Predict the Apology

[Bruce Miles]

Hey Bruce, I see you're online. What was the mood of the Angels after the game?

 

Livid, but under control. I really like Scioscia.

[USSoccer]

Hey Bruce, I see you're online. What was the mood of the Angels after the game?

 

Livid, but under control. I really like Scioscia.

 

will there be an official protest to the league?

[adamb0719]

I missed the game, but just saw the highlights on Sportscenter. That was terrible, he obviously called him out. Did I hear Eddings say he did not call the ball dropped? Then why did he allow him to advance to first? This is a very unique situation to say the least.

[Chris]

Eddings didn't help himself in the postgame interview. His motions for that play was the same set of motions as every other third strike for the third out the entire game.

[sethuel1]

Eddings didn't help himself in the postgame interview. His motions for that play was the same set of motions as every other third strike for the third out the entire game.

 

Yeah, he looked and sounded pretty clueless. And what's with the "I was watching josh paul" BS he keeps spewing? Why should that have any bearing on anything?

[Chris]

Eddings didn't help himself in the postgame interview. His motions for that play was the same set of motions as every other third strike for the third out the entire game.

 

Yeah, he looked and sounded pretty clueless. And what's with the "I was watching josh paul" BS he keeps spewing? Why should that have any bearing on anything?

 

Worthless comments. He needs to acknowledge that he screwed up. I loved how Baseball Tonight showed the replays of his motions to confirm that he was calling him out in the 9th.

[Mark_R]

Hey Bruce, I see you're online. What was the mood of the Angels after the game?

 

Livid, but under control. I really like Scioscia.

 

will there be an official protest to the league?

 

Protests of the play in question are not allowed:

 

4.19

PROTESTING GAMES. Each league shall adopt rules governing procedure for protesting a game, when a manager claims that an umpire's decision is in violation of these rules. No protest shall ever be permitted on judgment decisions by the umpire. In all protested games, the decision of the League President shall be final. Even if it is held that the protested decision violated the rules, no replay of the game will be ordered unless in the opinion of the League President the violation adversely affected the protesting team's chances of winning the game. Whenever a manager protests a game because of alleged misapplication of the rules the protest will not be recognized unless the umpires are notified at the time the play under protest occurs and before the next pitch is made or a runner is retired. A protest arising on a game ending play may be filed until 12 noon the following day with the League Office.

[USSoccer]

Hey Bruce, I see you're online. What was the mood of the Angels after the game?

 

Livid, but under control. I really like Scioscia.

 

will there be an official protest to the league?

 

Protests of the play in question are not allowed:

 

4.19

PROTESTING GAMES. Each league shall adopt rules governing procedure for protesting a game, when a manager claims that an umpire's decision is in violation of these rules. No protest shall ever be permitted on judgment decisions by the umpire. In all protested games, the decision of the League President shall be final. Even if it is held that the protested decision violated the rules, no replay of the game will be ordered unless in the opinion of the League President the violation adversely affected the protesting team's chances of winning the game. Whenever a manager protests a game because of alleged misapplication of the rules the protest will not be recognized unless the umpires are notified at the time the play under protest occurs and before the next pitch is made or a runner is retired. A protest arising on a game ending play may be filed until 12 noon the following day with the League Office.

 

This wasn't a judgement call, though. He called him out, then inexplicably allowed him to stay at 1B.

[XZero771679666304]

Hey Bruce, I see you're online. What was the mood of the Angels after the game?

 

Livid, but under control. I really like Scioscia.

 

will there be an official protest to the league?

 

Protests of the play in question are not allowed:

 

4.19

PROTESTING GAMES. Each league shall adopt rules governing procedure for protesting a game, when a manager claims that an umpire's decision is in violation of these rules. No protest shall ever be permitted on judgment decisions by the umpire. In all protested games, the decision of the League President shall be final. Even if it is held that the protested decision violated the rules, no replay of the game will be ordered unless in the opinion of the League President the violation adversely affected the protesting team's chances of winning the game. Whenever a manager protests a game because of alleged misapplication of the rules the protest will not be recognized unless the umpires are notified at the time the play under protest occurs and before the next pitch is made or a runner is retired. A protest arising on a game ending play may be filed until 12 noon the following day with the League Office.

 

But this seems like less of an issue of Edding's judgment than the fact he clearly called A.J. out, then said he didn't.

[da bears]

well i dont know if its the same for all white sox fans, but a sox fan on my floor definitely acknowledged that she is not as excited about the win as she usually would be. i commend her for that. even if it happened for the cubs (god forbid the cubs EVER get the breaks going their way) i too would probably feel a little empty about the win, knowing it was a bs call.

[Productive Outs]

Do we feel lucky? No," Pierzynski said. "Did they feel lucky when they won last night?

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=251012104

 

seems pretty arrogant to me

[adamb0719]

Has anyone checked the Sox boards. Some pretty classy stuff being said. It appears that most of their fans feel the called out is irrelevant. It was indisputable that the ball hit the ground. The Sox deserved it because they hustled on the play, and the Angels were lazy.

[USSoccer]

Has anyone checked the Sox boards. Some pretty classy stuff being said. It appears that most of their fans feel the called out is irrelevant. It was indisputable that the ball hit the ground. The Sox deserved it because they hustled on the play, and the Angels were lazy.

 

About the only thing I'll say to that is that Paul should have tagged him to be sure. Other than that, the whole play was bull.

[snoodmonger]

Frustrating stuff. And you could tell once those three umps got on the stand at the press conference that they were ready to back Eddings against all odds.

[adamb0719]

Has anyone checked the Sox boards. Some pretty classy stuff being said. It appears that most of their fans feel the called out is irrelevant. It was indisputable that the ball hit the ground. The Sox deserved it because they hustled on the play, and the Angels were lazy.

