MLB agrees, Spilborghs dropped the ball, so did umps

[pravata]

Watson said Cooper will not be fined or suspended for his comments that were critical of the umpires, but plans to discuss the situation with the first-year manager.

he, said today he plans to be in Houston on Tuesday to talk with Astros manager Cecil Cooper about his comments following Saturday’s game.

“I just think he needs an opportunity to know what he can or cannot say and do or cannot do,” Watson said.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/sports/5718458.html

You cannot tell an umpire that he's wrong.  No matter how blatantly he is wrong.  So either fine him or suspend him, Bob, but telling him he can't challenge an ump is chickenshit.

[TheWizard]

That's a load of bs.

[Taras Bulba]

I think it's horseshit, but that's just me.

[pravata]

I think it's horseshit, but that's just me.

I did too, at first.  But considering how constipated and petty this is, I went with  chickenshit.

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

MLB prefers obfuscation to honesty. I thought that much was clear.

[Fredia]

 obfuscation  i really like that word may i use it?

[pravata]

MLB prefers obfuscation to honesty. I thought that much was clear.

They are committed to the pretense of infallibility.  But obviously Watson believes Cooper was right, otherwise, fine and suspension.  They would gain credibility if they admitted mistakes and abandoned their ruthless cringing from responsibility. 

[austro]

obfuscation  i really like that word may i use it?

Use it? You invented it.

[otterjb]

Cooper should shake his hand, look him in the eye and tell him to kiss his ass.

[cougar]

So according to the MLB Gestapo, even if replays prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the umps blew a call, no one is allowed to SAY that the umps blew the call?  Groupthink rocks!

[Tralfaz]

I still have not seen any conclussive video evidence of the ball being dropped. Please post a link if it's there. 

I was at the game and from my angle, and Coopers (1B line) you could not tell.  What you could tell though was that the coaches and players in the bullpen, who could see it, were livid.  I think that's why Cooper was sure he was right. 

[pravata]

I still have not seen any conclussive video evidence of the ball being dropped. Please post a link if it's there. 

I was at the game and from my angle, and Coopers (1B line) you could not tell.  What you could tell though was that the coaches and players in the bullpen, who could see it, were livid.  I think that's why Cooper was sure he was right. 

There was an angle during the telecast that showed the ball bouncing out.

[Limey]

They are committed to the pretense of infallibility.

Then call them Popes, not Umpires.

[pravata]

Then call them Popes, not Umpires.

Tried that.  The hat makes them look even more like a penis.

[MikeyBoy]

Tried that.  The hat makes them look even more like a penis.

POTWA

[Limey]

POTWA

Already nominated it.

[Lurch]

You cannot tell an umpire that he's wrong.  No matter how blatantly he is wrong.  So either fine him or suspend him, Bob, but telling him he can't challenge an ump is chickenshit.

I dont think that's what is being said at all.  Obviously a manager can challenge an ump in the right forum, either on the field or in private.  The restriction is against berating them in the press when they make honest mistakes.  I don't think Coop actually crossed that line reading the quote, but he probably got just close enough to get a friendly reminder from Bob.  

[Limey]

Does Spilborghs deserve any retribution here?  If he'd just picked the ball up and thrown it in, the Umps wouldn't have been required to guess at an out call.  Don't recall him getting a high, hard one later in the game.

Seems to me that gaming the Umps for an out that affects the result of the game is worse than, say, posing after a dinger.

[Taras Bulba]

Does Spilborghs deserve any retribution here?  If he'd just picked the ball up and thrown it in, the Umps wouldn't have been required to guess at an out call.  Don't recall him getting a high, hard one later in the game.

Seems to me that gaming the Umps for an out that affects the result of the game is worse than, say, posing after a dinger.

No.  It's the umps' job to make the call.  If there is a player who would have done differently than Spilborghs in that circumstance, I'd like to know who he is.

[Limey]

No.  It's the umps' job to make the call.  If there is a player who would have done differently than Spilborghs in that circumstance, I'd like to know who he is.

Jeff Bagwell.

[Reuben]

No.  It's the umps' job to make the call.  If there is a player who would have done differently than Spilborghs in that circumstance, I'd like to know who he is.

I agree with you (though Limey could be right about Bagwell). And as HH said, the fact that SPilborghs showed them the ball in his bare hand, after "catching" it clearly with his glove hand, should've been a tip-off to the umps right there. If there is a player who's ever legitimately caught a ball with his glove, then put it in his bare hand to show the umps, I'd like to know who he is.

[Taras Bulba]

Jeff Bagwell.

Well, Bagwell was a helluva first baseman and damn good man but if he ever told the ump, "Excuse me, sir--the runner was really safe," then it would be news to a lot of folks.

[JimR]

Well, Bagwell was a helluva first baseman and damn good man but if he ever told the ump, "Excuse me, sir--the runner was really safe," then it would be news to a lot of folks.

agreed. Bagwell would do it too.

[Limey]

Well, Bagwell was a helluva first baseman and damn good man but if he ever told the ump, "Excuse me, sir--the runner was really safe," then it would be news to a lot of folks.

Different matter entirely to make an attempt at the play and wait for the call, than to not make the play, pretend you did in and con a call from the Ump.

[JimR]

Different matter entirely to make an attempt at the play and wait for the call, than to not make the play, pretend you did in and con a call from the Ump.

Limey, every player will try to convince the umps just as WRs do on a low pass in FB.

[MusicMan]

Limey, every player will try to convince the umps just as WRs do on a low pass in FB.

Just as Kirilenko did last night.

It's the ump/ref's job to make the right call.

[SaltyParker]

I still have not seen any conclussive video evidence of the ball being dropped. Please post a link if it's there. 

I was at the game and from my angle, and Coopers (1B line) you could not tell.  What you could tell though was that the coaches and players in the bullpen, who could see it, were livid.  I think that's why Cooper was sure he was right. 

I was at the game and sitting in the bullpen seats with a perfect view of that play. The ball rolled out onto the grass eight to ten inches or so from Spilboroughs who made somewhat of a hand to glove circular enclosure to corral the ball and keep it from rolling further away. As clear as it was to anyone who could see it (from my angle) that he missed the ball, it became equally clear that it was not within view of the umpire who made the call. I have no idea what the cameras showed as I was too busy booing.   

[Limey]

Limey, every player will try to convince the umps just as WRs do on a low pass in FB.

In that case, are we saying that there's no precedent for the Astros to demonstrate their displeasure over Spilborgh's play?

9FTR, I still think picking a ball up off the grass and pretending to catch it goes beyond trying to "sell" a catch.  But it seems that's just me.

[Limey]

I was at the game and sitting in the bullpen seats with a perfect view of that play. The ball rolled out onto the grass eight to ten inches or so from Spilboroughs who made somewhat of a hand to glove circular enclosure to corral the ball and keep it from rolling further away. As clear as it was to anyone who could see it (from my angle) that he missed the ball, it became equally clear that it was not within view of the umpire who made the call. I have no idea what the cameras showed as I was too busy booing.   

I think it was one of the pudnits on TV who made the observation that the Ump probably knew he'd blown it when he signalled out and an entire side of the stadium erupted in opposition to the call.

