Overturning a 3rd out?

[rocket]

Check out the highlights from today's Reds vs. Pirates game.

 

Brief description: Dunn is up to bat with 2 outs. Runners on 1st and 2nd. Dunn hits a flyball to centerfield, the centerfielder dives, the ball hits the grass and goes into his glove, but the umpire doesn't see that and calls him out.

 

Reds fans and players go nuts, umps have a conference, overturn the call, and a run is allowed to score.

 

Now, the ump clearly blew the call. But can you really overturn a 3rd out call like that, and then let a runner score? To me, it seems like that should be completely impossible. But it happened.

[SouthSideRyan]

Check out the highlights from today's Reds vs. Pirates game.

 

Brief description: Dunn is up to bat with 2 outs. Runners on 1st and 2nd. Dunn hits a flyball to centerfield, the centerfielder dives, the ball hits the grass and goes into his glove, but the umpire doesn't see that and calls him out.

 

Reds fans and players go nuts, umps have a conference, overturn the call, and a run is allowed to score.

 

Now, the ump clearly blew the call. But can you really overturn a 3rd out call like that, and then let a runner score? To me, it seems like that should be completely impossible. But it happened.

 

Seems wrong to me as well. Once that 3rd out is signaled, the ball's dead to all fielders and baserunners, meaning to determine what would've happened had it been called correctly pretty impossible.

 

Yes, Doug Eddings I'm looking at you.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

yeah, I'd say that if you can overturn the call at all that you can only assume one base advanced.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I think they did the right thing, that runner would have scored if the umps called it correctly in the first place.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I think they did the right thing, that runner would have scored if the umps called it correctly in the first place.

 

while that might be true, assuming the run would score runs contrary to everything else that's mandated about situations like this(can't assume a double play for example)

[rocket]

I think they did the right thing, that runner would have scored if the umps called it correctly in the first place.

 

I don't disagree, but I think umpires deciding what probably would have happened is a pretty bad trend to start.

[Tracer Bullet]

Depends on where the runners were when the ball was caught/dropped. If the runners are heading towards 3rd and home (which is likely, since you said there were 2 outs) at the time the guy dove, I don't have a problem with giving them the base they're heading to.

[BigbadB]

I'm pleased they made the right call. Jim Tracy isn't. He got tossed.

[mul21]

The guy they let score was around 15-20 feet from homeplate when the play was made in center field. I thinks it's pretty safe to assume my barely crawling 6 month old nephew could have made it to the plate by the time the guy got off his belly and made a throw. No reason to not let the run score in that particular situation.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

The old rule of thumb was that a call could be overturned, on appeal, if the call made was incorrect according to the rules. Judgement calls could not be overturned. I have started to see it occur more and more over the past few years where those judgement calls are being overturned, and I really don't know the reason for it.

[BigbadB]

What's a judgment call? In the game last night, the 2b made the wrong call. Another umpire may have clearly seen the ball bounce off the turf before it went in Duffy's glove. That's not a judgment call. That's a reversal of an incorrect call.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

What's a judgment call? In the game last night, the 2b made the wrong call. Another umpire may have clearly seen the ball bounce off the turf before it went in Duffy's glove. That's not a judgment call. That's a reversal of an incorrect call.

 

That is a judgement call. There are only 2 kinds -- judgement calls and those from the rulebook. It's the same as if a runner is thrown out at first by a step and the ump blows it. It was in his judgement that the batter was safe, therefore no out is recorded. An example of the other type is if one of the umps forgets about the infield fly rule and starts calling the wrong people safe and the wrong guy out.

 

Historically, that call would have stood as it was his call to make. Like I said, I don't know what changed and why, but they're starting to overturn each other more frequently.

[goonys evil twin]

If there was 2 outs and it was a pop fly, the runner would have scored. I don't see how anybody can have a problem with the right call being made.

[BigbadB]

What's a judgment call? In the game last night, the 2b made the wrong call. Another umpire may have clearly seen the ball bounce off the turf before it went in Duffy's glove. That's not a judgment call. That's a reversal of an incorrect call.

 

That is a judgement call. There are only 2 kinds -- judgement calls and those from the rulebook. It's the same as if a runner is thrown out at first by a step and the ump blows it. It was in his judgement that the batter was safe, therefore no out is recorded. An example of the other type is if one of the umps forgets about the infield fly rule and starts calling the wrong people safe and the wrong guy out.

 

Historically, that call would have stood as it was his call to make. Like I said, I don't know what changed and why, but they're starting to overturn each other more frequently.

 

Okay, so an umpire who didn't have a good angle that makes a call, and that call is overturned by an umpire who had a clear view of the play is a "judgment call"? I would think the umpire who had a clear view to make the correct call would be obligated to reverse the call.

 

On the first day of the year, LoDuca pretended to have had the ball in his grasp on the play at the plate. The home plate umpire's view was blocked. Let's just say that the 1b umpire came down the line a little bit, and from where he was positioned, he could see the ball clearly lying on the ground. It would only be a "judgment call" in this instance to reverse the original call? Can the umpire turn his back and walk away when he knows for certain the wrong call was made?

 

By the way, winning games is important and everything, but it was a total lack of integrity on LoDuca's part to pretend like he had that ball all along. It's cheating. Plain and simple. It sets a poor example for every young kid wanting to play the game the right way. Do whatever you have to do to win is what it has come down to. I love this game, but I'm not nearly as enamored with how the game is played anymore. Professional is not really an accurate word to describe some of these guys.

