# Galarraga: Should the call be overturned?



## jaywdetroit

EDIT: Original title of this thread was jokingly, "D* should end its contract with MLB."

Okay---

Maybe that would be a little harsh, (and probably an unwise business choice) but in a perfect world, a world where watching Baseball on TV transcends all other pursuits...

Wait whats more American? Watching Baseball or pursuit of profit???

:lol:


----------



## sigma1914

So, a blown call should result in Directv losing EI and MLB Network? Should cable and InDemand lose EI, too? 

Weird topic.


----------



## jaywdetroit

sigma1914 said:


> So, a blown call should result in Directv losing EI and MLB Network? Should cable and InDemand lose EI, too?
> 
> Weird topic.


Yes! Everyone should put pressure on Selig to overturn-- Starting with TV!!

:grin:


----------



## Piratefan98

I'd like to see them over-turn the play as well, but that's not going to happen.

The only good that can come from this debacle is if it pushes MLB to follow the rest of pro sports and institute some limited form of instant replay. Give each manager two reviews per game to make sure that things like safe/out calls, fair/foul calls, fan interference calls, etc. are made correctly.

Jeff


----------



## hilmar2k

No way the play can be overturned....period. Please, that's such a ridiculous proposal. I too, am for instant replay, though.

EDIT: BTW, in the grand scheme of things, that play was no more important (and in a lot of ways less, since it didn't effect the outcome of the game) than a blown call in the 5th inning of a 10-1 game. Just because it effected an individual accomplishment people are up in arms. An individual accomplishment means nothing in the course of a season. It is certainly no reason to go back in time and change a call. What if the next two batters got on, and then there was a home run to give Cleveland a 4-3 win? You going to take that win off the board because a blown call cost a kid a perfect game? Ludicrous.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> No way the play can be overturned....period. Please, that's such a ridiculous proposal. I too, am for instant replay, though.
> 
> EDIT: BTW, in the grand scheme of things, that play was no more important (and in a lot of ways less, since it didn't effect the outcome of the game) than a blown call in the 5th inning of a 10-1 game. Just becasue it effected an individual accomplishment people are up in arms. An indivisual accomplishment means nothing in the course of a season. It is certainly no reason to go back in time and change a call. What if the next to batters got on, and then there was a home run to give Cleveland a 4-3 win? You going to take that win off the board because a blown call cost a kid a perfect game? Ludicrous.


Never say never....it's being reviewed.

The commissioner is empowered to overturn the ruling *if* he chooses to do so.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5246454


----------



## hilmar2k

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Never say never....it's being reviewed.
> 
> The commissioner is empowered to overturn the ruling *if* he chooses to do so.
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5246454


If they over turn that call, I will lose complete respect for baseball, and specifically Selig.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> If they over turn that call, I will lose complete respect for baseball, and specifically Selig.


...and based on the various polls at ESPN, USA Today, and other news outlets, I suspect many others will gain respect for both.


----------



## hilmar2k

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...and based on the various polls at ESPN, USA Today, and other news outlets, I suspect many others will gain respect for both.


Again, I go back to what happens if Cleveland came back and won that game after that blown call?


----------



## Piratefan98

I don't know MLB's rules for such things, but IF the Commissioner does in fact have the authority to change a call after the fact, then that authority was surely granted to the Commissioner for egregious situations just like this one. If you're not going to overturn this call, then do away with the authority to overturn, because you're obviously not interested in using that authority in the first place.


----------



## hilmar2k

I'll add one more thing; what of that were the first play of the game? And Galarraga then went on to get all 27 subsequent hitters out? Do you over turn it then? This is only being considered because it is nice and neat. It sets precident, though, and I don't think a good one.

Instant replay is the solution for this (well, not this, but future occurences).


----------



## Laker44

For Galarraga I'm sorry the umpire made the wrong call. But the only way I'm in favor of Instant Replay is if they make everything subject to being reviewed. Every play effects the outcome of the game and you can't pick and choice which plays should be reviewed.

Baseball can and have overturned calls that happen in games. The "Pine Game" with George Brett is one example.


