Register now to remove this ad

Page 87 of 87 FirstFirst ... 3777858687
Results 1,291 to 1,304 of 1304

Thread: 10/17 ALCS game 4

  1. #1291
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by jung View Post
    Beat me to it. The Sox pitchers have been trying to avoid Bregman's hot zones the whole series and the guy that has just missed entirely has been KIMBREL.
    How about Hinch? Breg gets on base like 10 times in the first 3 games, so he moves him.

    Brilliant!

    If that was Cora....

  2. #1292
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    How about Hinch? Breg gets on base like 10 times in the first 3 games, so he moves him.

    Brilliant!

    If that was Cora....
    Moving Bregman in the line-up wasn't stupid. Forcing Kimbrel to get the last 6 outs was stupid.

  3. #1293
    Super Moderator Jasonbay44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    18,786
    This can be debated for hours and hours and when it comes down to it, its a judgement call. Most rational people would agree, that they "think" this or that happened on the Altuve play, but would agree you cant change the call. Whatever call Joe West made, was going to stand. I've listened to MLB Networks, TBS, ESPN, 105.7 the fan, etc and there is so many different opinions of this play, but the most common one seems to be "I think Mookie makes that play if there is no fans there, but I am not 100% sure the fan actually reach into the field of play". I agree with that assessment.

  4. #1294
    Super Moderator Jasonbay44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    18,786
    Also, the attacking of Joe West being "too old and fat" to make that call is just stupid and horrible journalism. They could've had the youngest most athletic umpire on the field and that is still a damn near impossible call to make in real time. Do you know how many moving parts were happening, as the ball was landing? Joe West has actually done a good job this series. His game 3 behind home plate was probably the best job a home plate umpired has done all playoffs, and this is coming from someone who hates umpires who try to be the star of the game, like Joe West often does at times.

  5. #1295
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    It was obvious the fan(s) hit the glove and forced it closed.

    The only real debate is whether the fans interference occurred over the plane in play (field side) or not (stands side).

    If a fan hits the glove on the stands side, the rule is clear: it is NOT interference.

    If the fan interferes on the field side, then it is interference.

    I do not think there is any clear angle that shows where the touching of the glove occured, but there are several hints that show, to me, it happened on the field side of the plane.

    1) Look at the fans. They are up against the fence and leaning forward slightly.
    2) Their arm are in front of them and/or slightly to the side, but they are clearly outstretched. One fan looks like his arms might be parallel to the wall and not reach over (the guy to the right). By looking at a 2 dimensional photo, you can still determine depth.
    3) Look at where Betts left the ground and landed. He hit the wall almost at the same time his feet hit the ground, so he started his jump away from the wall and ended up at it after his glove had already come down after the play.

    I do not think his glove went over the plane. It may have a little after contact with the fans, but not by much.

    I think the fans broke the plane.

    Interference was the right call.

    Didn't the review agree with the call and not say it was "inconclusive" thereby withholding the call on the field?
    Last edited by moonslav59; 10-18-2018 at 02:01 PM.

  6. #1296
    Super Moderator Jasonbay44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    18,786
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    It was obvious the fan(s) hit the glove and forced it closed.

    The only real debate is whether the fans interference occurred over the plane in play (field side) or not (stands side).

    If a fan hits the glove on the stands side, the rule is clear: it is NOT interference.

    If the fan interferes on the field side, then it is interference.

    I do not think there is any clear angle that shows where the touching of the glove occured, but there are several hints that show, to me, it happened on the file dside of the plane.

    1) Look at the fans. They are up against the fence and leaning forward slightly.
    2) Their arm are in front of them and/or slightly to the side, but they are clearly outstretched. One fan looks like his arms might be parallel to the wall and not reach over (the guy to the right). By looking at a 2 dimensional photo, you can still determine depth.
    3) Look at where Betts left the ground and landed. He hit the wall almost at the same time his feet hit the ground, so he started his jump away from the wall and ended up at it after his glove had already come down after the play.

    I do not think his glove went over the plane. It may have a little after contact with the fans, but not by much.

    I think the fans broke the plane.

    Interference was the right call.

    Didn't the review agree with the call and not say it was "inconclusive" thereby withholding the call on the field?
    Yeah, it was similar to an NFL challenge where it looks like a player might've been in the end zone, but they ruled him down at the 1 yard line, and on the replays you see a ton of bodies and cant see where ball/players knee is for sure, so call has to stand. A key with this review is they ruled call on the field "stands" and not was "confirmed".

    This is an absurd play though and I think they really need to change the faultiness of the fan interference rule, so if the ball is hit a few inches further, fans can "battle" Mookie for the ball and its allowed and considered fair game, but if its a few inches shorter, its interference. This seems like an absurdly tough judgement call for not only the umpires, for the fans. I imagine most fans at these games are drinking , so slightly intoxicated people are supposed to decided if they can go for an a potential ALCS home run ball, or let the opposing teams right fielder make a catch attempt and its all decided by the umpires opinions. It's wild.

  7. #1297
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    It was obvious the fan(s) hit the glove and forced it closed.

    The only real debate is whether the fans interference occurred over the plane in play (field side) or not (stands side).