[jjgman21]

I think they did the right thing, that runner would have scored if the umps called it correctly in the first place.

 

while that might be true, assuming the run would score runs contrary to everything else that's mandated about situations like this(can't assume a double play for example)

 

I know what you are saying, but there are also situations where the umps are allowed to make a determination based on what would have happened, ie. double down the line with a runner on first, then a fan reaches over and grabs the ball. the umps can decide whether the runner from first goes to third or scores.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Okay, so an umpire who didn't have a good angle that makes a call, and that call is overturned by an umpire who had a clear view of the play is a "judgment call"? I would think the umpire who had a clear view to make the correct call would be obligated to reverse the call.

 

On the first day of the year, LoDuca pretended to have had the ball in his grasp on the play at the plate. The home plate umpire's view was blocked. Let's just say that the 1b umpire came down the line a little bit, and from where he was positioned, he could see the ball clearly lying on the ground. It would only be a "judgment call" in this instance to reverse the original call? Can the umpire turn his back and walk away when he knows for certain the wrong call was made?

 

By the way, winning games is important and everything, but it was a total lack of integrity on LoDuca's part to pretend like he had that ball all along. It's cheating. Plain and simple. It sets a poor example for every young kid wanting to play the game the right way. Do whatever you have to do to win is what it has come down to. I love this game, but I'm not nearly as enamored with how the game is played anymore. Professional is not really an accurate word to describe some of these guys.

 

The proper thing to do, from the umpire's standpoint, is to ask for another's opinion prior to actually making the call. A simple look over the shoulder or glance to either side should let him know if any others may have been in better position. All they need to do is point to the other ump for the call (it's only a split-second delay). However, if it's "their call" and they make it, the other ump really can't jump in and offer his opinion, unless it conflicts with something in the rule book.

[goonys evil twin]

The proper thing to do, from the umpire's standpoint, is to ask for another's opinion prior to actually making the call. A simple look over the shoulder or glance to either side should let him know if any others may have been in better position. All they need to do is point to the other ump for the call (it's only a split-second delay).

 

What? I'm not umpire techniques expert, but I can't see how you are even close to right here. You never see baseball umps look around for help before they make a call. They make what they thing is the right call. Then if another ump thinks differently they talk about it. There is no hesitation, and no way would it be just a split second delay if they glance over their shoulder for help. They make the call, then deal with the problems if somebody disagrees.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

The proper thing to do, from the umpire's standpoint, is to ask for another's opinion prior to actually making the call. A simple look over the shoulder or glance to either side should let him know if any others may have been in better position. All they need to do is point to the other ump for the call (it's only a split-second delay).

 

What? I'm not umpire techniques expert, but I can't see how you are even close to right here. You never see baseball umps look around for help before they make a call. They make what they thing is the right call. Then if another ump thinks differently they talk about it. There is no hesitation, and no way would it be just a split second delay if they glance over their shoulder for help. They make the call, then deal with the problems if somebody disagrees.

 

I'm not saying that's what happens, it's what should happen. Any umpire who is unsure of a call should not be making a call.

 

And you do see umps look for help in making calls a few times in most games, the old "did he go" on a check swing.

[BigbadB]

The proper thing to do, from the umpire's standpoint, is to ask for another's opinion prior to actually making the call. A simple look over the shoulder or glance to either side should let him know if any others may have been in better position. All they need to do is point to the other ump for the call (it's only a split-second delay).

 

What? I'm not umpire techniques expert, but I can't see how you are even close to right here. You never see baseball umps look around for help before they make a call. They make what they thing is the right call. Then if another ump thinks differently they talk about it. There is no hesitation, and no way would it be just a split second delay if they glance over their shoulder for help. They make the call, then deal with the problems if somebody disagrees.

 

That's a bit closer to what "I" would think as well, but I'm really not all that versed on how umpires do things. I'm just asking the questions, because the above quote doesnt' seem accurate to me.

 

With 2 outs and everyone running, I would think there would be time to look back, but that it's still unlikely to happen. With less than 2 outs and players stopped about midway between the bases, any delay could really put a team at a disadvantage.

[K-Town]

The proper thing to do, from the umpire's standpoint, is to ask for another's opinion prior to actually making the call. A simple look over the shoulder or glance to either side should let him know if any others may have been in better position. All they need to do is point to the other ump for the call (it's only a split-second delay).

 

What? I'm not umpire techniques expert, but I can't see how you are even close to right here. You never see baseball umps look around for help before they make a call. They make what they thing is the right call. Then if another ump thinks differently they talk about it. There is no hesitation, and no way would it be just a split second delay if they glance over their shoulder for help. They make the call, then deal with the problems if somebody disagrees.

 

I'm not saying that's what happens, it's what should happen. Any umpire who is unsure of a call should not be making a call.

 

And you do see umps look for help in making calls a few times in most games, the old "did he go" on a check swing.

 

Balls and strikes are an entirely different circumstance than a ball that's in play. Umpires don't have time to hold a conference while players are running bases.

 

The play was handled exactly right, in my opinion. The Pirates might not like it, but the outcome was the way it should have been, and you can't ask for more than that.

[SouthSideRyan]

There's a difference between holding a conference and checking to see if somebody with a better view is making a safe call.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Does this mean we can go back to Game 2 of the ALCS and correct Doug Eddings' call?