[pravata]

I dont think that's what is being said at all.  Obviously a manager can challenge an ump in the right forum, either on the field or in private.  The restriction is against berating them in the press when they make honest mistakes.  I don't think Coop actually crossed that line reading the quote, but he probably got just close enough to get a friendly reminder from Bob.  

The call was obviously wrong.  The league is trying to pretend that the umps never make mistakes.  They do, a lot.  They'd have a better reputation if they admitted it.  Honest mistake or not.  Who is accusing the umps of cheating?  People saw the mistake, the proper forum to address it is in public.  If they only address the issue in private, the public who saw the mistake will think that the umpires have no responsibility.  If Cooper doesn't say something in public, he'll look as big a fraud as the league.

[hillbillyken]

If it were like golf we wouldnt need officials and they could just call it themselves, i'm sure everybody would be honest and forthright. Bottom line they get it right a whole bunch more than they get it wrong, but when they get it wrong they have to say we blew it and move on, not say we are infalable and should never be questioned.

[das]

agreed. Bagwell would do it too.

Yup.  Acting has been a part of this game for, oh, 150 years or so.  Heck, I see it in my church softball league and applaude the Emmy nominees...

[Noe]

The thing about the play was that 1) Spillborgh did reach the ball and it was in his glove initially, 2) he made a hell of an attempt to catch the ball, including laying out and actually having it in his glove 3) the ground popped the ball out of his glove, but back towards his body, so the ball was never clearly visible to the umpire as being loose on the ground 4) Spillborgh, as his continued to slide on his belly, quickly trapped the ball with his bare hand and in one motion held it up for the umpire to see.  If you watch the play realtime, from the angle of the umpire, it was a great play.  Spillborgh did what he was supposed to do, so I don't fault him at all for the play (his comments later left a little to be desired, but I'm not going to quibble about that).

What was odd to me was where was the first base umpire on the play?  Was he positioning himself to look at Blum run the bases (making sure he touches first base) thus taking himself entirely out of the play in the outfield?  Usually the home plate umpire is running up the line to help with the runner if he knows the first or second base umpire needs to run out to the outfield to make a call.  In this case, it looks like the first base umpire and home plate umpire muffed their chance to help the second base blue who got caught in no mans land when it came to making the correct call.  A few feet to the right for the second base umpire or a first base umpire running out to help make the call would've solved the problem for the umpires.

All you can ask of an umpire is to make sure they are in position to make a call.  Last night, on Berkman's slide home, the umpire swung around towards the third base line to watch the play at home develop.  He clearly was in position to see that the tag was never applied to Berkman and that Berkman touched home with his hand and not missed the plate.  Good angle, good call.

Cooper's argument (that got him tossed) is not that Spillborgh was wrong in selling the play, it was that the *umpires* blew the call, basically calling them out as a squad that they all had their heads up their rectums on the play.  That is why Reed tossed him and not Wegner.  Cooper called out the entire freaking crew... and I'm sure Watson wants to talk to Cooper about how to do this the right way with perhaps the league office.  Either way, Cooper was right... tell those blues to get themselves into position or get another job.  Best way to get the thumb other than getting profane on them.

[Lurch]

The call was obviously wrong.  The league is trying to pretend that the umps never make mistakes.  They do, a lot.  They'd have a better reputation if they admitted it.  Honest mistake or not.  Who is accusing the umps of cheating?  People saw the mistake, the proper forum to address it is in public.  If they only address the issue in private, the public who saw the mistake will think that the umpires have no responsibility.  If Cooper doesn't say something in public, he'll look as big a fraud as the league.

The league is not trying to pretend the umps never make mistakes.  

Managers can and do argue with umps on the field (in public) and within reason can do so without consequence.  Taking it off the field into the press room is inappropriate.

Not sure why MLB admittinig each mistake in public is valueable.  I don't think they fail to understand the rules or how to look at replays.  I am confident that they see mistakes and take appropriate actions internally.  The game is about the players, not individual umps.  Why should MLB make them even more a part of the story than the press already will?  Yes, they make mistakes, but that is part of the game.  

[Limey]

What is the rule of thumb for Umps in cases like this?  Do they have a standard philosophy as to whether the batter or the fielder gets the benefit of the doubt (like at 1B when a tie goes to the runner), or is it more of a preponderance of the evidence type thing?

[pravata]

The league is not trying to pretend the umps never make mistakes.  

Managers can and do argue with umps on the field (in public) and within reason can do so without consequence.  Taking it off the field into the press room is inappropriate.

Not sure why MLB admittinig each mistake in public is valueable.  I don't think they fail to understand the rules or how to look at replays.  I am confident that they see mistakes and take appropriate actions internally.  The game is about the players, not individual umps.  Why should MLB make them even more a part of the story than the press already will?  Yes, they make mistakes, but that is part of the game.  

It's valuable because if the fans don't see the consequences for the umpires, even if it's a mere public apology, when they obviously see the mistake, then they think the umpires have immunity.  That creates the impression that the league does not care if they get it right.

[MRaup]

What is the rule of thumb for Umps in cases like this?  Do they have a standard philosophy as to whether the batter or the fielder gets the benefit of the doubt (like at 1B when a tie goes to the runner), or is it more of a preponderance of the evidence type thing?

You call what you see.

Unless the ump saw the ball hit the ground, he's going to call it an out. You can't assume that the ball popped out because he showed it with his bare hand after catching it with his glove.

That being said, you're making 100k+ to call baseball, hustle your lazy ass out there and get a good look at it, and if you don't get in a good position to make the call, don't have a smug smile on your face while you're arguing.

[pravata]

You call what you see.

Unless the ump saw the ball hit the ground, he's going to call it an out. You can't assume that the ball popped out because he showed it with his bare hand after catching it with his glove.

That being said, you're making 100k+ to call baseball, hustle your lazy ass out there and get a good look at it, and if you don't get in a good position to make the call, don't have a smug smile on your face while you're arguing.

And if you make a mistake, admit it.  That or institute instant replay.  Cant have it both ways.  Saying that human judgment is part of the game then you can't ignore the fact that human judgment is failable.  And, if they're going to discipline a manager, and they think they have cause, just do it.  Otherwise, shut the fuck up.  This sanctimonious trip to give the rookie manager a lecture is, as I said, chickenshit.

[JimR]

The thing about the play was that 1) Spillborgh did reach the ball and it was in his glove initially, 2) he made a hell of an attempt to catch the ball, including laying out and actually having it in his glove 3) the ground popped the ball out of his glove, but back towards his body, so the ball was never clearly visible to the umpire as being loose on the ground 4) Spillborgh, as his continued to slide on his belly, quickly trapped the ball with his bare hand and in one motion held it up for the umpire to see.  If you watch the play realtime, from the angle of the umpire, it was a great play.  Spillborgh did what he was supposed to do, so I don't fault him at all for the play (his comments later left a little to be desired, but I'm not going to quibble about that).

What was odd to me was where was the first base umpire on the play?  Was he positioning himself to look at Blum run the bases (making sure he touches first base) thus taking himself entirely out of the play in the outfield?  Usually the home plate umpire is running up the line to help with the runner if he knows the first or second base umpire needs to run out to the outfield to make a call.  In this case, it looks like the first base umpire and home plate umpire muffed their chance to help the second base blue who got caught in no mans land when it came to making the correct call.  A few feet to the right for the second base umpire or a first base umpire running out to help make the call would've solved the problem for the umpires.

