CaliforniaRaisin

I went home for lunch and watched ESPNEWS and they discussed it. They said that essentially the umpire balked on the call and he deceived the players for the Angels. So they assumed it was an out when it wasn't. I don't deny that the ump screwed up but the Angels are not without fault in this. I don't like this line of thinking. It works to excuse the initial mistake that caused all the trouble. The Angels "mistake" was only a "mistake" because the ump screwed up. That's like saying a driver is at fault when an oncoming car is heading straight at them, and he swerves to avoid the head on collision, then ticketing that driver for changing lanes without signaling. The Angels did nothing wrong. They just failed to make up for the ump's huge blunder. I am not excusing the initial mistake by the ump. Watch the replay and tell me if Paul isn't sprintiing for the clubhouse and already rolls the ball before the ump pumps his hand. He rolled the ball right after the ump pumped his hand. But, Paul never looked at the ump. We saw two different games because Paul took off right after he caught the ball. AJP took a couple of steps towards his bench..looked at the ump and didn't see the out sign and ran. Only then did the ump pump his hand once AJP already took off. http://losangeles.angels.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article_perspectives.jsp?ymd=20051013&content_id=1248589&vkey=perspectives&fext=.jsp

I posted a link to it.

I went home for lunch and watched ESPNEWS and they discussed it. They said that essentially the umpire balked on the call and he deceived the players for the Angels. So they assumed it was an out when it wasn't. I don't deny that the ump screwed up but the Angels are not without fault in this. I don't like this line of thinking. It works to excuse the initial mistake that caused all the trouble. The Angels "mistake" was only a "mistake" because the ump screwed up. That's like saying a driver is at fault when an oncoming car is heading straight at them, and he swerves to avoid the head on collision, then ticketing that driver for changing lanes without signaling. The Angels did nothing wrong. They just failed to make up for the ump's huge blunder. I am not excusing the initial mistake by the ump. Watch the replay and tell me if Paul isn't sprintiing for the clubhouse and already rolls the ball before the ump pumps his hand. He rolled the ball right after the ump pumped his hand. But, Paul never looked at the ump. EDIT: Watch the link to "AJP's K in the ninth" on this page and you'll notice that too: http://losangeles.angels.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article_perspectives.jsp?ymd=20051013&content_id=1248589&vkey=perspectives&fext=.jsp

I don't know for sure that all those guys thought it but the one that mattered didn't. The ump that called him out thought he called him out. It wasn't until after AJ ran that he thought maybe he didn't call him out. I do not think that means what you think it does. That's where the other umps should be able to help him. Take time to discuss it and get it right. None of the other umps had a proper view.

I went home for lunch and watched ESPNEWS and they discussed it. They said that essentially the umpire balked on the call and he deceived the players for the Angels. So they assumed it was an out when it wasn't. I don't deny that the ump screwed up but the Angels are not without fault in this. How? Cuse, that's the sign the ump has been giving for an out ALL GAME LONG. The Angels assumed it was an out because the ump signaled it was an out. He's not allowed to change his signals over the course of the game! The only Angel potentially at fault is Paul for not bothering a tag, but that doesn't matter, since Eddings pumped his fist for an out.

Think about it. A catcher drops a low called strike 3 and the batter doesn't swing. How are the players to know it was strike 3? Is it the right hand straight out or does an ump yell strike 3 but doesn't pump the batter out? If the plate ump simply yelled "live runner" it would be clear what happened. It definately would help the catcher since he can't see him. The plate ump should definitely be required to use verbal signals for the catcher's benefit. The other umps can use visual signs. True. And...it's up to the other players to be aware to help the catcher with this. Given that all the players were running off the field, and indicated Eddings' fist pump when AJP started running, all the players were aware of what was going on. I saw Erstad standing at first when AJP got there. http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2005-10/19942320.jpg Look at the video, the second AJP starts running, Erstad, Kennedy and Escobar are shown in the wider view and all three make gestures similar to Eddings' fist pump or point to Eddings. http://losangeles.angels.mlb.com/images/2005/10/13/hDXPWAhK.jpg

I don't know for sure that all those guys thought it but the one that mattered didn't. http://www.mlb.com Paul caught the ball and booked for the dugout no doubt in my mind. IMO, he tried to do the same thing everyone is accusing AJP of. Either way, that doesn't explain the Angels IF's reaction.

Brilliant post, Daymen. I agree completely. I missed this post. I agree, that's the gist of the matter.

I don't know for sure that all those guys thought it but the one that mattered didn't. That means the ump put the Angels in a disadvantage.

I teach my players to go after the ball and not yell at an ump. Once AJP is on first then we'll deal with the ump. I hope this gets some rules straighted out and doesn't make then more complicated. But the ump ruled the player out!! Right as AJP starts running! If he doesn't do that, Escobar fields the rolled ball and throws it to Erstad. The players are were momentarily paralyzed by Eddings' idiocy and then point out his idiocy.

Think about it. A catcher drops a low called strike 3 and the batter doesn't swing. How are the players to know it was strike 3? Is it the right hand straight out or does an ump yell strike 3 but doesn't pump the batter out? If the plate ump simply yelled "live runner" it would be clear what happened. It definately would help the catcher since he can't see him. The plate ump should definitely be required to use verbal signals for the catcher's benefit. The other umps can use visual signs. True. And...it's up to the other players to be aware to help the catcher with this. Given that all the players were running off the field, and indicated Eddings' fist pump when AJP started running, all the players were aware of what was going on. I saw Erstad standing at first when AJP got there. http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2005-10/19942320.jpg Look at the video, the second AJP starts running, Erstad, Kennedy and Escobar are shown in the wider view and all three make gestures similar to Eddings' fist pump or point to Eddings.

