Blue Jays Discussion: Everyone's hurt, but some are starting to make returns

[Canada4Gold]

Wait, he was about to call strike 3 looking. How can you get hit by pitch on a strike and it count? That's literally in the MLB rulebook and the batter doesn't get 1st base. They should protest, the umpire clearly was about the call that a strike.

6.08 The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when—

...

(b) He is touched by a pitched ball which he is not attempting to hit unless (1) The ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or (2) The batter makes no attempt to avoid being touched by the ball;

If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, it shall be called a strike, whether or not the batter tries to avoid the ball. If the ball is outside the strike zone when it touches the batter, it shall be called a ball if he makes no attempt to avoid being touched.

APPROVED RULING: When the batter is touched by a pitched ball which does not entitle him to first base, the ball is dead and no runner may advance.

I would assume a protest wouldn't work because the umpire would just say I didn't officially say the pitch was in the strike zone. But he was clearly about to call strike 3.

 

[Da Cool Rula]

Wow great updates bro. Thx for sharing.

 

[Anthrax442]

What the hell

 

[Da Cool Rula]

Damnit... that's brutal. Good luck, man.

Aha now we see the truth

 

[Hoverhand]

Jesus christ, that's Jose Tabata leaning into Max Scherzer's perfect game levels of nonsense.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Wow.. That's some utter BS right there.

Conforto better get beaned a few times after pulling that stunt.

 

[phillipmike]

Not a Bauer fan but it’s ridiculous that other players can do this for years and now they want to crack down on it?

 

[Canada4Gold]

Since it was the final play of the game and thus protests are allowed up to 24 hours after the game ends, and the umpire has already admitted he messed up isn't this an easy protest win for the Marlins? Or am I missing something? The grounds for the protest would be the umpire misapplying the HBP in the strike zone rule which he's essentially already admitted to screwing up in multiple ways.

 

[theaub]

Its a judgment call, not a misapplication of the rules.

 

[Canada4Gold]

Its a judgment call, not a misapplication of the rules.

He was calling strike 3 before he realized the pitch hit the batter. Thus he thought the pitch was in the strike zone. Then he awarded the batter 1st base. You can't award a HBP on a pitch in the strike zone. Seems like a pretty clear misapplication of the rules.

I figured it would be difficult to prove the umpire was going to call strike 3(despite half ringing the batter up), but when he admits he messed it up...

I guess he didn't describe how he messed it up, but still.

 

[theaub]

Far more likely that he started to ring him up, then realized he got hit, and then figured if he got hit it wasn't in the zone.

Misapplying the rules would mean he legitimately did not know that if you get hit in the strike zone that its a strike, and considering that guy's been a MLB ump for 22 years I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

 

[stickty111]

Didn't like the hitting coach at the start and don't like him 3 years later.

 

[Kiwi]

Not a Bauer fan but it’s ridiculous that other players can do this for years and now they want to crack down on it?

I can't say I'm surprised Bauer is the guy who is being singled out as well, he made the league look pretty bad over it's inaction

It would seem it's payback time

 

[TheBeastCoast]

Far more likely that he started to ring him up, then realized he got hit, and then figured if he got hit it wasn't in the zone.

Misapplying the rules would mean he legitimately did not know that if you get hit in the strike zone that its a strike, and considering that guy's been a MLB ump for 22 years I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

Misapplying the rules does not mean the umpire doesn't know the rules....It means the umpire just didn't apply the rules as the rulebook states. Has nothing to do with whether the guy knows the rule or not, I am sure he does and he just screwed up. He still misapplied the rule as stated in the rulebook.

 

[theaub]

Misapplying the rules does not mean the umpire doesn't know the rules....It means the umpire just didn't apply the rules as the rulebook states. Has nothing to do with whether the guy knows the rule or not, I am sure he does and he just screwed up. He still misapplied the rule as stated in the rulebook.

How does it not mean that? By your logic you should be able to protest balls/strikes or safe/out then.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

How does it not mean that? By your logic you should be able to protest balls/strikes or safe/out then.

No? Grounds for protest are pretty black and white. Protests are for when a team believes the umpire made a decision in violation of the official rule book. There is absolutely nothing that says umpire has to not know the rule. If the umpire makes a decision that goes against the official rule book it is a protestable game. It is really that simple.

 

[theaub]

No? Grounds for protest are pretty black and white. Protests are for when a team believes the umpire made a decision in violation of the official rule book. There is absolutely nothing that says umpire has to not know the rule. If the umpire makes a decision that goes against the official rule book it is a protestable game. It is really that simple.

So by that logic you can protest any incorrect call (including balls/strikes and safe/out pre-replay) since the definition of all of those are in the rulebook. Which is obviously wrong or every single game would be played under protest.