    If a fan hits the glove on the stands side, the rule is clear: it is NOT interference.

    If the fan interferes on the field side, then it is interference.

    I do not think there is any clear angle that shows where the touching of the glove occured, but there are several hints that show, to me, it happened on the file dside of the plane.

    1) Look at the fans. They are up against the fence and leaning forward slightly.
    2) Their arm are in front of them and/or slightly to the side, but they are clearly outstretched. One fan looks like his arms might be parallel to the wall and not reach over (the guy to the right). By looking at a 2 dimensional photo, you can still determine depth.
    3) Look at where Betts left the ground and landed. He hit the wall almost at the same time his feet hit the ground, so he started his jump away from the wall and ended up at it after his glove had already come down after the play.

    I do not think his glove went over the plane. It may have a little after contact with the fans, but not by much.

    I think the fans broke the plane.

    Interference was the right call.

    Didn't the review agree with the call and not say it was "inconclusive" thereby withholding the call on the field?
    I agree with your detailed assessment, Moon. If West, otoh, had called it a HR, I'm sure the review would have withheld West's call. It would have been inconclusive either way.

  8. #1298
    Deity Slasher9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    12,248
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    How about Hinch? Breg gets on base like 10 times in the first 3 games, so he moves him.

    Brilliant!

    If that was Cora....
    mind boggling.
    other names i have posted under: none

  9. #1299
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Jasonbay44 View Post
    Yeah, it was similar to an NFL challenge where it looks like a player might've been in the end zone, but they ruled him down at the 1 yard line, and on the replays you see a ton of bodies and cant see where ball/players knee is for sure, so call has to stand. A key with this review is they ruled call on the field "stands" and not was "confirmed".

    This is an absurd play though and I think they really need to change the faultiness of the fan interference rule, so if the ball is hit a few inches further, fans can "battle" Mookie for the ball and its allowed and considered fair game, but if its a few inches shorter, its interference. This seems like an absurdly tough judgement call for not only the umpires, for the fans. I imagine most fans at these games are drinking , so slightly intoxicated people are supposed to decided if they can go for an a potential ALCS home run ball, or let the opposing teams right fielder make a catch attempt and its all decided by the umpires opinions. It's wild.
    I totally agree, but as the rule is written today, it makes calls like this very difficult.

    Now, imagine they changed the rule to interference can happen on any catch able ball not matter where the ball is hit. Now, you have a judgement call. Could Betts have caught it vs would he have caught it. It's like pass interference on a ball that was deemed uncatchable. There is often gray area and tough calls on close plays, no matter what the rule is or isn't.

  10. #1300
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by SPLENDIDSPLINTER View Post
    I agree with your detailed assessment, Moon. If West, otoh, had called it a HR, I'm sure the review would have withheld West's call. It would have been inconclusive either way.
    Probably right, but I'll ask again, didn't the review uphold (agree with) the call and not say it was "inconclusive?"

  11. #1301
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Slasher9 View Post
    mind boggling.
    Apparently, Hinch moved Bergman, because he wanted the Sox to start pitching to him. He wasn't happy with 10 on bases out of like 14 PAs or whatever.

    Yes, mind boggling.

    Now, did moving Bregman hurt Breg but help Springer?

    Inquiring minds want to know!

  12. #1302
    Deity
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    10,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Jasonbay44 View Post
    This can be debated for hours and hours and when it comes down to it, its a judgement call. Most rational people would agree, that they "think" this or that happened on the Altuve play, but would agree you cant change the call. Whatever call Joe West made, was going to stand. I've listened to MLB Networks, TBS, ESPN, 105.7 the fan, etc and there is so many different opinions of this play, but the most common one seems to be "I think Mookie makes that play if there is no fans there, but I am not 100% sure the fan actually reach into the field of play". I agree with that assessment.
    I agree with the assessment that you agree with. West obviously saw interference. I'm guessing that that is what caused him to make the immediate call. He certainly was in no position to definitively tell without replay that the fan broke the plane. In his best judgement, betts makes the play if no interference is called. On a play like that, is there anyone who is that good that they could tell precisely where the fan's arms were located. Like it or not, his job is to make a call not to wait a while and think about it. Mookie was not allowed to complete the play due to interference. It was the right call. It was the job of the replay to determine who was where when the play occurred. Kind of obvious that it was really too close to call on that one.

  13. #1303
    Deity
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    21,880
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    How about Hinch? Breg gets on base like 10 times in the first 3 games, so he moves him.

    Brilliant!

    If that was Cora....
    Yea I posted early on that I thought AJ had to do something to protect Bregs but really thought AJ's move to Bregs at the top was a panic move. Bregs led off all of 12 of the regular season 162. So if that was their best lineup they would have used it more than that.

    I thought moving Gonzalez up or possibly both Gonzalez and Correa up and Gurriel down was the move and posted exactly that before they even announced the lineups for Game 4.

  14. #1304
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    46,973
    What's the knock on Bregman being moved to leadoff? They scored 6 runs. And it was Bregman that had the big chance in the 9th because he was hitting leadoff.

    In any case it wasn't their offense that cost them the game.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •