said Lawrie made a good decision.

Most seem to think 1) the fastball was obviously a ball and 2) bristle at the notion that umpires are empowered to purposely make incorrect calls. I think both strike two and strike three were bad calls.

Really I can't see how either point can fuel a heated debate. I guess the third strike can be debated but it wasn't a consistent call with Miller.

Sea Ray
05-17-2012, 03:19 PM
Who watched the game and saw how Miller was calling balls and strikes the entire game? Anyone? Anyone? If he had called that pitch a strike the entire game and was being consistent with it, then what?


Bum

If he was consistently calling that pitch a strike then he should be out of the league because he's horrible. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt in assuming he didn't consistently call that a strike.

Caveman Techie
05-17-2012, 03:21 PM
And throwing a helmet at an umpire is the appropriate response? Hilarious. The umpire called 1 pitch that was a ball a strike and the world is ending. The child that didn't like it and took strike 3 throws his helmet at the umpire and that's not worth discussing (or irrelevant).

My favorite part of the thread is how everyone just blows past the part where Lawrie takes strike 3 and runs to first and then comes back to throw his helmet at the umpire who justifiably rang him up on a strike. He missed a strike...holy cow...Now we have 2 instances on the season where umpires missed a call. The sky is falling. In all likelihood neither "missed" call changed the outcome of the game. Again: The sky is falling.

I'm out. Y'all can bask in knowing more than everyone else about it. I disagree but when it comes to umpiring, most of y'all haven't a hint of knowledge about it. So I will crawl out of the slop and quit wrestling with the pigs. ;)

Bum

Nice post! Uncalled for Bumstead, you're better than that.

Plus Plus
05-17-2012, 03:24 PM
And throwing a helmet at an umpire is the appropriate response? Hilarious. The umpire called 1 pitch that was a ball a strike and the world is ending. The child that didn't like it and took strike 3 throws his helmet at the umpire and that's not worth discussing (or irrelevant).

My favorite part of the thread is how everyone just blows past the part where Lawrie takes strike 3 and runs to first and then comes back to throw his helmet at the umpire who justifiably rang him up on a strike. He missed a strike...holy cow...Now we have 2 instances on the season where umpires missed a call. The sky is falling. In all likelihood neither "missed" call changed the outcome of the game. Again: The sky is falling.

I'm out. Y'all can bask in knowing more than everyone else about it. I disagree but when it comes to umpiring, most of y'all haven't a hint of knowledge about it. So I will crawl out of the slop and quit wrestling with the pigs. ;)

Bum

This is pretty condescending and uncalled for. Furthermore, nobody in this thread is excusing Lawrie.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 03:40 PM
This is pretty condescending and uncalled for. Furthermore, nobody in this thread is excusing Lawrie.

How so? It is my opinion of this thread. Lawrie is getting a pass while the umpire who called one ball a strike is in theory being rushed to the guillotine to have his head removed from his body. What did I miss?

Should the players show respect for the umpires working their games or not? I think that is what this whole thing boils down to. Since a large portion of the posters appear to think showing respect is not necessary, then explain why that is the case. I was raised to show respect to everyone till they proved they didn't deserve it. I believe that is fair.

Bum

Plus Plus
05-17-2012, 03:49 PM
How so? It is my opinion of this thread. Lawrie is getting a pass while the umpire who called one ball a strike is in theory being rushed to the guillotine to have his head removed from his body. What did I miss?

Should the players show respect for the umpires working their games or not? I think that is what this whole thing boils down to. Since a large portion of the posters appear to think showing respect is not necessary, then explain why that is the case. I was raised to show respect to everyone till they proved they didn't deserve it. I believe that is fair.

Bum

Of course the players should respect umpires. That isn't in question by anybody. I, too, was raised to give anybody respect until they did something to warrant not getting respect.

The problem is that, as many posters have said, a very obvious pitch was called incorrectly and that whether it is due to an umpire being unable to call that clear pitch correctly or that the umpire called a pitch incorrectly on purpose to send a message, that call is a problem. Obviously, Lawrie was wrong to spike his helmet like a child. But (and I am really hesitant to post this next line), the helmet isn't spiked if the obvious call is made correctly.

--- (edit)

The other pervasive problem that this seems to go hand-in-hand with is the increasingly prevalent umpiring errors in previous seasons, and some umpires who seem to put themselves above the game, whether through their calls, gestures, delayed responses, or CD releases. I see this event, if it occurred for the reasons that George Anderson posted, as being yet another example of an umpire putting himself above the game. THAT is the problem at hand, imo.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 03:51 PM
Well I for one appreciate your POV George, umpiring, like the game looks easy

But we know that's a crock of..

It's funny, just yesterday after several weeks of problems and controversy with my local trash service I got an ongoing problem solved. For several weeks the trash man would take my trash cans and dump them into the trash truck but instead of putting the trash cans where they originally were off to the side of the road he instead either put them smack dab in the middle of my driveway to where I had to move them with my car or out in the middle of the actual road where cars would have to drive around them. I confronted the driver about the situation and he pretty much blew me off and in a nice way told me where to go. I contacted the city twice but that got me no where. Finally I got ahold of the actual company that is subcontracted to the city to pick up my trash and talked to a supervisor. I had a good conversation with him about how unlike my neighbors my trash cans were not put back in the same spot the trash man picked them up at but instead they were left in other very inconvenient places. Yesterday morning the actual supervisor showed up at my doorstep and we had a good conversation about all the things that had taken place. I also told him it seemed since I reported the driver to the city he was intent on taking things out on me by purposely putting the trash cans in spots that were very dangerous to traffic and a real inconvenience to me. The supervisor did note that my neighbors car is routinely parked on the street right near the cans which technically is against the rules of the trash service because they do not want to have to walk around a car to get my trash. After several minutes of figuring out how we could get the neighbor to move his car so my trash could be picked up weekly we were somewhat stuck on how to solve the problem. I mean I could ask my neighbor if he could not park his car there so my trash would be picked up so there would be no more controversy but I hated to drag my neighbor into this problem. The supervisor suggested checking into the Homeowners Association and try to figure out if residents are even allowed to park on the street but that would take some time and work. Finally a light bulb went off in my head and I suggested that I move the trash cans to the other side of the driveway which is like 10' away and more importantly away from my neighbors car to where the trash could be picked up without any more problems. Now I could have been a complete pain in the butt and told the supervisor I refuse to move my trash cans because I really don't have to kinda in the similar manner one could say a batter shouldn't have to wait a couple seconds for the umpire to make the call because they really don't have to. By my cooperation of moving my trash cans to the other side of the road I made my life much more easier by no longer having to deal with this problem. If batters equally cooperate and give the umpire the respect of a whole 2 seconds to make the call, controversy's like last night would not happen nor would a Reds Zone thread 5 pages long regarding this subject even exist.

If I can move my trash cans 10' why can't the batter wait 2 seconds for a call to be made?

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 03:55 PM
:beerme: Know who you are dealing with George, and take the comments with a grain of salt. Your views on umpiring, coming from the trenches and first hand experience, are far more valuable than an opinion on a message board.

Thanks Randy and I am sure being the student of baseball that you are that you are making sure your son waits for the call to be made before advancing to first base. That was alot of my intent of this thread to pass on friendly advice to others just how to teach their players to play but instead we are right back to heading up a movement to have R2D2 calling balls and strikes.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 04:01 PM
Of course the players should respect umpires. That isn't in question by anybody. I, too, was raised to give anybody respect until they did something to warrant not getting respect.

The problem is that, as many posters have said, a very obvious pitch was called incorrectly and that whether it is due to an umpire being unable to call that clear pitch correctly or that the umpire called a pitch incorrectly on purpose to send a message, that call is a problem. Obviously, Lawrie was wrong to spike his helmet like a child. But (and I am really hesitant to post this next line), the helmet isn't spiked if the obvious call is made correctly.

I can't answer why he called the pitch the way he did. But, to be honest, it doesn't matter. He is the umpire, the call is a strike, get back in the box. Umpires miss strike/ball calls all the time; there's no excuse for that reaction, ever. I, personally, find it disrespectful to take off to first if the umpire hasn't made a call. I can't say that I have called a ball a strike because of it but if it happens enough, I don't know? I'm not in his shoes, but I have done his job and it isn't as cut and dry as y'all want it to be or think it is. Strike 3 was a strike and a very hittable strike that Lawrie should be mad at himself for not pounding; maybe he should throw his helmet at himself for that?