All you can ask of an umpire is to make sure they are in position to make a call.  Last night, on Berkman's slide home, the umpire swung around towards the third base line to watch the play at home develop.  He clearly was in position to see that the tag was never applied to Berkman and that Berkman touched home with his hand and not missed the plate.  Good angle, good call.

Cooper's argument (that got him tossed) is not that Spillborgh was wrong in selling the play, it was that the *umpires* blew the call, basically calling them out as a squad that they all had their heads up their rectums on the play.  That is why Reed tossed him and not Wegner.  Cooper called out the entire freaking crew... and I'm sure Watson wants to talk to Cooper about how to do this the right way with perhaps the league office.  Either way, Cooper was right... tell those blues to get themselves into position or get another job.  Best way to get the thumb other than getting profane on them.

absolutely right, and you and i would have said it to them too.

[Limey]

You call what you see.

Unless the ump saw the ball hit the ground, he's going to call it an out. You can't assume that the ball popped out because he showed it with his bare hand after catching it with his glove.

That being said, you're making 100k+ to call baseball, hustle your lazy ass out there and get a good look at it, and if you don't get in a good position to make the call, don't have a smug smile on your face while you're arguing.

Cool, thanks.  I am pretty vocal about shitty adjudicating in sport, but it's lazy work that bugs me the most*.  I used to Umpire cricket, which is chock full o' judgment calls and close plays just like baseball.  I used to break my bottom to get into position to call a play, even though sometimes it happened so quickly (honestly, things happen quickly sometimes in cricket) that it was not possible to do so.  On those occasions, I would make the call based on what I could see and explain that to the players.  Invariably this would diffuse any rancor because I did what I could.  The players are trying, the Umps should too.

*  The lone exception is the trailing Ump in basketball who calls a ticky tac foul under the basket - from half a court away - when the two Umps right on top of the play see nothing.  This is one of the biggest reasons why I cannot watch the NBA any more.

[JimR]

And if you make a mistake, admit it.  That or institute instant replay.  Cant have it both ways.  Saying that human judgment is part of the game then you can't ignore the fact that human judgment is failable.  And, if they're going to discipline a manager, and they think they have cause, just do it.  Otherwise, shut the fuck up.  This sanctimonious trip to give the rookie manager a lecture is, as I said, chickenshit.

man, do i agree with this. baseball umpires are never accountable to anyone.

[Noe]

The league is not trying to pretend the umps never make mistakes. 

Managers can and do argue with umps on the field (in public) and within reason can do so without consequence.  Taking it off the field into the press room is inappropriate.

Not sure why MLB admittinig each mistake in public is valueable.  I don't think they fail to understand the rules or how to look at replays.  I am confident that they see mistakes and take appropriate actions internally.  The game is about the players, not individual umps.  Why should MLB make them even more a part of the story than the press already will?  Yes, they make mistakes, but that is part of the game. 

Sandy Alderson once fired a whole bunch of umpires who were basically ignoring the league office memos to do a better job (re: don't be a bunch of lazy bastards).  Charlie Williams, one of my favorite blues to absolutely hate, was one of them.  For the longest time, the perception was that the tenure an umpire had protected them from such action from the league.  Some even said that the league was basically using this to break up the umpire's union.

Somewhere in the middle is the truth I guess, but Alderson and the MLB made it stick and many of those umpires who thought they were protected by union and tenure never got their job back.  I think the league has a process to evaluate umpire performance and then put in place actions necessary to weed out bad umpires.  Is it for the integrity of the game?  At one time, I think it was because Williams and many other umpires were just horrible and had no inclination to get better.

Now?  I dunno, but time will tell if we'll ever see another sweep of the umpires based on performance like we did when Alderson took the pink slips to them.

[JimR]

Sandy Alderson once fired a whole bunch of umpires who were basically ignoring the league office memos to do a better job (re: don't be a bunch of lazy bastards).  Charlie Williams, one of my favorite blues to absolutely hate, was one of them.  For the longest time, the perception was that the tenure an umpire had protected them from such action from the league.  Some even said that the league was basically using this to break up the umpire's union.

Somewhere in the middle is the truth I guess, but Alderson and the MLB made it stick and many of those umpires who thought they were protected by union and tenure never got their job back.  I think the league has a process to evaluate umpire performance and then put in place actions necessary to weed out bad umpires.  Is it for the integrity of the game?  At one time, I think it was because Williams and many other umpires were just horrible and had no inclination to get better.

Now?  I dunno, but time will tell if we'll ever see another sweep of the umpires based on performance like we did when Alderson took the pink slips to them.

they resigned on the advice of their counsel, Richie ? baseball quickly accepted the resignations, which did break the union at that time. Jim Evans was a client of mine and a good umpire. he blindly followed that advice into oblivion and would never agree with me that it was bad advice.

[Noe]

they resigned on the advice of their counsel, Richie ? baseball quickly accepted the resignations, which did break the union at that time. Jim Evans was a client of mine and a good umpire. he blindly followed that advice into oblivion and would never agree with me that it was bad advice.

Awesome, thanks for the pick-me-up on the Alderson action against the umpires.  Basically, it was a gift wrap for the MLB by way of the umpire's union on that one.  How in heaven's name they will ever have umpires held accountable is left to be seen.  I don't believe they should be held as infallable and I think Coop did the right thing to call them out as being woefully out of position to make the proper call on that one play.  You don't want to see it happen in a tight game, but when your team is struggling, you don't want the umpires to take for granted that they need to hustle to do their freaking jobs for sure.

It's all anyone asks of an umpire, then and only then you accept the call they make because that is how they saw it and that is how it will stand.

[Limey]

Of course, the whole Ump walkout debacle enabled CB Bucknor to get his foot in the door as a replacement Ump.  How's that working out?  Eh? Oh.

[Noe]

Of course, the whole Ump walkout debacle enabled CB Bucknor to get his foot in the door as a replacement Ump.  How's that working out?  Eh? Oh.

Yeah, traded Charlie Williams and Eric Gregg for C.B. Bucknor and Angel Hernandez.  Suck for suck.

[JimR]

Evans lost much more than his umpire job. he also had 2 of the 3 umpire schools that MLB gave an exclusive deal to graduate professional umpires. after the walkouts/resignations, Jim lost this exclusive arrangement as well. he was too smart to follow that awful advice to resign, but he did so with blind faith in the advice.

[mrpink]

Well, Bagwell was a helluva first baseman and damn good man but if he ever told the ump, "Excuse me, sir--the runner was really safe," then it would be news to a lot of folks.

I vividly remember Berkman faking a hit by pitch against the Cubs and reaching 1st base on the call.

[Lurch]

It's valuable because if the fans don't see the consequences for the umpires, even if it's a mere public apology, when they obviously see the mistake, then they think the umpires have immunity.  That creates the impression that the league does not care if they get it right.

How would you do this?  A nightly press conference given after the game officials spend several hours watching the entire game back on tivo, taking notes on what they missed so they can discuss it with the chron bloggers?  We talking balls and strikes, too?  Check swings?  Just plays in the field?  Maybe only the balls and strikes that lead to strike outs and walks.  Perhaps just those plays that result in a large chorus of boos.  Seriously, what are the logistics to make this feasible?  And then what?  Do you want to see the written warning given to the ump?  Does he need to give an apology?  Two more and he's fired?  Do we start questioning the ultimate outcome of the game based on the number of missed calls admitted to?  New column it the box score, perhaps?  Asterisk next to the score?  Maybe an umpire batting average.  The sabermagicians could have a field day with this new stat.  Yes, Roy is throwing more curves, but the umps are misreading it at a greater clip this season.

I don't think the umpires have immunity.  Nor do I have the impression that the league does not care if they get it right.  Neither of those seem remotely logical.  That there is not a better public solution that doesn't result in a circus after the game seems much more likely.

[Limey]

I don't think the umpires have immunity.  Nor do I have the impression that the league does not care if they get it right.  Neither of those seem remotely logical.  That there is not a better public solution that doesn't result in a circus after the game seems much more likely.

The Umps need a sand screen for their vaginas.  That is all.

[Noe]

How would you do this?  A nightly press conference given after the game officials spend several hours watching the entire game back on tivo, taking notes on what they missed so they can discuss it with the chron bloggers?  We talking balls and strikes, too?  Check swings?  Just plays in the field?  Maybe only the balls and strikes that lead to strike outs and walks.  Perhaps just those plays that result in a large chorus of boos.  Seriously, what are the logistics to make this feasible?  And then what?  Do you want to see the written warning given to the ump?  Does he need to give an apology?  Two more and he's fired?  Do we start questioning the ultimate outcome of the game based on the number of missed calls admitted to?  New column it the box score, perhaps?  Asterisk next to the score?  Maybe an umpire batting average.  The sabermagicians could have a field day with this new stat.  Yes, Roy is throwing more curves, but the umps are misreading it at a greater clip this season.

I don't think the umpires have immunity.  Nor do I have the impression that the league does not care if they get it right.  Neither of those seem remotely logical.  That there is not a better public solution that doesn't result in a circus after the game seems much more likely.

The NBA does allow the public to know that referees are constantly evaluated and they will get some sort of retribution for continued lousy officiating.  Joey Crawford last year comes to mind.  The perception in the MLB right now is that the umpires are immune from evaluation and retribution if they *continually* exhibit performance flaws.  That perception is bad, even if it may be wrong.  So Cecil Cooper going out and arguing with the umpires about their performance and getting a heave ho is in a way a perception changer for the average fan because the manager is seeing the same thing most of us do... umpires who not only got a call wrong, they were never in the proper position to even remotely get it right.  The latter is the worse proposition if the percieved attitude of an umpire is "so what, what ya gonna do to me?  Nothing, that is what!" by said fans.  It calls the league into question in some ways.  Not like the steroid hysteria mind you, but in others ways for sure.

Accountability is the issue and the league office response to Cooper seems to be that while he is correct, they would like for the manager to make it a private issue that would not stir the emotions of the fans on this very item.  I can see their point if there were some sort of established and well known avenue for managers and clubs to voice concerns and real action could be taken (and of course fans knew that said action was being enforced by the league).  I thought the Alderson scene a few years back was the league's doing and Jim rightfully set me straight that that was the tail wagging the dog, in terms of the Umpires Union thinking highly of themselves that if they all resigned that would bring the league to it's knees.

Why do the umpires feel they have that much power on the league (then and perhaps now)?  Well maybe because the league doesn't really exhibit any sort of backbone to them to disuade them from this idea.

Maybe?  I dunno for sure, but maybe.

[pravata]

I vividly remember Berkman faking a hit by pitch against the Cubs and reaching 1st base on the call.

sorry, doesn't count, after a week long bean ball war, then having Remlinger aiming at his head he's not responsible for the umps misconceptions. 

[Limey]

So Cecil Cooper going out and arguing with the umpires about their performance and getting a heave ho is in a way a perception changer for the average fan because the manager is seeing the same thing most of us do... umpires who not only got a call wrong, they were never in the proper position to even remotely get it right.  The latter is the worse proposition if the percieved attitude of an umpire is "so what, what ya gonna do to me?  Nothing, that is what!" by said fans.  It calls the league into question in some ways.  Not like the steroid hysteria mind you, but in others ways for sure.

Throwing Coop out of the game was simply compounding a shitty situation.  They must've known straight away that they probably botched it.  Wegner should have said that he didn't see the ball come out, but he didn't see it stay in.  They should have understood that Coop was going to be miffed and, assuming what Coop said is true - that he never used foul of abusive language - they should've let him make his point and then got him back in the dugout.

Blowing a call and then tossing the manager for being annoyed is BS squared.

[pravata]

How would you do this?  A nightly press conference given after the game officials spend several hours watching the entire game back on tivo, taking notes on what they missed so they can discuss it with the chron bloggers?  We talking balls and strikes, too?  Check swings?  Just plays in the field?  Maybe only the balls and strikes that lead to strike outs and walks.  Perhaps just those plays that result in a large chorus of boos.  Seriously, what are the logistics to make this feasible?  And then what?  Do you want to see the written warning given to the ump?  Does he need to give an apology?  Two more and he's fired?  Do we start questioning the ultimate outcome of the game based on the number of missed calls admitted to?  New column it the box score, perhaps?  Asterisk next to the score?  Maybe an umpire batting average.  The sabermagicians could have a field day with this new stat.  Yes, Roy is throwing more curves, but the umps are misreading it at a greater clip this season.

I don't think the umpires have immunity.  Nor do I have the impression that the league does not care if they get it right.  Neither of those seem remotely logical.  That there is not a better public solution that doesn't result in a circus after the game seems much more likely.

Yes of course, they should apologize for every checked swing missed call.  OF COURSE THAT'S THE ANSWER!  Or maybe they could just address calls that potentially affect the outcome of the game.  Also, I wasnt considering your personal opinion on the issue.  I was thinking more generally in light of the instant replay discussion and vote that MLB has before every fucking season because of the perception that incompetent umpiring has too much affect on the game.

[JimR]

Throwing Coop out of the game was simply compounding a shitty situation.  They must've known straight away that they probably botched it.  Wegner should have said that he didn't see the ball come out, but he didn't see it stay in.  They should have understood that Coop was going to be miffed and, assuming what Coop said is true - that he never used foul of abusive language - they should've let him make his point and then got him back in the dugout.

Blowing a call and then tossing the manager for being annoyed is BS squared.

then add to that the crew chief's comments that he did not see why Cooper should be so upset when video was inconclusive.

[Limey]

then add to that the crew chief's comments that he did not see why Cooper should be so upset when video was inconclusive.

"You can't prove the call was wrong so fuck you!"

[Noe]

Throwing Coop out of the game was simply compounding a shitty situation.  They must've known straight away that they probably botched it.  Wegner should have said that he didn't see the ball come out, but he didn't see it stay in.  They should have understood that Coop was going to be miffed and, assuming what Coop said is true - that he never used foul of abusive language - they should've let him make his point and then got him back in the dugout.

Blowing a call and then tossing the manager for being annoyed is BS squared.

Eggszactly.  Rick Reed tossed Cooper for the audacity of calling his crew into account.  No profanity, no argument of a judgement call, just plain and simply put, Coop told Reed that with four umpires that sort of play should never go unnoticed and the call should not be in question.  Coop went to Wegner first and Wegner rightfully told him that he called what he saw but admitted to Coop he did not have the right angle to see the entire play.  So he told Coop he'll ask for help, which he did.

Up until then, all was cool.

Then the four got together, Reed doing most if not all of the talking and again if you could read lips in an amateurish way, you'd swear Reed said to Wegner "Go with what you saw, let's play ball...".  In essence, what Reed did was admit to Wegner "We can't help you... sorry!".  It's not like throwing him under the bus, it's more like telling him that they failed to place themselves into position to help him so he has to go with what he saw".  So up to then, remember Wegner already told Coop that what he saw was a catch *but* he wasn't in the best position to make the call.  So when Coop heard Reed say "go with what you saw...", Coop knew that the one umpire who admittedly was in no position to make the call but had the responsibility to do so was getting no help from three other umpires on the same field, he went after Reed for the sorry, candyass opinion that Reed gave.

I can hear Coop now "WHAT!?!?  Oh come on now Rick, you're telling me that while you're running down the first base line watching the play develop you did not see the ball pop out from your position?"  "Settle down Coop, the call isn't mine, Wegner made it, he called what he saw, it's done... now go sit down".  "Rick, tell me... did you see the play at all?  Why not and what about the first base umpire where was he?"  "I'm telling Coop... stop it!"  "Stop what?  Asking if you four umpires can't get yourselves into position to make a very simple call on a play that 40,000 others saw clearly?  Isn't that your job Rick, to get it right by being in the right position to help each other out and leave as little doubt as possible on any given play?  huh?"  "That's it Coop... You're outta here... get lost, I don't need you telling me how to do my job!"  "Oh yeah, well you didn't do your job... how's that... you blew it... four umpires and not one of you can see a play clear as day happening before your eyes... that's what!"  "Get outta here Coop... you've had your say..." "I'll say it again too!  You blew it!"

Or something like that (my imagination of course).

[Noe]

then add to that the crew chief's comments that he did not see why Cooper should be so upset when video was inconclusive.

Which was a screwy comment by Reed because he didn't review video, he waited until the end of the game and was shown the video and then he commented.  At the time, the issue was why four umpires couldn't see the play when Wegner admitted to Coop he didn't see the play fully play out.  If Wegner saw the play, then has no business asking for help.  If he asks for help, Reed has no business shooing him away and telling him move on and stick with his call.

I think it was Reed's action that irked Cooper the most.

[CJM]

...

What was odd to me was where was the first base umpire on the play?  Was he positioning himself to look at Blum run the bases (making sure he touches first base) thus taking himself entirely out of the play in the outfield?  Usually the home plate umpire is running up the line to help with the runner if he knows the first or second base umpire needs to run out to the outfield to make a call.  In this case, it looks like the first base umpire and home plate umpire muffed their chance to help the second base blue who got caught in no mans land when it came to making the correct call.  A few feet to the right for the second base umpire or a first base umpire running out to help make the call would've solved the problem for the umpires.

...

From a good friend of mine who is a AA umpire now filling in at AAA: When the 2nd base ump goes out to make a call (he is responsible for the "V" in the outfield which is pretty much RCF over to LCF), the 3rd base umpire takes 2nd base, the plate umpire rotates up to 3rd base, and the 1st base umpire will come inside to watch the "touch up" at first, then he will rotate down to home plate if the runner continues on to second.  He said it would have been almost impossible for the 2nd base ump to get a better angle on that particular play because they are taught to go pretty much straight out towards the play for a close catch/no catch call.  All standard 3-man and 4-man rotations are in a clockwise fashion now, 8-10 year ago this used to be "crew" specific..some crews would do it one way, other would do it another way.  This was causing somewhat of a learning curve for AAA umpires coming up to MLB, now they all do it the same way.

[Noe]

From a good friend of mine who is a AA umpire now filling in at AAA: When the 2nd base ump goes out to make a call (he is responsible for the "V" in the outfield which is pretty much RCF over to LCF), the 3rd base umpire takes 2nd base, the plate umpire rotates up to 3rd base, and the 1st base umpire will come inside to watch the "touch up" at first, then he will rotate down to home plate if the runner continues on to second.  He said it would have been almost impossible for the 2nd base ump to get a better angle on that particular play because they are taught to go pretty much straight out towards the play for a close catch/no catch call.  All standard 3-man and 4-man rotations are in a clockwise fashion now, 8-10 year ago this used to be "crew" specific..some crews would do it one way, other would do it another way.  This was causing somewhat of a learning curve for AAA umpires coming up to MLB, now they all do it the same way.

This is eggszactly how Reed's crew rotated.  The third base ump went to second in case of a close play/throw to second base, the first base umpire had his eyes trained on first base and the home plate umpire rotated to third while Wegner ran straight out to medium deep CF.  Here is the problem with that rotation:  The ball was tailing away from CF towards RF and the only way a catch could be made was running hard towards Right Center Field.  What was Wegner doing staying put at medium deep CF when the ball was tailing.  A few feet to his right, he sees the play cleanly.  IOW - don't run to a spot, position yourself to make a call for goodness sake.  The flight of the ball should've immediately told him that he's going to be out of position in case the ball is dropped, which turned out to be true.  If you see the replay, Wegner actually makes an attempt at the last minute to move several feet towards right field, but by the time he's re situated himself, Spillborgh is in full slide and raising his arm with the ball in hand.

He admitted to Coop that is what happened.  What made it worse was that the rotation the umpires made was one that made watching the play develop impossible for others, so no help was forthcoming.  So to tell Coop that he (Wegner) was going to confirm with the entire crew was a hollow promise and one that would get me mad too.  If they're in no position to help and you're not sure and admit you're out of position, why in the heck are you making an out call?  And if you're the crew chief and you know all this, why do you toss Cooper because he's telling you and your crew that in this one particular play, four blind mice could've done better because the play should dictate your position, not some set rule about where you should run.

It's actually worse to tell me that they have a set place to run instead of watching the play develop and getting into the *best* positon possible to make a call.  Again, I point to Berkman's slide last night.  The home plate umpire positioned himself perfectly to make a call.  In the game in Philly, the home plate umpire positioned himself behind the play shielding himself from the tag, so he went on his best knowledge of who arrived first, the runner or the ball.  It put a play in doubt in my mind because the umpire called the runner safe (and he may have been, I dunno for sure) but did not leave me thinking the umpire had the best view of the play.  All you can ask an umpire is for their best position on a play, anything else is call for some arguments.  Don't toss the manager for arguing in said case.

[Lurch]

What made it worse was that the rotation the umpires made was one that made watching the play develop impossible for others, so no help was forthcoming.  So to tell Coop that he (Wegner) was going to confirm with the entire crew was a hollow promise and one that would get me mad too. 

Is it not reasonable for him to offer to at least ask if the others saw it?

If they're in no position to help and you're not sure and admit you're out of position, why in the heck are you making an out call? 

  What would you have him do instead?

And if you're the crew chief and you know all this, why do you toss Cooper because he's telling you and your crew that in this one particular play, four blind mice could've done better because the play should dictate your position, not some set rule about where you should run.

  Do we actually know why Coop was tossed?  I see a lot of comments that make me believe it's presumptive.  How long should the umps allow him to complain before tossing him, per the rules?