 

About the only thing I'll say to that is that Paul should have tagged him to be sure. Other than that, the whole play was bull.

 

True, he should have tagged him. One thing I read on their board was that Paul tossed the ball to the mound before the out call was made. Did anyone notice that? Either way, I personally did not see an angle that showed the ball hit the ground. And shouldn't that be irrelevant since he was called out? I guess this confuses me a bit. I still just don't understand why he signaled him out, then just let him take first. I think the ump was as confused as the Angels were.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Eddings didn't help himself in the postgame interview. His motions for that play was the same set of motions as every other third strike for the third out the entire game.

 

In the postgame interview, Eddings said he makes the same motion for every strikeout, whether the ball hits the ground or not. This is a lie. The previous batter, Aaron Rowand, struck out on a ball that bounced. Eddings made no motion until Josh Paul tagged or threw Rowand out (don't know which happened).

 

Josh Paul said in his postgame interview that every umpire says, including Eddings, "not caught" when strike 3 is not caught. Eddings acknowledged he did not say that it was not caught. When asked why not, he said something to the extent that he wanted to see what the players did.

 

It's obvious that ALL the Angels saw the same thing, since they all were walking off the field. I would think a few, especially Erstad, Kennedy or Escobar might have thought otherwise if there was any question - but there wasn't, since Eddings ruled AJP out TWICE.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Has anyone checked the Sox boards. Some pretty classy stuff being said. It appears that most of their fans feel the called out is irrelevant. It was indisputable that the ball hit the ground. The Sox deserved it because they hustled on the play, and the Angels were lazy.

 

About the only thing I'll say to that is that Paul should have tagged him to be sure. Other than that, the whole play was bull.

 

True, he should have tagged him. One thing I read on their board was that Paul tossed the ball to the mound before the out call was made. Did anyone notice that? Either way, I personally did not see an angle that showed the ball hit the ground. And shouldn't that be irrelevant since he was called out? I guess this confuses me a bit. I still just don't understand why he signaled him out, then just let him take first. I think the ump was as confused as the Angels were.

 

Not according to the Angels or Dodgers radio stations. They said Paul saw Eddings do the fist thing to acknowledge an out and then he rolled the ball to the mound.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Eddings acknowledged he did not say that it was not caught. When asked why not, he said something to the extent that he wanted to see what the players did.

 

Wasn't that the question where Eddings didn't say anything, and there was silence for a second before the Umpires superintendent jumped in with some nonsense?

[adamb0719]

Has anyone checked the Sox boards. Some pretty classy stuff being said. It appears that most of their fans feel the called out is irrelevant. It was indisputable that the ball hit the ground. The Sox deserved it because they hustled on the play, and the Angels were lazy.

 

About the only thing I'll say to that is that Paul should have tagged him to be sure. Other than that, the whole play was bull.

 

True, he should have tagged him. One thing I read on their board was that Paul tossed the ball to the mound before the out call was made. Did anyone notice that? Either way, I personally did not see an angle that showed the ball hit the ground. And shouldn't that be irrelevant since he was called out? I guess this confuses me a bit. I still just don't understand why he signaled him out, then just let him take first. I think the ump was as confused as the Angels were.

 

Not according to the Angels or Dodgers radio stations. They said Paul saw Eddings do the fist thing to acknowledge an out and then he rolled the ball to the mound.

 

Gotta love the two sides that every story has.

[Chris]

"There was a change of direction in the ball"

 

Apparently all of the replays and even zooming the play was inconclusive.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Eddings acknowledged he did not say that it was not caught. When asked why not, he said something to the extent that he wanted to see what the players did.

 

Wasn't that the question where Eddings didn't say anything, and there was silence for a second before the Umpires superintendent jumped in with some nonsense?

 

Yes, that might have been it. At some point and time Eddings acknowledged he was watching the players rather than taking charge of the situation.

 

Also, the umpiring folks said something about having technology and watching the ball move to show it was trapped. Of course the ball moves once it hits the glove. If it hit the ground/was trapped, there should have been a sign of dirt moving and there was none.

 

For Eddings/ump superintendent to say that he made the right call after watching the replay is bogus.

[Chris]

The umps are saying that the ball hit the ground and bounced in the glove. The interview is on ESPNEWS

[Chris]

"He never called him out, he called it a strike"

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Has anyone checked the Sox boards. Some pretty classy stuff being said. It appears that most of their fans feel the called out is irrelevant. It was indisputable that the ball hit the ground. The Sox deserved it because they hustled on the play, and the Angels were lazy.

 

About the only thing I'll say to that is that Paul should have tagged him to be sure. Other than that, the whole play was bull.

 

True, he should have tagged him. One thing I read on their board was that Paul tossed the ball to the mound before the out call was made. Did anyone notice that? Either way, I personally did not see an angle that showed the ball hit the ground. And shouldn't that be irrelevant since he was called out? I guess this confuses me a bit. I still just don't understand why he signaled him out, then just let him take first. I think the ump was as confused as the Angels were.

 

Not according to the Angels or Dodgers radio stations. They said Paul saw Eddings do the fist thing to acknowledge an out and then he rolled the ball to the mound.

 

Gotta love the two sides that every story has.

 

Sorry, I was in a drug store in suburban LA. I had no shot to ask anyone related to the White Sox about the play.

 

Oddly enough, the folks at the Dodgers station hate the Angels but have gone on about how ridiculous the call was.

[adamb0719]

"There was a change of direction in the ball"

 

Apparently all of the replays and even zooming the play was inconclusive.

 

Couldn't a change of direction happened just from bouncing inside the glove? Also I really don't get it, isn't that all irrelevant since he was signaled out. I thought that superseded anything else, the fact that he was called out.