I still take a bit of offense to calling my post "condescending and uncalled for." If I went around and posted that reply to every holier than thou post I get in reply on this board, the board would be filled with those types of posts. I stated my opinion just like the rest of the people on here have and do. I very rarely call anybody out for their posts in that manner.

When I referred to not wrestling with the "pigs" anymore it was more in reference to: never wrestle with a pig in the mud, you will only find that the pig enjoys it.

Bum

Sea Ray
05-17-2012, 04:20 PM
How so? It is my opinion of this thread. Lawrie is getting a pass while the umpire who called one ball a strike is in theory being rushed to the guillotine to have his head removed from his body. What did I miss?

Should the players show respect for the umpires working their games or not? I think that is what this whole thing boils down to. Since a large portion of the posters appear to think showing respect is not necessary, then explain why that is the case. I was raised to show respect to everyone till they proved they didn't deserve it. I believe that is fair.

Bum

I think the reason you're perceiving Lawrie getting a pass is because we all agree on it to the point that we don't talk about it much. Speaking for myself, I don't think he should get a pass and I think his suspension is well deserved. Since I don't get the feeling that my opinion is being challenged I haven't made a big deal over it.

The controversy stems from whether the ump deserves any sanctions. IMO I think he should get a poor evaluation for how he handled it and a talking to by the powers that be at MLB.

I am in full agreement with your thoughts on mud wrestling...

Caveman Techie
05-17-2012, 04:45 PM
I still take a bit of offense to calling my post "condescending and uncalled for."
Bum

That's ok, cause I took offense at being called unintelligent and a pig. Of course with a handle of "caveman" maybe I shouldn't.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 04:48 PM
That's ok, cause I took offense at being called unintelligent and a pig.

Well, I explained that. If that bothers you, I don't know what to tell you. Pigs are pretty intelligent as far as non-humans go; so there's always that...:D

The Operator
05-17-2012, 04:51 PM
And throwing a helmet at an umpire is the appropriate response? Hilarious.
Nowhere have I said anything remotely resembling an excuse for Lawrie. There is no excuse for that, and he's lucky it wasn't for longer.

But I'm not about to act like the umpire is without blame in this. He made himself bigger than the game, and that was ridiculous.


The umpire called 1 pitch that was a ball a strike and the world is ending.
Sorry, but yea. Purposely missing a call to send someone a message is crap, and it has no place in little league much less the highest level in the world. It's a disgrace.


The child that didn't like it and took strike 3 throws his helmet at the umpire and that's not worth discussing (or irrelevant).Show me where anyone on here is defending Lawrie. The thing is, he's been held accountable for his actions by MLB and there is a very real chance the umpire in question will have absolutely NO consequence for purposely missing the first pitch in question to start with.


My favorite part of the thread is how everyone just blows past the part where Lawrie takes strike 3 and runs to first and then comes back to throw his helmet at the umpire who justifiably rang him up on a strike. He missed a strike...holy cow...Now we have 2 instances on the season where umpires missed a call. The sky is falling. In all likelihood neither "missed" call changed the outcome of the game. Again: The sky is falling.Again, show me where anyone is defending Lawrie in all of this. He acted like a schmuck and he got hammered by MLB for it. IMO, he deserved worse. But at least he was held accountable. The guy who purposely missed a call to teach him a lesson will probably come under no sort of consequence for this. But umpires are beyond reproach and not to be questioned, soooo....


I'm out. Y'all can bask in knowing more than everyone else about it. I disagree but when it comes to umpiring, most of y'all haven't a hint of knowledge about it. I know enough to know that there is no reason any umpire should ever, EVER purposely miss a call in a game. EVER.

I may not be a police officer, but I would have a problem with a cop handing out a speeding ticket to someone who wasn't speeding just to show the driver who was boss. But I've never been a cop, so what do I know.

jojo
05-17-2012, 05:00 PM
As I said earlier there really are two interpretations. Either the calls were legitimately blown or as some have argued they were purposefully incorrect. Neither interpretation brings honor to the blue. It's actually kind of surprising to see amateur umps supporting that performance.

Again Lawrie lost his moral authority by his poor decision. But it was poor umping.

I would hate to hit with Miller behind the plate. By your fourth at bat you not only should be able to predict the strikezone, you NEED to be able to predict the strike zone.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 05:02 PM
Nowhere have I said anything remotely resembling an excuse for Lawrie. There is no excuse for that, and he's lucky it wasn't for longer.

But I'm not about to act like the umpire is without blame in this. He made himself bigger than the game, and that was ridiculous.


Sorry, but yea. Purposely missing a call to send someone a message is crap, and it has no place in little league much less the highest level in the world. It's a disgrace.

Show me where anyone on here is defending Lawrie. The thing is, he's been held accountable for his actions by MLB and there is a very real chance the umpire in question will have absolutely NO consequence for purposely missing the first pitch in question to start with.

Again, show me where anyone is defending Lawrie in all of this. He acted like a schmuck and he got hammered by MLB for it. IMO, he deserved worse. But at least he was held accountable. The guy who purposely missed a call to teach him a lesson will probably come under no sort of consequence for this. But umpires are beyond reproach and not to be questioned, soooo....

I know enough to know that there is no reason any umpire should ever, EVER purposely miss a call in a game. EVER.

I may not be a police officer, but I would have a problem with a cop handing out a speeding ticket to someone who wasn't speeding just to show the driver who was boss. But I've never been a cop, so what do I know.

So...you know that he purposely called that pitch a strike to stick it to Lawrie? How do you know this? I just watched the video several times and he doesn't really even hesitate or look at Lawrie before making his call. The catcher quickly move his mitt into the strike zone. Maybe he got caught up in seeing where the mitt was? Everyone on here is making assumptions about why he called that pitch a strike. I'm not sure anyone on here is aware of the answer as to why...Assumptions don't always lead to facts.

Was the pitch a strike? Not unless he had called it a strike all night. Did he intentionally make that call to stick it to Lawrie? Only one guy knows for sure and you or me aren't that guy. Watch the video; there is no hesitation at all. I don't know but I am sure somebody is going to ask him, just because it's not published on the internet doesn't mean questions aren't asked.

Otherwise, the action that followed was pathetic and 4 games is a joke along with his excuses for his actions. But I'm not currently an MLB player, so what do I know...

Bum

The Operator
05-17-2012, 05:16 PM
Otherwise, the action that followed was pathetic and 4 games is a joke along with his excuses for his actions. Again, show me anyone, and I mean ANYONE, supporting Lawrie. Not sure why you are continuing to beat that drum.

Say this happened to a mild-mannered guy like Sean Casey. Would he deserve to get rung up on a ball because he dared to upset the umpire by jogging to first on an obvious ball before the ump gave him the final permission to do so? Just because Lawrie exploded and acted like a jerk (but again, he was punished - and not a single person has defended his actions) doesn't mean that Miller was justified in his actions that precipitated the entire event to start with.


But I'm not currently an MLB player, so what do I know...

BumIt was those of you on the umpire defense councel who went there first with the "Have you ever umped a game?" quip so I'm not sure you're trying to turn that back around now.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 05:30 PM
Again, show me anyone, and I mean ANYONE, supporting Lawrie. Not sure why you are continuing to beat that drum.

Say this happened to a mild-mannered guy like Sean Casey. Would he deserve to get rung up on a ball because he dared to upset the umpire by jogging to first on an obvious ball before the ump gave him the final permission to do so? Just because Lawrie exploded and acted like a jerk (but again, he was punished - and not a single person has defended his actions) doesn't mean that Miller was justified in his actions that precipitated the entire event to start with.

It was those of you on the umpire defense councel who went there first with the "Have you ever umped a game?" quip so I'm not sure you're trying to turn that back around now.

To be clear, Lawrie got wrung up on a strike. Strike two appears to be a ball, but again, I challenge you to show me or explain to me how you know he called it a ball to stick it to Lawrie. If he did, then that's something he will have to explain to the powers that be. I assume because they don't publicize any of these types of talks, critiques, etc. that in your opinion that means that the talks never occur...

I keep bringing up Lawrie's actions because they are 100 times more appalling than an umpire missing a ball/strike call. Y'all want to re-hash the ball/strike thing like it's the end of the world, but don't want to hear how Lawrie is a punk.

Bum

jojo
05-17-2012, 05:36 PM
To be clear, Lawrie got wrung up on a strike. Bum

Lawrie got rung up on ball 5.

The Operator
05-17-2012, 05:50 PM
Y'all want to re-hash the ball/strike thing like it's the end of the world, but don't want to hear how Lawrie is a punk.

BumAgain, show me ONE post defending Lawrie's actions. You can call him a punk all day, I agree.

On the other hand, you and a few others are defending this umpire tooth and nail and it's beyond me as to why. Yes, Lawrie is a PUNK. However, I don't care if Lucifer himself was at the plate during that at-bat, there is no excuse for calling an obvious ball a strike just to send a message.

If players are behaving badly on the field, umpires are well within their right to eject them from the game and they are then going to further be sanctioned by MLB in most cases. If a player's transgressions aren't serious enough for an ejection but instead require a "message" from the ump, that tells me that whatever rule that the player broke was a rule nowhere other than in the ump's mind. I guess I'd rather the rules be enforced by the book, not on how Ump X or Ump Y feels like that day.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 06:02 PM
Again, show me ONE post defending Lawrie's actions. You can call him a punk all day, I agree.

On the other hand, you and a few others are defending this umpire tooth and nail and it's beyond me as to why. Yes, Lawrie is a PUNK. However, I don't care if Lucifer himself was at the plate during that at-bat, there is no excuse for calling an obvious ball a strike just to send a message.

If players are behaving badly on the field, umpires are well within their right to eject them from the game and they are then going to further be sanctioned by MLB in most cases. If a player's transgressions aren't serious enough for an ejection but instead require a "message" from the ump, that tells me that whatever rule that the player broke was a rule nowhere other than in the ump's mind. I guess I'd rather the rules be enforced by the book, not on how Ump X or Ump Y feels like that day.

I have never defended this umpire one way or the other. I have given reasons/examples of why he may have called strike two instead of ball four. I don't know why he did it and neither do you. If you do, explain it to me please. I have watched the video over and over and I'm not so sure he was sticking it to Lawrie; if he was, then he will have to answer for it. I have also said that I have not called a ball a strike because a batter takes off for first before I make my call, but just because he takes off for first prior to my call doesn't keep me from calling a strike either. I just am of the opinion that the batter is better off waiting for the umpire to call ball four before he takes off; by that, I am not condoning calling a ball a strike. You are taking my thoughts and painting me into a corner that I don't belong in which is why I was originally backing out of this thread and probably why other posters were as well.

Couldn't he have just missed the call? Couldn't he have paid too much attention to the mitt one time and called a ball a strike? Or, it's just as possible he was perturbed at Lawrie; watch the video; I don't know the answer and I don't think anyone here does either.

Bum

The Operator
05-17-2012, 06:07 PM
Bum, one of two things happened. Either a)he purposely made an awful call to teach Lawrie a lesson, or b)he honestly thought that strike two was a strike.

Either way he looks really, really bad.

The Operator
05-17-2012, 06:09 PM
I have never defended this umpire one way or the other. I have given reasons/examples of why he may have called strike two instead of ball four. That is defending the ump, Bum.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 06:10 PM
That is defending the ump, Bum.

Call it what you want. We don't have to agree. Watch the video.

Bumstead
05-17-2012, 06:11 PM
Bum, one of two things happened. Either a)he purposely made an awful call to teach Lawrie a lesson, or b)he honestly thought that strike two was a strike.

Either way he looks really, really bad.

The timing looks bad...missing one ball/strike call really isn't that bad. If an umpire only misses 1 pitch a game, then there shouldn't be any unhappy people out there.

Brutus
05-17-2012, 06:50 PM
You know darn well he didn't.

Actually that's not the case.

The strike zone plot for the game shows close to 10 pitches off the edge of the plate that were called that game...

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/zoneTrack.php?month=5&day=15&year=2012&game=gid_2012_05_15_tbamlb_tormlb_1%2F&prevDate=515

So he was in fact calling the corner quite often.

jojo
05-17-2012, 07:51 PM
Actually that's not the case.