----------



## hilmar2k

Laker44 said:


> For Galarraga I'm sorry the umpire made the wrong call. But the only way I'm in favor of Instant Replay is if they make everything subject to being reviewed. Every play effects the outcome of the game and you can't pick and choice which plays should be reviewed.
> 
> Baseball can and have overturned calls that happen in games. The "Pine Game" with George Brett is one example.


The Brett thing was a misinterpretation of the rules, not a blown call by an ump. That's different.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> Again, I go back to what happens if Cleveland came back and won that game after that blown call?


Wrong is wrong.

Sports are about fair competition - if human error contributes to it being unfair, then it needs to be rectified. Its not an accident that instant replay came into being.

In the Stanley Cup game last night between Chicago and Philly - instant replay allowed the officials to make the correct call on a non-scoring situation that at first appeared to be a goal. It works.


----------



## bixler

hilmar2k said:


> Again, I go back to what happens if Cleveland came back and won that game after that blown call?


But they didn't. There are no if's in this call....he flat out blew the call on the 27th out of the game. This was a huge call as baseball has only had 20 perfect games in it's entire history and never more than 2 in a single season. This would've been the 3rd one in the last 30 days!

You are projecting things that never happened by saying 2 guys get on and someone hits a homerun. That did not happen. What did happen was the batter grounded to the first baseman, the pitcher received the throw from the first baseman and stepped on the base before the runner was even 3 feet from the base. This was clearly an out but the call was blown. There isn't anything imaginary about this at all. It needs to be overturned.


----------



## hilmar2k

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Wrong is wrong.
> 
> Sports are about fair competition - if human error contributes to it being unfair, then it needs to be rectified. Its not an accident that instant replay came into being.


There are 100's of blown calls made. Should they all be overturned? Can't you see what an awful precident this sets?

I relaize the call was awful, and the kid deserved a perfect game, but overturning the call is not the solution.


----------



## erosroadie

hilmar2k said:


> Again, I go back to what happens if Cleveland came back and won that game after that blown call?


Regardless of what MLB will not do (overturn), it's time to get Instant Replay into the game to make the calls right. I support this even for balls and strikes.

If we have the technology to make the right calls more often, then let's use it. I'm personally tired of officials claiming that Instant Replay will take their jobs away. To me, the NFL has benefitted from this, even if a bit cumbersome. Other sports will benefit.

Give the kid from Detroit credit; he handled an unbelievably disappointing ending with class. He could teach many aged Major Leaguers a thing or two.

Let's get the calls right!
:soapbox:


----------



## hilmar2k

bixler said:


> But they didn't. There are no if's in this call....he flat out blew the call on the 27th out of the game. This was a huge call as baseball has only had 20 perfect games in it's entire history and never more than 2 in a single season. This would've been the 3rd one in the last 30 days!
> 
> You are projecting things that never happened by saying 2 guys get on and someone hits a homerun. That did not happen. What did happen was the batter grounded to the first baseman, the pitcher received the throw from the first baseman and stepped on the base before the runner was even 3 feet from the base. This was clearly an out but the call was blown. There isn't anything imaginary about this at all. It needs to be overturned.


You don't get it. What about next time? Are you only going to overturn calls that are nice and neat and result in a perfect game? A perfect game has zero impact on the season....none. That is the last reason to overturn a call. Why is this only coming up now? How about all the blown calls in the past that cost a team the game? Those are infinitely more important than this one...as they actually have an effect on the season, not the record book.


----------



## bixler

hilmar2k said:


> I'll add one more thing; what of that were the first play of the game? And Galarraga then went on to get all 27 subsequent hitters out? Do you over turn it then? This is only being considered because it is nice and neat. It sets precident, though, and I don't think a good one.
> 
> Instant replay is the solution for this (well, not this, but future occurences).


That didn't happen either. Don't dream up scenarios, just look at the facts. The only precident it sets is if the 27th out of a perfect game is blown by an EASY call then it should be overturned. It is nice and neat because it was a simple call to make.


----------



## hilmar2k

erosroadie said:


> Regardless of what MLB will not do (overturn), it's time to get Instant Replay into the game to make the calls right. I support this even for balls and strikes.
> 
> If we have the technology to make the right calls more often, then let's use it. I'm personally tired of officials claiming that Instant Replay will take their jobs away. To me, the NFL has benefitted from this, even if a bit cumbersome. Other sports will benefit.
> 
> Give the kid from Detroit credit; he handled an unbelievably disappointing ending with class. He could teach many aged Major Leaguers a thing or two.
> 
> Let's get the calls right!
> :soapbox:


You had me until balls and strikes. I am with you 100% with everything else you said, espesially about Galarraga, world class kid.


----------



## hilmar2k

bixler said:


> That didn't happen either. Don't dream up scenarios, just look at the facts. The only precident it sets is if the 27th out of a perfect game is blown by an EASY call then it should be overturned. It is nice and neat because it was a simple call to make.


See post 18.

If you aren't going to overturn *all* blowns calls, you can't overturn any.


----------



## njblackberry

The entire Detroit organization (excluding some fans) handled this situation extremely professionally, from Manager Jim Leyland on done. A very classy organization.


----------



## bixler

hilmar2k said:


> You don't get it. What about next time? Are you only going to overturn calls that are nice and neat and result in a perfect game? A perfect game has zero impact on the season....none. That is the last reason to overturn a call. Why is this only coming up now? How about all the blown calls in the past that cost a team the game? Those are infinitely more important than this one...as they actually have an effect on the season, not the record book.


Yes, calls that are blown on the 27th out of a perfect game should be overturned. When blown calls are made during the game, the teams have time to overcome them. In this situation the game was over if the correct call is made.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> There are 100's of blown calls made. Should they all be overturned? Can't you see what an awful precident this sets?


Yeah - justice in officiating. Terrible, huh?

Perhaps umpire's would think a little bit more first...if they knew every call might be second-guessed.


> I relaize the call was awful, and the kid deserved a perfect game, but overturning the call is not the solution.


OK - glad to hear what would be then...because allowing it to happen with no action *isn't* an answer.

Neither is DirecTV having anything to do with it.


----------



## bixler

hilmar2k said:


> If you aren't going to overturn *all* blowns calls, you can't overturn any.


Why not?


----------



## hilmar2k

bixler said:


> Yes, calls that are blown on the 27th out of a perfect game should be overturned. When blown calls are made during the game, the teams have time to overcome them. In this situation the game was over if the correct call is made.


What does the fact that it was a perfect game have to do with it? Nothing.


----------



## Piratefan98

In Singapore, there are over 30 offenses for which the penalty is caning.

Perhaps if caning were introduced to MLB for umpires who make really bad calls, there'd be less bad calls made.

Food for thought.


----------



## hilmar2k

So to be clear, what everyone here (except me) is saying is that a blown call that costs someone a perfect game is more important that one that costs a team a game (and therefore possibly a playoff spot)? Really?


----------



## bixler

In 1991, a panel headed by then-commissioner Fay Vincent took a look at the record book and decided to throw out 50 no-hitters for various reasons.

If they can take 50 no hitters off the record book, they can add 1 perfect game that was blown on a very easy call. Nothing to do with balls/strikes/foul lines/fielding errors....a simple out by 3 foot call that was missed.


----------



## bixler

hilmar2k said:


> So to be clear, what everyone here (except me) is saying is that a blown call that costs someone a perfect game is more important that one that costs a team a game (and therefore possibly a playoff spot)? Really?


It depends on when the blown call is made, as in last out of the game, and what kind of call it is, strike/ball/fair/foul.


----------



## jaywdetroit

hilmar2k said:


> I'll add one more thing; what of that were the first play of the game? And Galarraga then went on to get all 27 subsequent hitters out? Do you over turn it then? This is only being considered because it is nice and neat. It sets precident, though, and I don't think a good one.
> 
> Instant replay is the solution for this (well, not this, but future occurences).


I think your situation would definitely be considered to be overturned if the call was equally as bad. (But I wonder if Andrew Jackson makes that catch if he isn't defending a perfect game.)

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but in the instance, you are in a very small minority. As far as most people are concerned, he threw a perfect game, and should be properly credited for it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/columns/story?id=5245642


----------



## hilmar2k

The beauty of baseball is sometimes the ugliness of it. Those damn record books. Far too much of baseball is dictated by them.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> So to be clear, what everyone here (except me) is saying is that a blown call that costs someone a perfect game is more important that one that costs a team a game (and therefore possibly a playoff spot)? Really?


I certainly never said that...nor did any of the other posts I read.

Wrong is wrong. Seems pretty simple, regardless of the circumstances.

Even the umpire admitted the error and apologized.

Seems pretty simple...to overturn the call, set the record straight, and move on. As for precedent...while every case would earn the right to be considered *on its own merit*...the sky would not fall either if that were done.


----------



## jaywdetroit

hilmar2k said:


> So to be clear, what everyone here (except me) is saying is that a blown call that costs someone a perfect game is more important that one that costs a team a game (and therefore possibly a playoff spot)? Really?


No, actually you are saying that. In my mind previous "sins" (not overturning bad calls) should not hold any weight on whether or not you overturn this one.

I don't agree with your logic.


----------



## hilmar2k

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I certainly never said that...nor did any of the other posts I read.
> 
> Wrong is wrong. Seems pretty simple, regardless of the circumstances.
> 
> Een the umpire admitted the error and apologized.
> 
> Seems pretty simple...to overturn the call, set the record straight, and move on. As for precedent...while every case would earn the right to be considered *on its own merit*...the sky would not fall either if that were done.


But there have been hundreds of blown calls that resulted in a team losing a game. Where is the outpouring of pressure to overturn those calls?


----------



## cmasia

Hilmar2K is right.

Bixler is wrong.

It has nothing to do with giving Galarraga a perfect game.

It has everything to with setting a "reversable error" precedent that must be avoided at all cost.

What's ironic is, years from now, Galarraga will be remembered more that the 20 guys who have thrown oerfect games.


----------



## bixler

hilmar2k said:


> But there have been hundreds of blown calls that resulted in a team losing a game. Where is the outpouring of pressure to overturn those calls?


On the 27th out of the game?


----------



## hilmar2k

Okay, let me make one final statement.

I am not specifically against overturning calls in baseball (though instat replay is a much better solution). What I am against is overtunring a call specifically because it ruinded a perfect game. Overturn one, overturn all. A perfect game should not cause one play to be more important than another.

EDIT: I lied. I am against overturning calls. Just institute instant replay and be done with this.


----------



## bixler

cmasia said:


> Hilmar2K is right.
> 
> Bixler is wrong.
> 
> It has nothing to do with giving Galarraga a perfect game.
> 
> It has everything to with setting a "reversable error" precedent that must be avoided at all cost.
> 
> What's ironic is, years from now, Galarraga will be remembered more that the 20 guys who have thrown oerfect games.


What precedent is being set? Did Fay Vincent set one when he overturned 50 no hitters?


----------



## jaywdetroit

hilmar2k said:


> But there have been hundreds of blown calls that resulted in a team losing a game. Where is the outpouring of pressure to overturn those calls?


I think the reason you have the outpouring is because of the athletic achievement made here. This will only be the 21st time it has EVER happened.

How many MLB games have been played in the past 100 years? Only 21 times has someone achieved this. The outpouring is coming because people don't want this achievement to go uncredited.

Losing a game on a blown call sucks. But it happens ALOT. It's not rare. A perfect game is.

And if there is anything Baseball fans appreciate, it's a rare moment. (Or a rare Mickey Mantel card)


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> But there have been hundreds of blown calls that resulted in a team losing a game. Where is the outpouring of pressure to overturn those calls?


How about two threads on this topic today alone on a satellite-topic site? 

What happened after the Pittsburgh Super Bowl was another good example...it comes up all the time. Some sports haven't joined this millennium yet in using technology to validate or overturn human error.