Misapplication of rulebook means ignorance of the rules. Screwing up the call and awarding Conforto 1B because he didn't think he was in the strike zone when he got hit is very wrong, but its not misapplying the rules.

It should be reviewable and I assume it will be by the end of today.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

So by that logic you can protest any incorrect call (including balls/strikes and safe/out pre-replay) since the definition of all of those are in the rulebook. Which is obviously wrong or every single game would be played under protest.

Misapplication of rulebook means ignorance of the rules. Screwing up the call and awarding Conforto 1B because he didn't think he was in the strike zone when he got hit is very wrong, but its not misapplying the rules.

It should be reviewable and I assume it will be by the end of today.

My main gripe was with you saying that the umpire has to not know the rule. Judgement plays like balls and strikes and safe out are not protestable. The umpire just has to get the call wrong. There is no ignorance clause in there. I think this was a bit of a grey area but as far as I understand the Marlins aren't protesting either way.

 

[Discoverer]

So by that logic you can protest any incorrect call (including balls/strikes and safe/out pre-replay) since the definition of all of those are in the rulebook. Which is obviously wrong or every single game would be played under protest.

Misapplication of rulebook means ignorance of the rules. Screwing up the call and awarding Conforto 1B because he didn't think he was in the strike zone when he got hit is very wrong, but its not misapplying the rules.

It should be reviewable and I assume it will be by the end of today.

Can an umpire change a ball/strike call at any time after the call has been made? Because he called it a strike and was in the process of punching him out when he realized it had hit him. So he had already determined it was in the zone.

I don't actually know the rule here, but if it hadn't hit Conforto, is the ump allowed to punch him out and then go "Wait, no, nevermind... ball four"?

He made two calls on the play: that it was in the strike zone, and that it hit Conforto. By the rule book, the first one negates the second, yet he allowed the second to stand. I think that's a pretty clear misapplication of the rules.

 

[Discoverer]

Not a Bauer fan but it’s ridiculous that other players can do this for years and now they want to crack down on it?

I hope they keep going and catch a bunch of other guys too, but I think it's hilarious that the first guy they're looking into, after officially warning everyone in the league to give them the opportunity to stop, is the most vocally anti-cheating guy around who was also very obviously cheating.

Bauer got a Cy Young award and a huge contract out of it. I'm sure he's happy to play the part of martyr at this point.

 

[theaub]

Can an umpire change a ball/strike call at any time after the call has been made? Because he called it a strike and was in the process of punching him out when he realized it had hit him. So he had already determined it was in the zone.

I don't actually know the rule here, but if it hadn't hit Conforto, is the ump allowed to punch him out and then go "Wait, no, nevermind... ball four"?

He made two calls on the play: that it was in the strike zone, and that it hit Conforto. By the rule book, the first one negates the second, yet he allowed the second to stand. I think that's a pretty clear misapplication of the rules.

Educated guesswork on my end, but I think he started to punch him out, then realized it hit Conforto, and then decided that Conforto wasn't in the zone/the ball was deflected into the zone.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

I hope they keep going and catch a bunch of other guys too, but I think it's hilarious that the first guy they're looking into, after officially warning everyone in the league to give them the opportunity to stop, is the most vocally anti-cheating guy around who was also very obviously cheating.

Bauer got a Cy Young award and a huge contract out of it. I'm sure he's happy to play the part of martyr at this point.

If they can just move onto Gerrit Cole next that would be great though.

 

[Morgs]

I hope they keep going and catch a bunch of other guys too, but I think it's hilarious that the first guy they're looking into, after officially warning everyone in the league to give them the opportunity to stop, is the most vocally anti-cheating guy around who was also very obviously cheating.

Bauer got a Cy Young award and a huge contract out of it. I'm sure he's happy to play the part of martyr at this point.

Its so typical of the MLB to go after the guy that tried to put a stop to everything. Bauer for all his flaws is has been calling out issues for years and the MLB didn't care until he made them look like fools.

Who was one of the first that talked about the Astros cheating? Who has talked about the effects of substances and then went on to prove it? The MLB is such a joke.

 

[theaub]

This is a fine balance between 'Trevor Bauer is an asshole' and 'Trevor Bauer is a correct asshole'

 

[Discoverer]

Its so typical of the MLB to go after the guy that tried to put a stop to everything. Bauer for all his flaws is has been calling out issues for years and the MLB didn't care until he made them look like fools.

Who was one of the first that talked about the Astros cheating? Who has talked about the effects of substances and then went on to prove it? The MLB is such a joke.

Meh. If he was just trying to prove a point, why is he still cheating now that A) he proved his point, and B) the league literally warned everyone two weeks ago that they were going to start taking it more seriously?