The strike zone plot for the game shows close to 10 pitches off the edge of the plate that were called that game...

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/zoneTrack.php?month=5&day=15&year=2012&game=gid_2012_05_15_tbamlb_tormlb_1%2F&prevDate=515

So he was in fact calling the corner quite often.


Actually that's not the case.

The strike zone plot for the game shows close to 10 pitches off the edge of the plate that were called that game...

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/zoneTrack.php?month=5&day=15&year=2012&game=gid_2012_05_15_tbamlb_tormlb_1%2F&prevDate=515

So he was in fact calling the corner quite often.

And once again, the opposing batter's box is not the edge of the plate. It was a horrid, blown call. Even Vlad doesn't swing at that pitch. Even you won't argue it was a strike or that Lowrie should have swung that pitch.

Even pitch f/x thinks Lowrie was rung up on ball five.

Brutus
05-17-2012, 08:02 PM
And once again, the opposing batter's box is not the edge of the plate. It was a horrid, blown call. Even Vlad doesn't swing at that pitch. Even you won't argue it was a strike or that Lowrie should have swung that pitch.

Even pitch f/x thinks Lowrie was rung up on ball five.

Thanks for admitting by omission that the data clearly shows he was calling those pitches most of the night. That goes against the suggestion this was nothing more than a spiteful, purposeful call.

I surmise, and correctly I'm sure, there would be absolutely no controversy if we didn't have four replay angles to dissect where the ball crossed. The reason is obvious: because three inches for an object the size of nine inches traveling 95 MPH is not easy to correctly call without at least a little bit of doubt or hesitation.

jojo
05-17-2012, 08:26 PM
Thanks for admitting by omission that the data clearly shows he was calling those pitches most of the night. That goes against the suggestion this was nothing more than a spiteful, purposeful call.

I surmise, and correctly I'm sure, there would be absolutely no controversy if we didn't have four replay angles to dissect where the ball crossed. The reason is obvious: because three inches for an object the size of nine inches traveling 95 MPH is not easy to correctly call without at least a little bit of doubt or hesitation.

My position has been articulated in a crystal clear manner. The call was obviously blown based upon seeing it in real time. This was obvious and intuitive without need for replay. Given the pitch location, there is no way Lawrie would have legitimately been expected to swing at that pitch on ANY count. Miller was not routinely calling pitches over the opposing batters box chalk line strikes. Miller blew an easy call that all umps should be expected to make and it is unreasonable to argue an ump should not be expected to correctly judge a pitch with that location. If Miller can not confidently judge that pitch as a matter of course, he is not qualified to ump major league games. I have not argued that Miller purposefully blew the call but rather i have objected to the notion that he had the latitude to purposefully blow a call.

I'm not sure why any of this needed clarification.

AtomicDumpling
05-17-2012, 08:28 PM
It was our resident amateur umpire that suggested the umpire intentionally made the bad call to teach the hitter a lesson. He actually even said that was a good thing, and that is what touched off the firestorm.

Whether it was intentional or not Miller still blew the call and embarrassed himself in front of millions of people. Pretty much everyone here has agreed that it is unacceptable for an umpire to break the rules and call a ball a strike because the hitter starts toward first base. Each observer can decide for themselves whether or not this umpire intentionally made a bad call, but 99% of observers will agree that the umpire made a very bad call on that pitch.

I think the evidence shows the pitch was about 5-6 inches outside rather than 3 inches. Besides, three inches off the plate is very easy to see from right behind the catcher. That pitch was as easy a call as an umpire is ever going to get. He blew it.

If he was making bad calls all night it still does not justify them as good calls. A bad call is a bad call no matter how consistently you make it. Hitters have to learn to make adjustments during the game to compensate for the poor umpiring. If the umpires would simply call the strike zone as defined in the rule book then hitters would not have to make adjustments to compensate for poor umpiring. Making bad strike calls all night does not magically transform them into good calls.

Judging by the nearly unanimous reaction of the pundits on all the various websites and TV channels it is abundantly clear that both Lawrie and Miller humiliated themselves on that night. Both let their emotions take over and did stupid things. They should both be severely punished.

