ESPN doing a great job of piling on

[davearm2]

if Alou catches the ball in the presence of no fans, but does not catch it in the presence of fans, isn't that by definition fan interference?

Of course that isn't the rulebook definition of fan interference.

[woodprior04]

 

The thing that perplexed me the most though is that he was listening to the radio. I was doing the same after I walked into parents house from a late night class and had my head phones on. Paranoid as I was, I left them on while watching the game. Now if my memory serves me right when the ball was popped in the air and on its way toward the bullpen wall area Ronny shouted something to the effect of "get back, give him room." My mind could have completely fabricated that part but that is how I recall it. You would think that even in the heat of the moment that he would have reconsidered in mid lunge hearing ronny say? Or maybe he was jamming out to some B96. :D At any rate it really doesnt matter because if it wasnt him one of the other 16 hands grabbing for the ball would have done the same.

 

They played the radio portion of the broadcast in the documentary and Ronny was not in the booth. It was Pat and Steve Stone and they didn't say anything about the fans during the play. I remember Ron not being able to announce during those playoffs but I can't remember the reasoning.

[Mark Priors Calves]

Santo was fighting bladder cancer that postseason.

[biittner77]

I seem to remember in other threads that have been on here, people have claimed that Alou wouldn't have caught it.

 

Probably because Alou never went into the stands to catch a ball ever in his Cubs career. In 30 years of watching Cubs games, I can't remember ever seeing anyone catch a ball in that part of the park.

[jersey cubs fan]

I seem to remember in other threads that have been on here, people have claimed that Alou wouldn't have caught it.

 

Probably because Alou never went into the stands to catch a ball ever in his Cubs career. In 30 years of watching Cubs games, I can't remember ever seeing anyone catch a ball in that part of the park.

 

Yeah, anybody who claims Alou clearly would have made that catch is talking out of his butt.

[CubmanPi]

Due to the remarks completely dismissing the possibility that this play was fan interference, and due to me being convinced that it was, I need to revisit the topic.

 

I used reference points from the new angle of Alou with the fans removed from the background and compared it with the pic people used on page 1 of this thread to argue Alou was clearly reaching into the stands. The two pictures don't seem to be from the exact same instant, but they're so close that this comparison still works.

 

The main reference points are the tops of the dividing lines between sections of padding on the wall. I drew a line straight up from the tops of the line in front of Alou and behind him in order to define the section of railing Alou is next to.

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v483/cubbybear314/comparison1.jpg

 

From this angle, it's very clear how far behind Alou that section of padding extends. The vertical lines on the railing, as well as the thick line I drew on the railing itself, are drawn in the exact same position on the above picture as on the below picture. In the picture below, in order for Alou to be "clearly reaching into the stands," his glove would have to be reaching over the red vertical line on the right. Comparing it with the picture above, it's very clear that Alou's glove was not that far back along the wall.

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v483/cubbybear314/comparison2.jpg

 

Even if instant replay were available, there's no way they go back and call fan interference, but in comparing these two pictures, I don't understand how people think it's so clear Alou reached over the railing.

[CubmanPi]

I went back to page 1 and saw there was a different picture used for the point of contact. I extended the lines all the way up to show that, base on where bartman was standing, his full arm extension, and where he was in relation to the railing, there's no way Bartman makes contact with the ball on his side of the railing.

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v483/cubbybear314/comparison3.jpg

[El Duderino]

I never noticed the guy next to Bartman with his hands to his face and the look of absolute horror. It's like he knew what was going to happen.

[Butterscup1679666578]

i think hes being a [expletive] and trying not to get hit by a ball

[OleMissCub]

I never noticed the guy next to Bartman with his hands to his face and the look of absolute horror. It's like he knew what was going to happen.

 

I believe that was actually a chick. One of Bartman's buddies that was at the game with him.

[Brett]

CubmanPi's analysis looks pretty convincing to me.

 

Shall we petition the League?

[Derwood]

when did this thread turn into Loose Change?

[UMFan83]

CubmanPi's analysis looks pretty convincing to me.

 

Shall we petition the League?

 

Yup. Get all the involved parties together and lets replay the rest of that season from that point (2 outs, top 8, 3-0 Cubs, Pierre on 2nd).

