I agree that's what they saw - or didn't see. It's the only reasonable explanation for the call after review, that rather than assume he touched the plate they assumed his foot was over the plate. I see that as stupid, but that's only a related story.
Here's my problem with it. If they're going to use that criteria (whether or not he actually touched the plate or was his foot over it?) then need to have a camera exactly at ground level and facing the plate. They then can use whether they can see daylight between the foot and the plate as the determining factor.
If they're going to use the current criteria of how it looked one-dimensionally looking down on the play they're never going to actually SEE the contact beween the foot and the plate. Therefore the default call always will be the umpire's original call. But of course they won't be consistent on that call. :-(
In short, review will do no good on plays at the plate and we got fucked.
It's a mere moment in a man's life between the All-Star game and the Old Timer's game.
-Vin Scully
Sox 10-31 with RISP in this series.
"Hating the Yankees like it's a religion since 94'" RIP Mike.
"It's also a simple and indisputable fact that WAR isn't the be-all end-all in valuations, especially in real life. Wanna know why? Because an ace in run-prevention for 120 innings means more often than not, a sub-standard pitcher covering for the rest of the IP that pitcher fails to provide. You can't see value in a vacuum when a player does not provide full-time production."