Bad Call Umps...

[jkrdevil]

Alright I was watched the enitre 9th inning on mlb.tv. As far as the umpire signals; they were consistant. The foward punching motion was his strike call, for every strike. The batter before Pierzynski struck out on a ball that bounced and had to be tagged out. The home plate umpire made the same signals that he did for Pierzynski. The Ump on the controversial play signaled that he sung and then signaled strike. He did not call him out. I grant that his signals were confusing and his strike signal was too close to the standard out signal, however the ump was correct when he sayed after his game that was his strike signal, he made that signal for strike.

Now whether the ball bounced is a different argument.

[ROCHitman]

I've never seen an umpire make two different strike 3 calls, one of which looks the same as an out call and occurs a lot longer after a regular strike 3 call.

It's actually quite frequent at lower levels of fastpitch softball. A dropped strike 3 is one insatcne where the plate umpire MUST wait to signal OUT. That is why I teach young umpires to go with a more conservative strike3 call (no bow and arrow and now no waving your arms about). The less movement one has back there and the more time he gives to read the play, the better he can see the ball, glove, and bat and make the correct judgement.

What eddings should have done, and it would avoided this situatuion, was vocalize "No Catch!" to the batter and catcher. Paul would have no choice to throw down to Erstad IMMEDIATELY.

[Cujo]

What eddings should have done, and it would avoided this situatuion, was vocalize "No Catch!" to the batter and catcher.  Paul would have no choice to throw down to Erstad IMMEDIATELY.

What I wanna know is how do both the second and third base umpires also miss this call?? You know Eddings didn't have the best view so he went with Pierzynski and figured if he was wrong, which he knew he was by his racation during his post-game conference, that at least one of the other two umpires with better views of the pitch would overrule him and call Pierzynski out, so Eddings isn't the only one to blame here because the other umpires should have helped him get this one right.

But you also gotta give Pierzynski props for being heads-up enough to actually run to first knowing the ball was close to hitting the dirt. He helped con the umpire into thinking the ball hit the dirt by running to the bag, and it worked.

[jkrdevil]

What eddings should have done, and it would avoided this situatuion, was vocalize "No Catch!" to the batter and catcher.  Paul would have no choice to throw down to Erstad IMMEDIATELY.

What I wanna know is how do both the second and third base umpires also miss this call?? You know Eddings didn't have the best view so he went with Pierzynski and figured if he was wrong, which he knew he was by his racation during his post-game conference, that at least one of the other two umpires with better views of the pitch would overrule him and call Pierzynski out, so Eddings isn't the only one to blame here because the other umpires should have helped him get this one right.

But you also gotta give Pierzynski props for being heads-up enough to actually run to first knowing the ball was close to hitting the dirt. He helped con the umpire into thinking the ball hit the dirt by running to the bag, and it worked.

After Socia argued the 3rd base ump (the one with a clear view) was asked. Either he didn't know if it hit the ball in the dirt or he thought. He probably didn't know.

As far as Pierzynski selling the call. Yes it was a heads up play by him to realize the ump called adrop ball. However Pierzynski did not trick the ump into making that call. Immediatly after he swung the ump swung his arm out which was his signal for swinging strike but the catcher dropped the ball. Pierzynski realized what had happened and ran to first. The Ump already made the drop ball/ball in dirt call before Pierzynski turned to first base.

[no97]

Alright I was watched the enitre 9th inning on mlb.tv. As far as the umpire signals; they were consistant. The foward punching motion was his strike call, for every strike. The batter before Pierzynski struck out on a ball that bounced and had to be tagged out. The home plate umpire made the same signals that he did for Pierzynski. The Ump on the controversial play signaled that he sung and then signaled strike. He did not call him out. I grant that his signals were confusing and his strike signal was too close to the standard out signal, however the ump was correct when he sayed after his game that was his strike signal, he made that signal for strike.

Now whether the ball bounced is a different argument.

Exactly... My guess is that Eddings is given a refresher on his strike and out mechanics before he's allowed behind the plate again.