[CJM]

This is eggszactly how Reed's crew rotated.  The third base ump went to second in case of a close play/throw to second base, the first base umpire had his eyes trained on first base and the home plate umpire rotated to third while Wegner ran straight out to medium deep CF.  Here is the problem with that rotation:  The ball was tailing away from CF towards RF and the only way a catch could be made was running hard towards Right Center Field.  What was Wegner doing staying put at medium deep CF when the ball was tailing.  A few feet to his right, he sees the play cleanly.  IOW - don't run to a spot, position yourself to make a call for goodness sake.  The flight of the ball should've immediately told him that he's going to be out of position in case the ball is dropped, which turned out to be true.  If you see the replay, Wegner actually makes an attempt at the last minute to move several feet towards right field, but by the time he's re situated himself, Spillborgh is in full slide and raising his arm with the ball in hand.

He admitted to Coop that is what happened.  What made it worse was that the rotation the umpires made was one that made watching the play develop impossible for others, so no help was forthcoming.  So to tell Coop that he (Wegner) was going to confirm with the entire crew was a hollow promise and one that would get me mad too.  If they're in no position to help and you're not sure and admit you're out of position, why in the heck are you making an out call?  And if you're the crew chief and you know all this, why do you toss Cooper because he's telling you and your crew that in this one particular play, four blind mice could've done better because the play should dictate your position, not some set rule about where you should run.

It's actually worse to tell me that they have a set place to run instead of watching the play develop and getting into the *best* positon possible to make a call.  Again, I point to Berkman's slide last night.  The home plate umpire positioned himself perfectly to make a call.  In the game in Philly, the home plate umpire positioned himself behind the play shielding himself from the tag, so he went on his best knowledge of who arrived first, the runner or the ball.  It put a play in doubt in my mind because the umpire called the runner safe (and he may have been, I dunno for sure) but did not leave me thinking the umpire had the best view of the play.  All you can ask an umpire is for their best position on a play, anything else is call for some arguments.

I don't remember the direction the ball came from in Philly, but I know the HP ump positions himself in relation to location of the throw to the plate.

Indulge me for a moment- As far as help in the play the other night, what would have happened if the 1st base ump had decided that he should watch the catch as well and helps the 2nd base ump make a "no catch" call.  The the defense wants to appeal that Blum never touched 1st base...nobody was watching because the 1st base ump didn't do what he was supposed to do so Blum is ruled safe because the umpire can't call something he doesn't see.  Then we have replays showing that Blum obviously never touched 1st and we have a similar situation now it's the Rockies that got screwed. 

I think for the most part the umpires are well trained and do a good job.  That's not to say that MLB doesn't "baby" them too much...for one not allowing a instant replay of a close call in the ballpark is bullshit, IMO. 

[MRaup]

This is eggszactly how Reed's crew rotated.  The third base ump went to second in case of a close play/throw to second base, the first base umpire had his eyes trained on first base and the home plate umpire rotated to third while Wegner ran straight out to medium deep CF.  Here is the problem with that rotation:  The ball was tailing away from CF towards RF and the only way a catch could be made was running hard towards Right Center Field.  What was Wegner doing staying put at medium deep CF when the ball was tailing.  A few feet to his right, he sees the play cleanly.  IOW - don't run to a spot, position yourself to make a call for goodness sake.  The flight of the ball should've immediately told him that he's going to be out of position in case the ball is dropped, which turned out to be true.  If you see the replay, Wegner actually makes an attempt at the last minute to move several feet towards right field, but by the time he's re situated himself, Spillborgh is in full slide and raising his arm with the ball in hand.

He admitted to Coop that is what happened.  What made it worse was that the rotation the umpires made was one that made watching the play develop impossible for others, so no help was forthcoming.  So to tell Coop that he (Wegner) was going to confirm with the entire crew was a hollow promise and one that would get me mad too.  If they're in no position to help and you're not sure and admit you're out of position, why in the heck are you making an out call?  And if you're the crew chief and you know all this, why do you toss Cooper because he's telling you and your crew that in this one particular play, four blind mice could've done better because the play should dictate your position, not some set rule about where you should run.

It's actually worse to tell me that they have a set place to run instead of watching the play develop and getting into the *best* positon possible to make a call.  Again, I point to Berkman's slide last night.  The home plate umpire positioned himself perfectly to make a call.  In the game in Philly, the home plate umpire positioned himself behind the play shielding himself from the tag, so he went on his best knowledge of who arrived first, the runner or the ball.  It put a play in doubt in my mind because the umpire called the runner safe (and he may have been, I dunno for sure) but did not leave me thinking the umpire had the best view of the play.  All you can ask an umpire is for their best position on a play, anything else is call for some arguments.  Don't toss the manager for arguing in said case.

When I went through umpire training for high school ball, one of the things they re-iterated over and over was to get to the play before you make the call. But the thought process for this was for the wrong reasons. The reason you get to the play before you make the call is so it appears you were on top of it when it happened, even if you weren't right there until after it was over. So, for example, on a running catch/no catch call, they wanted us to run toward the play, and if an out or no catch happened before you got there, take a few more steps so that when you make the call you're right on top of it and appear like you were in perfect position.

From a perception point of view it makes sense because it looks better to have an ump signal the play from right next to it instead of 20+ feet away, but the stress was on getting to where it happened, not making sure you were in the best position to see it.

[MRaup]

I don't remember the direction the ball came from in Philly, but I know the HP ump positions himself in relation to location of the throw to the plate.

Indulge me for a moment- As far as help in the play the other night, what would have happened if the 1st base ump had decided that he should watch the catch as well and helps the 2nd base ump make a "no catch" call.  The the defense wants to appeal that Blum never touched 1st base...nobody was watching because the 1st base ump didn't do what he was supposed to do so Blum is ruled safe because the umpire can't call something he doesn't see.  Then we have replays showing that Blum obviously never touched 1st and we have a similar situation now it's the Rockies that got screwed. 

I think for the most part the umpires are well trained and do a good job.  That's not to say that MLB doesn't "baby" them too much...for one not allowing a instant replay of a close call in the ballpark is bullshit, IMO. 

In my not so humble opinion, the fault of the missed call falls on Wegner's lazy ass. He made no attempt to get a good angle on the play. Just ran into the outfield.

He proved throughout the rest of the series that he is a shitheels in most aspects of the game, that blown call was just the jumping off point.

[MRaup]

I just re-watched the clip on MLB.com, and had a few observations.

I never could see where Wegner was when he made the call, but when they showed Spillbourgh holding the ball up, Wegner was still 50-60 feet from the play and pretty much straight on the call. The implication to me is that he probably just ran straight at the play instead of running with the angle of the fielder for the diving catch. Could he have made it into position to make the call? I don't know.

Also, when Coop was tossed later in the clip, all he was saying was "THAT WAS A HORRIBLE CALL!" and "HORRIBLE CALL" over and over again.

[pravata]

I just re-watched the clip on MLB.com, and had a few observations.

I never could see where Wegner was when he made the call, but when they showed Spillbourgh holding the ball up, Wegner was still 50-60 feet from the play and pretty much straight on the call. The implication to me is that he probably just ran straight at the play instead of running with the angle of the fielder for the diving catch. Could he have made it into position to make the call? I don't know.

Also, when Coop was tossed later in the clip, all he was saying was "THAT WAS A HORRIBLE CALL!" and "HORRIBLE CALL" over and over again.