George Anderson
05-17-2012, 10:07 PM
It was our resident amateur umpire that suggested the umpire intentionally made the bad call to teach the hitter a lesson. He actually even said that was a good thing, and that is what touched off the firestorm.

.

Calling someone an amateur is nothing more than a cheap shot and a personal attack. I can ignore the misrepresentation you just gave of my views but I am not going to ignore being insulted simply because I am giving you inside information on how the world of umpiring works that you do not like. I have worked with hundreds of different individuals over the years and with very few exceptions they all were very good people who cared very much about the game. Calling people such as myself and the guys who work along me amateurs speaks well about your opinion of the umpire profession.

AtomicDumpling
05-18-2012, 12:24 AM
Calling someone an amateur is nothing more than a cheap shot and a personal attack. I can ignore the misrepresentation you just gave of my views but I am not going to ignore being insulted simply because I am giving you inside information on how the world of umpiring works that you do not like. I have worked with hundreds of different individuals over the years and with very few exceptions they all were very good people who cared very much about the game. Calling people such as myself and the guys who work along me amateurs speaks well about your opinion of the umpire profession.

What I meant is that you are an umpire for amateur leagues. You are not an umpire in professional baseball right? So don't try to make it out as a personal attack. There was no insult intended.

It was your controversial remarks that touched off the firestorm in this thread. You can't be surprised that people would take exception to your comments that it is OK for umpires to intentionally make a bad call.

I think we all already knew that some umpires break the rules to defend their egos. Your comments have made it clear that umpires often feel entitled to break the rules in order to get their way and you think that is OK. Many people here have disagreed with you. Calling an outside pitch a strike just because the batter steps toward first is dishonest at any level of umpiring. I think most people would say an umpire who does that is not doing his job very well. I find it shocking that a professional umpire would freely admit that he intentionally makes bad calls to punish players for doing things that are not against the rules.

George Anderson
05-18-2012, 12:51 AM
What I meant is that you are an umpire for amateur leagues. You are not an umpire in professional baseball right? So don't try to make it out as a personal attack. There was no insult intended.

It was your controversial remarks that touched off the firestorm in this thread. You can't be surprised that people would take exception to your comments that it is OK for umpires to intentionally make a bad call.

I think we all already knew that some umpires break the rules to defend their egos. Your comments have made it clear that umpires often feel entitled to break the rules in order to get their way and you think that is OK. Many people here have disagreed with you. Calling an outside pitch a strike just because the batter steps toward first is dishonest at any level of umpiring. I think most people would say an umpire who does that is not doing his job very well. I find it shocking that a professional umpire would freely admit that he intentionally makes bad calls to punish players for doing things that are not against the rules.

Lets just forget I ever chimed in on this subject and ignore everything I posted. I didn't realize the training I have had over the past 15 plus years umpiring by numerous former AAA, AA, current Div 1 and CWS umpires was all wrong and instead you and the rest of the fans on this board are right. My humble apologies for cluttering up the board with my misinformed tripe.

AtomicDumpling
05-18-2012, 01:21 AM
Can't people disagree on a topic? You don't have to be a professional umpire to have an opinion on the rules. A disagreement doesn't invalidate your training. If someone could direct us to a rule that allows the umpire to call an outside pitch a strike due to the batter's behavior then we could all learn an important thing today.

membengal
05-18-2012, 07:01 AM
Lets just forget I ever chimed in on this subject and ignore everything I posted. I didn't realize the training I have had over the past 15 plus years umpiring by numerous former AAA, AA, current Div 1 and CWS umpires was all wrong and instead you and the rest of the fans on this board are right. My humble apologies for cluttering up the board with my misinformed tripe.

It's actually illuminating to find out the TRAINING you have received over the last 15 plus years includes being taught that it is okay to ignore baseball rules to "teach players a lesson". It explains so much of what I sometimes see on the baseball field.

Mind you, I find it awful, but, it explains things.

jojo
05-18-2012, 07:21 AM
Lets just forget I ever chimed in on this subject and ignore everything I posted. I didn't realize the training I have had over the past 15 plus years umpiring by numerous former AAA, AA, current Div 1 and CWS umpires was all wrong and instead you and the rest of the fans on this board are right. My humble apologies for cluttering up the board with my misinformed tripe.

If nothing else, you probably now understand why people boo umpires...