Moose

[Cujo]

Throughout the game, Eddings was inconsistent with his call for the "ball in dirt/strike three". During the game he has two different signals for the exact same play.

Call #1. Earlier on in Game 2, Eddings extended his arm out parallel with the ground to signal strike three, and only after the tag was applied would he pump his fist and signal that the batter was out.

Call #2. As for the Paul/Pierzynski play, Eddings extended his arm for a called thrid strike as he did previously, but immediatly pumped his fist after the strike signal confirming the out, without a tag even being applied.

[WSU151]

Throughout the game, Eddings was inconsistent with his call for the "ball in dirt/strike three".  During the game he has two different signals for the exact same play.

Call #1. Earlier on in Game 2, Eddings extended his arm out parallel with the gound to signal strike three, and only after the tag was applied would he pump his fist and signal that the batter was out out.

Call #2. As for the Paul/Pierzynski play, Eddings extended his arm for a called thrid strike as he did previously, but immediatly pumped his fist after the strike signal confirming the out, without a tag even being applied.

Based on your description, Eddings made the same signal for the same play...the arm out to the side means that it's a delayed dead ball, and then the punch means it's a strike. Of course, throughout the game, the punch meant a strike. The arm out and parallel is a signal for a different call, not necessarily a strike. I have to agree with jkr's argument here.

How many non-dropped strike threes did Eddings call with one arm parallel to the ground?

[Cujo]

I guess what I'm trying to discribe was that the only difference between Eddings' two calls was that for one he did not pump his fist until after the out was recorded, and the other he pumped his fist before the out was made.

A Major Leauge umpire should not be that inconsistent with his signals.

[pcgd]

the ump in the NLCS was making the same pump action for his strike calls.

[WSU151]

I guess what I'm trying to discribe was that the only difference between Eddings' two calls was that for one he did not pump his fist until after the out was recorded, and the other he pumped his fist before the out was made.

A Major Leauge umpire should not be that inconsistent with his signals.

But you and I really don't know if he's calling a strike or an out when we watch him...which is the problem. The "strike" and "out" signals in his repertoire (sp?) are technically consistent - however, there's just no difference in the two, and the viewing public has no clue as to what he's doing.

[Cujo]

I guess what I'm trying to discribe was that the only difference between Eddings' two calls was that for one he did not pump his fist until after the out was recorded, and the other he pumped his fist before the out was made.

A Major Leauge umpire should not be that inconsistent with his signals.

But you and I really don't know if he's calling a strike or an out when we watch him...which is the problem. The "strike" and "out" signals in his repertoire (sp?) are technically consistent - however, there's just no difference in the two, and the viewing public has no clue as to what he's doing.

Which leads me to ask the question: Why don't MLB umpires have universal signals for all calls like all the other leagues have?

[pcgd]

I guess what I'm trying to discribe was that the only difference between Eddings' two calls was that for one he did not pump his fist until after the out was recorded, and the other he pumped his fist before the out was made.

A Major Leauge umpire should not be that inconsistent with his signals.

But you and I really don't know if he's calling a strike or an out when we watch him...which is the problem. The "strike" and "out" signals in his repertoire (sp?) are technically consistent - however, there's just no difference in the two, and the viewing public has no clue as to what he's doing.

Which leads me to ask the question: Why don't MLB umpires have universal signals for all calls like all the other leagues have?

There are as far as I know. But each up puts their spin on it for the situation or for personality.

If you look at a close play the umpire is going to be much more animated than a normal play. A big strike out you see the big fists to the side thing that some do.

Personally I always liked the simple hand to the side, number of strikes extended and the punch out call of the shaddow boxing.

I dunno...its one play out of a million that happened this year. I don't think anything major should change. It happens. Its a human game.

[winghaz]

A few thoughts here:

1. There is no way the umpire could have known if it were a trap or legitimate catch. He had to make the best assumption he could have made.