Once he was out of position, he had no choice.  How's he going to reverse the call if no other ump saw it either?   They were stuck.  They can't reverse a call because the crowd yelled.  But, Watson obviously agreed that Cooper had a legitimate question and shouldn't have been thrown out.  The only thing the ump can come up with the next day, even though "Television replays indicated the ball became dislodged from his glove" was "The best I can tell you is from my angle I never saw the ball hit the ground," Link No shit Wegner, because if you called him out after seeing the ball hit the ground you wouldn't be an ump, you'd be a line cook at Red Lobster.  But since you are an ump, could you acknowledge as has Watson, that you blew it? 

[pravata]

What Watson said,

"He just said watch what you say, be careful what you say," Cooper said.

Cooper said Watson gave him a "lashing," but otherwise was told "you're the new guy so I'll be lenient with you."
Link

Yeah, watch that you don't state the obvious again there Coop.  But cause my boss picked you to manage this team, I'll go easy.  But if I catch you expecting my employees to be minimally competent again, I'll have to make another special trip to have another conversation with you.

[Noe]

Is it not reasonable for him to offer to at least ask if the others saw it?

If the home plate umpire is running to third, he is running away from the play.  If the first base umpire is keeping an eye on the first base bag, he has his back to the play.  If the third base umpire is running to second base, he is in the same line of sight as Wegner, only further back.  So if he knows this why is he even asking?

What would you have him do instead?

Run to the play at the same angle as the play and make sure the play has been made?

Do we actually know why Coop was tossed?  I see a lot of comments that make me believe it's presumptive.  How long should the umps allow him to complain before tossing him, per the rules?

I don't think there are any rules about tossing someone.  Umpires use their own discretion about how and when to toss someone.  The only rules that exist for automatic ejection is after a warning has been issued to both benches and after contact is made with the umpire.

[Noe]

I don't remember the direction the ball came from in Philly, but I know the HP ump positions himself in relation to location of the throw to the plate.

Left field, so the umpire placed himself in the line of the throw, but behind the two players.  The ball and player arrived at the same time and Brownie was surprised that the call was safe.  He was even more surprised that the Astros didn't complain about the call.  I thought, at the time, that Young could've placed himself towards the side and not directly in line with the throw to see the plate being touched, runner tagged at the same time.  I know he was probably positioned where he's taught to go, but it was not, IMHO, the best position to make a bang-bang call at the plate.  I think Young took the safe way out and did what he was supposed to do in just about 99% of the calls he has to make.  In this one instance, it was not the best position for that particular play.

Indulge me for a moment- As far as help in the play the other night, what would have happened if the 1st base ump had decided that he should watch the catch as well and helps the 2nd base ump make a "no catch" call.  The the defense wants to appeal that Blum never touched 1st base...nobody was watching because the 1st base ump didn't do what he was supposed to do so Blum is ruled safe because the umpire can't call something he doesn't see.  Then we have replays showing that Blum obviously never touched 1st and we have a similar situation now it's the Rockies that got screwed.

Yup.  So what we're saying is that if someone has to be screwed, let it be because the umpires did what they are asked to do except for one.  What are the chances that Blum misses first base?  What are the chances that Spillborgh makes a great catch?  About the same?  Then all things being equal, go with telling Wegner to position himself to the *play*, not the position in CF that they teach you to run to. 

I think for the most part the umpires are well trained and do a good job.

Totally agree with this.  I'm not saying that all umpires are bad nor that the position they are trained to place themselves is a bad idea.  But you're a ball player, so are many others in here.  Running to a position on the field to make a play is the worse way to make a play for a player.  You follow the track of the ball and keep your eye on said ball to make sure you have the proper read on the ball to either try to catch it, play if off the wall, et. al.  IMHO, the umpires have been around baseball long enough (most of all them go through many years in the minors to get to this 100K position in the majors) that they should be as instinctive as a player when it comes to a play.  Those who play it by rote will have one or two plays like this bite them.

That's not to say that MLB doesn't "baby" them too much...for one not allowing a instant replay of a close call in the ballpark is bullshit, IMO. 

Funny thing, last night I was watching the Rockets game and several plays involving Okur and Scolla were of the ticky-tack variety in terms of foul calls.  Okur being the beneficiary of course.  The home crowd got to see replays on the jumbotron apparently because the crowd reactions while Scolla argued his case was one of a crowd that just saw the replay.  I know in college sports, they show replays too.  I'm not sure in the NFL.

In the MLB, an umpire can have a jumbotron operator throw out of a game if he so much as dares replay a close play on the big screen.  A few years ago, a drunken McMichaels was in the Cubs booth when a close play at home happened and the umpire called an opponent runner safe at home on a very close play that looked for all the world like he was out by a mile.  Home plate umpire was Angel Hernandez.  The boos rang down on him unmercifully, but what happened next was they gave the mic to McMichaels to to do the seventh inning stretch "Take Me Out To The Ballgame".  McMichaels instead decided to berate Hernandez via the PA system, much to the cheering crowd's delight.  Hernandez had him tossed from the stadium.

[Lurch]

If the home plate umpire is running to third, he is running away from the play.  If the first base umpire is keeping an eye on the first base bag, he has his back to the play.  If the third base umpire is running to second base, he is in the same line of sight as Wegner, only further back.  So if he knows this why is he even asking?

Make an assumption despite not seeing it.  Check.  Got it.

Run to the play at the same angle as the play and make sure the play has been made?

Dont make an assumption despite not seeing it.  Check.  Got it. 

He was slow and ran to the wrong (although it was technically right?) spot.   Didn't see the catch and shouldn't have made any call.  When challenged by Coop, he shouldn't have offered to see if one of the others had a better look because he should have known that they, too, ran to their right spots and couldn't have seen the play.  Having heard the crowd the umps should have let Coop vent (longer?) without tossing him.  Coop should then be able to again chastise the umps for not seeing the play in the media.  MLB should issue a statement that the umps made a mistake and will be appropriately reprimanded.  Utopia.

Fair enough.

[Limey]

Point of order for my benefit:  not making a call was an option for Wegner...yes?

If this is correct, he could've made no call and the play would've continued to develop - with Spilborghs throw being tardy because of the attempt to get a call on the "catch" and Blum advancing around the bases.  Then, the Pads would've kicked up a fuss, the Umps could've conferred and, if anyone saw it better and it actually was a good catch, they could've called Blum out and reset everyone else.

[Noe]

Make an assumption despite not seeing it.  Check.  Got it.

Don't play games with Manager.  Check. Got it. 

Say to Coop "I made the call I positioned myself to make, so I have to go with it... even if I blew it."  Any umpire would have the balls to say this unless they're arrogant jerks who like to think very highly of themselves.  I'm not sure about Wegner, but there are many like that.  They will *never* admit to being out of position.  Never.

Dont make an assumption despite not seeing it.  Check.  Got it.

Again, just admit that you were out of position and the best call you can make is the one you can make.  Cooper may blow off steam but what is he going to do?  What is anyone going to do about it?  Nothing.  But acting like you can't be called on it and an entire crew playing the whole thing out like they cannot be called on it is adding insult to injury.  Wegner took a straight line to the play instead of tracking it and that cost him.  He did not see the play fully play out and was not able to make a call correctly.  He then went ahead and ask others if they saw the play.  Answer no, so the play stands... but where have you seen Wegner say "I was out of position to make the proper call?"  No where.  I've said it countless times, all you can ask an umpire is to be in the proper position to make a call.  Not to be 100% correct all the time, no one is... that is impossible and part of the game.  The part that is hurtful is that Wegner could've just said "Coop, sorry man, blew it because I wasn't in position... but I gotta go with what I saw and it was a catch!". 