[CubmanPi]

It's not about what should or shouldn't have happened. No replay would have been conclusive enough on the spot to ever overturn it. What should have happened is that Alou should have STFU and GBTW. I don't blame the guy at all, but to say Bartman wasn't reaching over the field of play when he touched the ball is pretty clearly false.

 

And Derwood, my post was nowhere near the realm of Loose Change. Had I claimed that Bartman was a secret agent working for some underground secretive corporate network, who sought to ultimately ruin the Cubs' franchise so the landmark status could be removed, so they could purchase the land, so they could drill to the oil/gold wealth located 12 miles directly beneath Wrigley that only they know about, and their elaborate plot even went so far as to alter the physics of the baseball to allow it to be remotely steered to Bartman's position in the stands, using technology only high-ranking members of the government were authorized to implement, then it would be loose change.

 

I believe a more appropriate unsupported criticism would be:

 

http://knowyourmeme.com/i/24183/original/500pxShopped.jpg

[Sammy Sofa]

I thought FI hinged on where the ball is. If the contact between Alou and Bartman occurred because both are going after a ball in the stands isn't it moot? I thought FI occurs when a player interferes with a player trying to make a play on the field.

[erik316wttn]

Santo was fighting bladder cancer that postseason.

 

One of the very few good things is that we didn't have to hear Ronny's agonizing screams after that play.

[CubmanPi]

Right. And combining the angles shows that Bartman's hands and Alou's glove make contact over the field of play. The only two conclusions that can then be drawn are:

 

1) The ball was also over the field of play.

2) The ball was over the railing and in foul territory, but Alou and Bartman were both reaching for the exact same wrong spot over the field of play, and the ball bounced off Bartman's elbows.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't think the pictures are conclusive either way. Hell, they make it look like if the ball was in play then Alou had absolutely zero chance of catching it since he's reaching into the stands.

[JockJones]

I don't think the pictures are conclusive either way. Hell, they make it look like if the ball was in play then Alou had absolutely zero chance of catching it since he's reaching into the stands.

 

Ya, but Moises was looking up on a play at the wall, and he never did that. He was definitely going to catch it.

[CubmanPi]

I don't think the pictures are conclusive either way. Hell, they make it look like if the ball was in play then Alou had absolutely zero chance of catching it since he's reaching into the stands.

You're either trolling or the hardest-headed person in existence. And I'm really not sure which.

 

http://www.nature.com/scientificamerican/journal/v20/n1/images/scientificamericanmind0510-56sp-I8.jpg

 

Look at the picture on the left. Is it a closed, intact triangle? If you think so, look at the picture on the right. It's the same structure, but viewed from a different angle. Knowing that, look back at the picture on the left. Do you still think it's a closed, intact triangle?

[Sammy Sofa]

I honestly have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

[CubmanPi]

So you're trolling. Thanks.

[Sammy Sofa]

No, I genuinely don't understand. I really don't get how your posts prove he wasn't reaching over the wall. Your marked photos seems to only indicate where he was along the wall and not whether or not he was reaching into the stands. I don't know how much more clear I can make this.

[CubmanPi]

Right. It marked where he was along the wall. In the image where it appears as if he's reaching into the stands, he would have to be reaching over the railing where the red line farthest from home plate crosses the railing. The new angle from the documentary, where I drew the red line across the railing in the exact same position, shows that he clearly wasn't reaching over that portion of the railing. The fat red line I drew on the railing itself is much closer to the part of the railing closest to Alou's glove. He clearly was not reaching across that chunk of railing into the stands.

 

I don't know how much more clear I can make this.

[davearm2]

Right. And combining the angles shows that Bartman's hands and Alou's glove make contact over the field of play.

No they do not. That conclusion is, and forever will be, pure speculation.

 

Heck I have yet to hear anyone even ask, let alone answer, the question of where the stands end and the field of play starts. At the railing? At the edge of the concrete wall? At the outermost edge of the padding?

 

I'm pretty convinced the ball, glove, and hands were above one or more of those potential, imaginary boundary lines.

 

To borrow a phrase from football, there is not conclusive video evidence to overturn the call on the field.