Blue Jays Discussion: WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo!!!!!!!!!! (avatars: posts 1-4)

[BertCorbeau]

Can somebody explain the third run Texas scored to me.

I've been surprised by all the media rushing to say the umps got the call right this morning. I thought it was botched and that run shouldn't have counted. And when I say this, I mean it was botched in favour of the Jays and against Texas. The ump shouldn't have called time, but he did, which I thought made what happens after moot.

But my belief may not be rooted in the actual rule.

Here's what I thought: when the ump calls time (like Dale Scott did after Sanchez protested and before the runner scored) is the play not dead? Just the same as a hockey ref blowing the whistle.

I guess what I don't understand is how they can overturn the ump ruling the play dead.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2015...inning-game-5-texas-rangers-toronto-blue-jays

Insanity, Take 1

Odor was 90 feet away from scoring the go-ahead run with Choo coming to the plate. Choo fouled off a couple of 98 mph heaters from Sanchez, sandwiched around a fastball that missed for a ball, then took ball two. Martin took the ball out of his glove and flipped it back toward the mound, except it never got there. In transit, it struck Choo, appearing to hit his hand, and rolled down the third-base line. Odor scored and plate umpire Dale Scott waved off the run when he called timeout, but then reversed himself after a lengthy review, prompting a shower of beer and trash from the stands while causing the Blue Jays to play the rest of the game under protest.

Batter Choo: "It hit me in the hand. Never been in a play like that. Never [seen a play] like that.''

Know the rule? "No. That's why I asked [manager Jeff] Banister.''

Catcher Martin: "First time I've ever been involved in a play like that in my life. I wasn't really sure what the rule was. I think if he's in the box, there's nothing wrong. If he's outside the box, then he's out. He was inside the box.

"I heard the umpire [call it dead]. But then they got together and went over the rule, and I'm sure they got it right. You have like eight brains out there. You're going to get it right.''

Crew chief Scott to a pool reporter: "That was my mistake. I was mixing up two rules and I called time, but then it started clicking. I went wait a minute, wait a minute, there's no intent on the hitter. He's in the box, the bat's in the box.''

Which brings us to MLB Rule 6.03 (a) (3), which governs these things. The pertinent section reads:

"If the batter is standing in the batter's box and he or his bat is struck by the catcher's throw back to the pitcher, and, in the umpire's judgment, there is no intent on the part of the batter to interfere with the throw, the ball is alive and in play.''

The run stood up. Odor scored. Martin was charged with an error.

You can question whether it was correct on the ump to allow the run after he called time (which he admitted he did wrongly) or the ump erred that Choo did not intentionally interfered with the catcher but I can see why it was the right call.

 

[topched]

Can somebody explain the third run Texas scored to me.

I've been surprised by all the media rushing to say the umps got the call right this morning. I thought it was botched and that run shouldn't have counted. And when I say this, I mean it was botched in favour of the Jays and against Texas. The ump shouldn't have called time, but he did, which I thought made what happens after moot.

But my belief may not be rooted in the actual rule.

Here's what I thought: when the ump calls time (like Dale Scott did after Sanchez protested and before the runner scored) is the play not dead? Just the same as a hockey ref blowing the whistle.

I guess what I don't understand is how they can overturn the ump ruling the play dead.

The only thing Dale Scott did wrong was calling the ball dead on that play. Ball should have been live the whole time. What was lucky (and kudos to Odor) is that he ran across the plate despite the dead ball call. If you go back and look at the play, Odor is scoring there regardless of the dead ball call. Sanchez, Martin and Donaldson are no where near the ball and wouldn't have made a play. That's why the call was corrected and Odor counted. He would have scored no matter what.

Now, if Odor stops halfway and goes back to 3rd it's a whole different story. Because you lose that "he would have scored no matter what" piece.

Ridiculously unique play, part of why baseball is so damn awesome. I'd probably be way more fragile about the whole thing if not for GOATse Batflipsa

 

[Longshot]

The only thing Dale Scott did wrong was calling the ball dead on that play. Ball should have been live the whole time. What was lucky (and kudos to Odor) is that he ran across the plate despite the dead ball call. If you go back and look at the play, Odor is scoring there regardless of the dead ball call. Sanchez, Martin and Donaldson are no where near the ball and wouldn't have made a play. That's why the call was corrected and Odor counted. He would have scored no matter what.