2. Umpires have to use such judgement, based on assumptions. That's just the way the game is.

3. The umpire's assumption was wrong in this case. The ball did not hit the ground. But that's baseball.

4. The umpire looked confused in making the call, as if he wasn't totally sure of himself. He should have immediately looked to the third-base umpire.

5. The Angels were confused by the hand signals of the ump. Now, the Angels catcher couldn't have seen the umpire's signal, but I have a feeling he reacted to his teammates reacting to what they thought was signaled an out.

6. The Angels catcher should have thrown to first base, anyway. But there appeared to be so much confusion on the field that you almost can't blame him for being caught up in the confusion.

7. Give two people credit -- A.J. Pierzynski and Mike Scioscia. Pierzynski, obviously, for taking advantage of the whole thing, and Scioscia for not making a huge stink about the call. Now, imagine if Billy Martin were alive and he was manager of the Angels ... wow, that would have been a rhubarb!

8. The umpires need to have universal signals on strikes, outs, balls in play, etc.

[slapshot]

Umpires are supposed to be trained to use universal signals. In recent times, umpires are trained to always face the pitcher/field of play, so no in-field activity is missed. So a strike call is a striking (no pun) of the right arm & fist, similar to the way one would swing a hammer. Older umpires were trained to face and point to the 1st base dugout with a loud strike call (sometimes to the 3rd base side if the batter is left handed). I've seen both types of mechanics at the single-A level in the NY-Penn League. My mechanic is to stay square to the pitcher at all times.

If I have a partner on the bases, during out pre-game discussion I would ask him to "help me out" on situations like this. If the catcher catches the 3rd strike, if I look to my partner I would see a subtle fist. If the 3rd strike is not caught, he would point to the ground, although that would sometimes be accompanied by a verbal call as well. But both of these cases would only be used if I, as the home plate umpire, were blocked out and not able to cleanly see the 3rd strike caught or not caught by the catcher.

If the batter swings at that third strike, the only signal I would give is to point at the batter and say "that's a swing", or I would immediately point to my base partner to see if he thinks the batter swung at the pitch. This is different from other appeal calls to the base umpire, in that I point to him, instead of the catcher first asking for an appeal. And it has to be done immediately, because if it's a strike instead of a ball, the batter can advance to first (depending on the outs & runners on base).

I've only seen quick bits of the play. I saw the umpire point to the batter, confirming that it was a swing. I then saw the fist pump. I can't say if the pump was to signal a third strike, or the batter was out. I also can't tell if any of the base umpires gave the plate umpire one of those "subtle" signs. I do think that since the batter ran to first right away, benefit of the doubt would suggest the Angels throw the ball to first, just to be on the safe side.

Bottom lines? The umpire probably made a mistake, and the Angles fell asleep because of it.

[gashouser27]

There will be an Eddings rule i am sure to clear up the signals in the future..

However as was already pointed out every little league catcher is taught to tag the batter on a low strike before you walk off..DON"T LEAVE IT UP TO THE UMP!

I think if Molina is in the game it is different..To the Angels credit the whining about it was minimal

On the other hand AJ was at least out of the base line as much as Cano was when he was called out...

What goes around comes around?

[Cujo]

I think if Molina is in the game it is different

Why exactly was Molina taken out of the game to begin with??

And why in the world were the Angels using their third string catcher in the bottom of the 9th in a tied game in the ALCS??

[NJTank]

They had both MOlinas in the game one as a DH, and they pinch ran for Jose hoping to score the go ahead run.

[ROCHitman]

There will be an Eddings rule i am sure to clear up the signals in the future..

Oh, I doubt that. Each umpire is left to create his own safe, out, hard sell safe, hard sell out, and strike/ball mechanics as long as it's familiar to the game of baseball meaning it's easily recognizable. It's always been that way.

[LMU]

Let's add 3 blown calls from tonight's game:

1- Catcher's interference on Steve Finley noncall

2- Podsednik pickoff noncall

3- Baserunner tagout noncall in top of the 7th

[NJTank]

The Angels do have some big gripes with the umps in this series, though Im not sure it would have made a differnce tonight.