Think about it. A catcher drops a low called strike 3 and the batter doesn't swing. How are the players to know it was strike 3? Is it the right hand straight out or does an ump yell strike 3 but doesn't pump the batter out? If the plate ump simply yelled "live runner" it would be clear what happened. It definately would help the catcher since he can't see him. The plate ump should definitely be required to use verbal signals for the catcher's benefit. The other umps can use visual signs. True. And...it's up to the other players to be aware to help the catcher with this. Given that all the players were running off the field, and indicated Eddings' fist pump when AJP started running, all the players were aware of what was going on.

Isn't John Wayne/Santa Ana closer? Most teams fly in to Ontario and fly out of John Wayne. Don't ask me why. John Wayne is much closer. I also wouldn't fancy driving from Ontario to Anaheim - the 91 is evil and always jam packed with traffic.

Thanks! It was Slugger_16's idea.

I still haven't heard from Paul yet about the verbal out call. You're going to have to wait for an interview from him today or tomorrow. For some reason, the reporters never asked him what he heard the Eddings say

"It was a swing, our catcher caught it, Doug Eddings called him out, and somewhere along the line because the guy ran to first base, he altered the call. He called him out, and that's what's disappointing. When an umpire calls a guy out and you're the catcher -- and I've caught my share of them -- he's out. He didn't call 'swing,' he rang him up with his fist and said, 'You're out.' " - Mike Scioscia

This was printed earlier in this thread. In addition, BBTN did a video recap of every incident like the one in the bottom of the 9th. He clearly did the same movement for every swinging strike that was not dropped. In regards to rules, there is nothing I can find that says that an umpire has to say a ruling. In regards to the delayed call, here's what MLB tells the umpires under rule 9.05: Then my question is what does he do to tell the difference between strike 3 and you're out? He put his hand out to say it was not a foul ball but what would he do to say it's a strike but not an out? By the way, this will be a great lesson for my kids! NOT pump his first, which is what he did in 3 examples that I showed in my last post.

Regardless of whether or not he saw the signal he was called out by the umpire. If the Angels actually heard "You're out" then they have a 100% legit beef. If they assumed they heard it then we have a problem. I'm curious on what Paul heard. Doesn't the fact the there was the fist pump, signaling him out, make the beef legit? I said 100%. The Angels have a very valid arguement I have never denied that. Also, for anyone that taped the game I think it would matter what the ump did the whole game to determine his pattern for K's.

Regardless of whether or not he saw the signal he was called out by the umpire. If the Angels actually heard "You're out" then they have a 100% legit beef. If they assumed they heard it then we have a problem. I'm curious on what Paul heard. Doesn't the fact the there was the fist pump, signaling him out, make the beef legit? Yes, it should. To everyone besides the umps.

Indecision yes, but the fact remains the same that he DID call him out. I think he called it a strike but did not say out loud he was out. But he motioned with his fist that he was out. Eddings said nothing, because he wanted to see what the players would do...way to control the field of play, ump. :roll: I agree that is the wrong thing to do. It also proves my point that there was a possibility of it not being an out and AJP took advantage while Paul assumed the other. Also, that explaination doesn't make sense because half of the players involved believed it to be an out so since Paul didn't throw the ball to first and rolled the ball to the mound I dont see how that explaination can be right. There is no possibility that AJP wasn't out. Eddings fist took care of any doubts on that. Doesn't an ump yell you're out? Hrm, apparently he did yell him out: "I was right there, how many feet away. I didn't see if the ball hit the dirt, but I saw the umpire point and call him out. That's all I needed to see." - Angels reliever Kelvim Escobar EDIT: That doesn't necessarily mean Eddings yelled.

Indecision yes, but the fact remains the same that he DID call him out. I think he called it a strike but did not say out loud he was out. But he motioned with his fist that he was out. Eddings said nothing, because he wanted to see what the players would do...way to control the field of play, ump. :roll: I agree that is the wrong thing to do. It also proves my point that there was a possibility of it not being an out and AJP took advantage while Paul assumed the other. Also, that explaination doesn't make sense because half of the players involved believed it to be an out so since Paul didn't throw the ball to first and rolled the ball to the mound I dont see how that explaination can be right. There is no possibility that AJP wasn't out. Eddings fist took care of any doubts on that.

:-s Yes. The umps all have Eddings back. :roll: Did Paul hear him say that AJP was out? If so then the ump is lying but if he didn't then there is the gray area. No. The ump said NOTHING. I think Paul was also affected by seeing Erstad, Kennedy, Cabrerra and Figgins running to the dugout and they saw Eddings' fist signal the out.

Indecision yes, but the fact remains the same that he DID call him out. I think he called it a strike but did not say out loud he was out. But he motioned with his fist that he was out. Eddings said nothing, because he wanted to see what the players would do...way to control the field of play, ump. :roll:

:-s Yes. The umps all have Eddings back. :roll:

"I rarely look up there [home plate ump], but this time I did, and I saw he was out." - first baseman Darin Erstad. "Doug Eddings called him out, and somwehere along the line, because the guy ran to first base, he altered the call." - manager Mike Scioscia.