He was slow and ran to the wrong (although it was technically right?) spot.   Didn't see the catch and shouldn't have made any call.  When challenged by Coop, he shouldn't have offered to see if one of the others had a better look because he should have known that they, too, ran to their right spots and couldn't have seen the play.  Having heard the crowd the umps should have let Coop vent (longer?) without tossing him.  Coop should then be able to again chastise the umps for not seeing the play in the media.  MLB should issue a statement that the umps made a mistake and will be appropriately reprimanded.  Utopia.

Fair enough.

Who said all that?  I didn't.  I said all... and I mean *ALL* you can ask of an umpire is to be in the proper position to make a call.  If you want to quote that of me, go ahead, I'll stand by it.  But all that other bullshit is of your own making because I didn't say that.  I said Wegner was out of position and none of his crew could help him because they reacted on the play as they are trained to do.  99% of the time, that is always the best thing.  But in the case of a single, solitary play, it is not that difficult to track the play and realize that where you were trained to run and where you *should* be is two different things.  It would've helped Wegner, not hurt him to react to the play.  Can he be told by Cooper or the league that this may be helpful to him or is he to be treated with kid gloves because he might break?  Bob Watson seems to be playing that sort of game with Cooper because Cooper did not accept the bs dished out by Reed and crew.  He called it right, a blown call that none of them accepted responsibility for.  So either Watson fines him, suspends him or throws the book at him for it because Coop is wrong or he shuts up about it.  But it looks like Wegner is being allowed to get away with positioning himself to a spot intead of a play and sure as I'm sitting here, another play in another situation will arise and Mark Wegner will be involved and this will crop up yet again.

It would be cool if it was the BoSox/Yankees on national television in September fighting for a playoff spot, jut to add a little drama to the whole thing.  Ya think Wegner might appreciate a little help in that situation?

[Noe]

Point of order for my benefit:  not making a call was an option for Wegner...yes?

If this is correct, he could've made no call and the play would've continued to develop - with Spilborghs throw being tardy because of the attempt to get a call on the "catch" and Blum advancing around the bases.  Then, the Pads would've kicked up a fuss, the Umps could've conferred and, if anyone saw it better and it actually was a good catch, they could've called Blum out and reset everyone else.

Only two calls available: Catch/No catch.  Had Wegner signalled "no catch" (it is similar to a safe sign), Blum would've ended up at second, maybe third base.  Then Clint Hurdle could come out and asked Wegner why he made the "no catch" call.  Wegner could've told him the same thing he told Coop and Reed would've told Wegner the same thing he told him when Cooper asked... "go with what you saw...".  At which point, we're probably looking at Hurdle being tossed for arguing with Reed.

I think for the sake of making a call, an umpire has to be in a position to be able to see the play fully for all parties to have less to say.  Anything else is left unsavory to anyone who is left with a call to their dislike.

[mihoba]

He proved throughout the rest of the series that he is a shitheels in most aspects of the game, that blown call was just the jumping off point.

Yes he did, the smug bastard.

The look was always 'don't question me' with his arms crossed.

He is on my growing list of men in blue jerkoffs.

[OregonStrosFan]

Yes he did, the smug bastard.

The look was always 'don't question me' with his arms crossed.

He is on my growing list of men in blue jerkoffs.

The look after he sent Tejada packing the other night especially irked me... 

[HudsonHawk]

That being said, you're making 100k+ to call baseball, hustle your lazy ass out there and get a good look at it, and if you don't get in a good position to make the call, don't have a smug smile on your face while you're arguing.

The umpire was hustling, and was in the best position he could be in.  He simply didn't see the ball come out.  Nobody was at fault, no one cheated.  Just one of them things. 

[HudsonHawk]

Point of order for my benefit:  not making a call was an option for Wegner...yes?

No.  He has to make a call.  He was in the best position he could be in, he saw the ball go into the glove, saw the player fall to the ground and come up with the ball.  Did he have the best angle?  No.  Could he have been in better position?  No.  Did he get the call right?  No.  Thems the breaks. 

[Limey]

The umpire was hustling, and was in the best position he could be in.  He simply didn't see the ball come out.  Nobody was at fault, no one cheated.  Just one of them things. 

Technically, Spilborghs cheated, but I'm reliably informed that it's all part of trying.

[JackAstro]

Quick question (sorry if it's already been covered, but there are many, many words in this thread). In an instance like this, where the ump can't clearly see whether a catch has been made, and there's no way of knowing whether the fielder just pulled the ball out of his glove or off of the ground, is there some specific guidance for the ump in terms of which way to go with the call? That is, in cases where they really don't know, are they supposed to err towards an out, towards a safe call, or just take their best guess?

[MRaup]

Quick question (sorry if it's already been covered, but there are many, many words in this thread). In an instance like this, where the ump can't clearly see whether a catch has been made, and there's no way of knowing whether the fielder just pulled the ball out of his glove or off of the ground, is there some specific guidance for the ump in terms of which way to go with the call? That is, in cases where they really don't know, are they supposed to err towards an out, towards a safe call, or just take their best guess?

Best guess. "Call what you saw".

[JackAstro]

Best guess. "Call what you saw".

Or "call what you think you would have seen, had you seen it." Good to know, thanks.

[MRaup]

Or "call what you think you would have seen, had you seen it." Good to know, thanks.

Call what you see encompasses that nicely.

"Duhhhh, I didn't see anything... But his beard is pretty. OUT!"

[JackAstro]

Call what you see encompasses that nicely.

"Duhhhh, I didn't see anything... But his beard is pretty. OUT!"

Tie goes to the beard - oldest axiom in the game.

[MRaup]

Tie goes to the beard - oldest axiom in the game.

And people wonder why I've had my facial hair since I turned 22...

[Andyzipp]

And people wonder why I've had my facial hair since I turned 22...

All this time I thought that was your Astros' World Series beard...

[MRaup]

All this time I thought that was your Astros' World Series beard...

I've had the beard a bit longer than the Astros' World Series appearance...

Or the NLCS appearance...

[VirtualBob]

I've had the beard a bit longer than the Astros' World Series appearance...

Or the NLCS appearance...

Hmmm ... I've had mine since the Carter administration.

[MRaup]

Hmmm ... I've had mine since the Carter administration.

If ever this country needed a rally-beard...

[VirtualBob]

If ever this country needed a rally-beard...

Good point.  I may have to steal that concept and recycle it.

[MRaup]

Good point.  I may have to steal that concept and recycle it.

Maybe we can mass-market the idea.


Rally-beards to bring down the price of gas!

[Noe]

Maybe we can mass-market the idea.


Rally-beards to bring down the price of gas!

House of David Night at the MMPUS.

[austro]

House of David Night at the MMPUS.

It'll be a throwdown when they meet up with MustacheMan out in the Crawfords.

[Noe]

It'll be a throwdown when they meet up with MustacheMan out in the Crawfords.

Winner gets to shave the loser.