Now, if Odor stops halfway and goes back to 3rd it's a whole different story. Because you lose that "he would have scored no matter what" piece.

Ridiculously unique play, part of why baseball is so damn awesome. I'd probably be way more fragile about the whole thing if not for GOATse Batflipsa

I agree 100%, but my question is: once the ball is declared dead, is it not dead? I don't understand how they can overrule that.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Might have been smarter to keep Hamels in ?
I, for one, was excited to see Hamels go.
Did he really need to be yanked ?

Certainly all hell broke loose after he left.
http://www.fangraphs.com/plays.aspx?date=2015-10-14&team=Blue Jays&dh=0&season=2015

Dyson's stats are probably good.
http://m.mlb.com/gameday/player/473879

In his last 3 innings vs Jays he gave up No Runs, and only 1 hit in each of his innings.

Was Hamels "getting stronger" as the game went on (as the announcers suggested) ?
Was "any change" a good change after your team makes 3 errors ?

Hindsight is 20/20.
As a Blue Jay fan I'm happy it turned out as it did.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Unless they're pitching Cueto on short rest in Gm 2, Stroman will be facing him at home in Gm 3. The way things are shaping up, it looks like we'll be going

Estrada 1/5
Price 2/6
Stroman 3/7
Dickey 4

The only thing I can see changing that is if we pitch Price on short rest in Gm 5 and use Estrada in a Gm 6, but I don't see Gibby doing that with how Estrada has done all year, and how he pitched Gm 3 unless he completely implodes in Gm 1, and then you bump everyone else up to pitch on 3-days rest for the remainder of the series. But I don't see that happening, so I think my original rotation is how it'll play out lol

That looks reasonable, but my thoughts are that I want to get Stro and Price two starts no matter what - so using either out of the pen isn't a great idea unless it's in an elimination type scenario.

That means you need 3 starts from Dickey/Estrada. I'd lean towards starting Dickey in game 1, and if he falters (maybe give him a short leash) Estrada is a good option to come out of the bullpen as a long man to eat innings. In this case, Dickey would not have thrown many pitches and would be good to start game 4 on short rest (even if he had a good game, he could still start on short rest given his throwing style). Estrada would be good for game 5 then as pitching Friday would give him normal rest between those appearances.

 

[Longshot]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2015...inning-game-5-texas-rangers-toronto-blue-jays



You can question whether it was correct on the ump to allow the run after he called time (which he admitted he did wrongly) or the ump erred that Choo did not intentionally interfered with the catcher but I can see why it was the right call.

Your quotations don't make reference to what it means for an umpire to rule a play dead.

I understand the rule on the play. The ball was live, but the umpire ruled the play dead.

I thought once that happened, the play was dead, regardless of what happened after or what they think would have happened.

 

[theaub]

Eh its like when they call a guy down in NFL and the other team recovers the fumble. If its clearly in the act of the play, the defense gets the ball.

In this case, Odor was scoring no matter what. It was the right call. Its also a lot easier to say that since we won.

 

[Leaftors]

Eh its like when they call a guy down in NFL and the other team recovers the fumble. If its clearly in the act of the play, the defense gets the ball.

In this case, Odor was scoring no matter what. It was the right call. Its also a lot easier to say that since we won.

if we lost on that run though, mayhem i assure you.

 

[Eb]

The only thing Dale Scott did wrong was calling the ball dead on that play. Ball should have been live the whole time. What was lucky (and kudos to Odor) is that he ran across the plate despite the dead ball call. If you go back and look at the play, Odor is scoring there regardless of the dead ball call. Sanchez, Martin and Donaldson are no where near the ball and wouldn't have made a play. That's why the call was corrected and Odor counted. He would have scored no matter what.

Now, if Odor stops halfway and goes back to 3rd it's a whole different story. Because you lose that "he would have scored no matter what" piece.

Ridiculously unique play, part of why baseball is so damn awesome. I'd probably be way more fragile about the whole thing if not for GOATse Batflipsa

So you're saying, if Donaldson/Sanchez were closer to making the play at home, the run wouldn't have counted?

I think it still would have.

 

[Discoverer]

Wow. i think a lot of us back in July were all like "Please lets face KC in the ALCS" heh. so watching some reports, it seems like while KC doesn't homer a lot - they are really good at manufacturing the run, which means, it seems like to me, we have to match that, and not go for the homer all the time.

The way the Royals score runs really shouldn't have any impact on the way the Jays try to score runs. The Jays had the best offense in baseball this year because they're patient and have a ton of power. Trying to adopt the Royals' "swing at everything and slap the ball around" approach would make them worse.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Your quotations don't make reference to what it means for an umpire to rule a play dead.

I understand the rule on the play. The ball was live, but the umpire ruled the play dead.

I thought once that happened, the play was dead, regardless of what happened after or what they think would have happened.

It's within the umps control to discuss the play on the field and get it right .. The result might have been different had a Jays fielder gotten to the ball, gone to throw it home, but stopped because the ump had his arms up. In that case I can see the ump not allowing the run to count.

 

[Longshot]

Eh its like when they call a guy down in NFL and the other team recovers the fumble. If its clearly in the act of the play, the defense gets the ball.

In this case, Odor was scoring no matter what. It was the right call. Its also a lot easier to say that since we won.

Not sure I get the comparison. In the NFL case the fumble would be reviewed and the call on the field would be overturned on review.

That's not what happened here.

Scott ruled the play dead when he called time.

The umpire conferred and then reversed that call.

But I thought, once a play is ruled dead - it's dead and can't be overturned.

My comparison would be in the NHL when a goal is scored after the whistle has been blown. Whistle was blown. Doesn't matter what happens next or what they think would have happened. The play is dead.

Ultimately they got the call right (Scott should never have called time and Odor obviously would have scored). I'm just questioning how they can overturn the dead play call. I thought once that call was made it was final.

 

[Habsawce]

I have a son being born in a month. I fear he might be named Jose. Poor white kid, named Jose.

 

[topched]

So you're saying, if Donaldson/Sanchez were closer to making the play at home, the run wouldn't have counted?

I think it still would have.

I think there's a more compelling case if Sanchez is holding the ball with Odor 3 steps from the plate when Dale Scott throws his hands up and Sanchez doesn't throw the ball because of the call.

Odor scoring was happening whether the ball was dead or not, which made it easy to reverse.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Not sure I get the comparison. In the NFL case the fumble would be reviewed and the call on the field would be overturned on review.

That's not what happened here.

Scott ruled the play dead when he called time.

The umpire conferred and then reversed that call.

But I thought, once a play is ruled dead - it's dead and can't be overturned.

My comparison would be in the NHL when a goal is scored after the whistle has been blown. Whistle was blown. Doesn't matter what happens next or what they think would have happened. The play is dead.

Ultimately they got the call right (Scott should never have called time and Odor obviously would have scored). I'm just questioning how they can overturn the dead play call. I thought once that call was made it was final.

It's bizarre ... The ump didn't call time until Odor already had made his break for home and was practically there, so I can see why they overturned it.

Had he called time as soon as the ball hit Choo's bat/hand it may have been different, but the timeout call happened in the middle of the play - given it was the wrong decision coupled with a Blue Jay having no chance at throwing Odor out anyway, it makes sense that they reversed it

 

[theaub]

Not sure I get the comparison. In the NFL case the fumble would be reviewed and the call on the field would be overturned on review.

That's not what happened here.

Scott ruled the play dead when he called time.

The umpire conferred and then reversed that call.

But I thought, once a play is ruled dead - it's dead and can't be overturned.

My comparison would be in the NHL when a goal is scored after the whistle has been blown. Whistle was blown. Doesn't matter what happens next or what they think would have happened. The play is dead.

Ultimately they got the call right (Scott should never have called time and Odor obviously would have scored). I'm just questioning how they can overturn the dead play call. I thought once that call was made it was final.

Yeah I can see that too.

I don't know. Feel like they got the call right on the field, but screwed up getting there. Wasn't too upset with the general mayhem that followed (baby hitting aside).

 

[Longshot]

It's within the umps control to discuss the play on the field and get it right .. The result might have been different had a Jays fielder gotten to the ball, gone to throw it home, but stopped because the ump had his arms up. In that case I can see the ump not allowing the run to count.

I need to watch the replay again, but my clear memory is that Donaldson and Sanchez both reacted to the ump calling the play dead and didn't make an attempt on the ball. It's a moot point, because Odor was scoring no matter what if it was ruled a live ball.

I'm sure the argument Gibbons made was: "You called time, my guys stopped playing. How is it fair to give them a run?"

 

[Eb]

The way the Royals score runs really shouldn't have any impact on the way the Jays try to score runs. The Jays had the best offense in baseball this year because they're patient and have a ton of power. Trying to adopt the Royals' "swing at everything and slap the ball around" approach would make them worse.

Ya, not sure I get the logic behind matching their small ball play at all.

Has no barring on our offence one bit.

 

[Tundra]

It's pretty nuts to think how the core of the lineup was largely created by acquiring rejects (with the exception being Donaldson who was at odds with Beane). We got Jose for Robinson Diaz. Edwin was acquired for Scott Rolen.

 

[BertCorbeau]

I need to watch the replay again, but my clear memory is that Donaldson and Sanchez both reacted to the ump calling the play dead and didn't make an attempt on the ball. It's a moot point, because Odor was scoring no matter what if it was ruled a live ball.

I'm sure the argument Gibbons made was: "You called time, my guys stopped playing. How is it fair to give them a run?"

I need a replay too .. I recall the ball already being in no-man's land when the ump called time and Sanchez/Donaldson reacted to the umps call. They couldn't have gotten to it if it was live. I think that played a big factor as I noted in my previous post.

 

[topched]

It's pretty nuts to think how the core of the lineup was largely created by acquiring rejects (with the exception being Donaldson who was at odds with Beane). We got Jose for Robinson Diaz. Edwin was acquired for Scott Rolen.

Correction: We got Zach Stewart for Scott Rolen.

Edwin was the throw in to play 3rd for the rest of the year. My GOD

 

[HamiltonNHL]

"If the batter is standing in the batter's box and he or his bat is struck by the catcher's throw back to the pitcher, and, in the umpire's judgment, there is no intent on the part of the batter to interfere with the throw, the ball is alive and in play.''

There is clear interference.
I think the word Intent is wrong and needs changing.
Intent is irrelevant, he clearly interfered.

I think the smart call would be that the ump SHOULD have ruled there was intent. (the burden of responsibility should be on the batter, he would have to prove he didn't have any intent, and considering how far he was sticking his bat out (maximum arm length) and interfering with the throw back ... he would not be able to prove he had no intention).

There can be super big ramifications if this rule isn't improved.
It *OBVIOUSLY* failed in this situation.
If this rule isn't changed, I promise this will come back to haunt MLB.
The opportunities for left handed batters to interfere "unintentionally" on throws from right handed back catchers is OBVIOUS.

If you take this rule as fair, I think the catcher should walk the ball back to the mound *EVERYTIME*. How is that going to delay things ? Maybe the catcher should ask the ump for the player to move more out of the way *EVERYTIME*. Maybe to give the catcher enough space ... the batter should be forced to move out of the box after every pitch ?

The burden of responsibility should be on the batter to get out of the way. Why should you be allowed to oddly stick your bat out to mess with the catchers throw ?

This rule needs changing. It's obvious.

 

[Tundra]

Correction: We got Zach Stewart for Scott Rolen.

Edwin was the throw in to play 3rd for the rest of the year. My GOD

I wonder if Stewart and Roenicke are even playing professional baseball ATM?

 

[Longshot]

I need a replay too .. I recall the ball already being in no-man's land when the ump called time and Sanchez/Donaldson reacted to the umps call. They couldn't have gotten to it if it was live. I think that played a big factor as I noted in my previous post.

It went like this:

Martin throws.
Ball hits Choo's bat.
Odor starts running.
Ball rolls over between third and home
Sanchez immediately starts protesting
Scott stands up and calls time
Odor is about halfway home and keeps running right through the plate (my belief is he didn't see the ump and was probably watching Martin to see if there was going to be a play)
Donaldson and Sanchez stop believing the play is dead.

 

[Raging Bull]

I have a son being born in a month. I fear he might be named Jose. Poor white kid, named Jose.

Just make his middle name Batflip.