----------



## jtbell

Fortunately or not, umpire error is part of the game. Just ask any Cardinals fan about Don Denkinger. Greg Maddux was a master of slowly working the strike zone far outside of the plate. Many double plays feature the phantom tag.

Jim Joyce is a good umpire who made a bad call. Unlike Denkinger, he admits that the call was wrong and is very distraught.

I am in favor of rules that make games shorter, not longer.


----------



## hilmar2k

jaywdetroit said:


> I think the reason you have the outpouring is because of the athletic achievement made here. This will only be the 21st time it has EVER happened.
> 
> How many MLB games have been played in the past 100 years? Only 21 times has someone achieved this. The outpouring is coming because people don't want this achievement to go uncredited.
> 
> Losing a game on a blown call sucks. But it happens ALOT. It's not rare. A perfect game is.
> 
> And if there is anything Baseball fans appreciate, it's a rare moment. (Or a rare Mickey Mantel card)


This has NOTHING to do with a perfect game. You can't allow that to be the reason to overtunr a call. You then set precident that individual achievements are more important than the outcome of the game.


----------



## jaywdetroit

hilmar2k said:


> This has NOTHING to do with a perfect game. You can't allow that to be the reason to overtunr a call. You then set precident that individual achievements are more important than the outcome of the game.


I completely disagree with you. You can and in this instance, you should, for reasons stated previously.


----------



## hilmar2k

jaywdetroit said:


> I completely disagree with you. You can and in this instance, you should, for reasons stated previously.


No shock that you're a Tigers fan.


----------



## jaywdetroit

hilmar2k said:


> No shock that you're a Tigers fan.


No doubt it's why I'm passionate about it, but I'd still agree with these points if it were a Cleveland pitcher, or worse yet, a Yankees one.


----------



## hilmar2k

jaywdetroit said:


> No doubt it's why I'm passionate about it, but I'd still agree with these points if it were a Cleveland pitcher, or worse yet, a Yankees one.


I like the passion, no doubt. We agree to disagree, I guess. And this could go on all day.


----------



## hilmar2k

Herdfan said:


> Actually, the Official Scorer of the game is looking at the replay, which he can do, to determine if the 1st basemen bobbled it enough to call it an error. Would make it a no-hitter, but not a perfect game.


I have no problem with that, as it does not wipe out what happened after it. Change the scoring all you want, just not the calls on the field ex post facto.


----------



## Piratefan98

hilmar2k said:


> You then set precident that individual achievements are more important than the outcome of the game.


Couldn't disagree more, for most of the same reasons others have mentioned in this thread.

Also, you can make at least moderately good case that a perfect game IS a team accomplishment. Fielders have to make plays (as the CF did in the 9th inning). Catchers have to call good games. Advance scouts learn the traits of opposing hitters and pass along to the pitching staff. The focus is obviously on the pitcher, but it truly is a team accomplishment.

Jeff


----------



## jaywdetroit

Herdfan said:


> Actually, the Official Scorer of the game is looking at the replay, which he can do, to determine if the 1st basemen bobbled it enough to call it an error. Would make it a no-hitter, but not a perfect game.
> 
> Plus I think the situation here is a little different in that the umpire that made the call admitted he blew it.


I read that he looked at the replay and decided against making it an error.


----------



## hilmar2k

Piratefan98 said:


> Couldn't disagree more, for most of the same reasons others have mentioned in this thread.
> 
> Also, you can make at least moderately good case that a perfect game IS a team accomplishment. Fielders have to make plays (as the CF did in the 9th inning). Catchers have to call good games. Advance scouts learn the traits of opposing hitters and pass along to the pitching staff. The focus is obviously on the pitcher, but it truly is a team accomplishment.
> 
> Jeff


You can't disagree, it's not an opinion. 

Baseball has never overturned a call that cost a team a game. Overturning this one becasue of the perfect game clearly shows that baseball places a higher importance on individual achievement than it does on the outcome of a game. I can't see how you an infer anything else.


----------



## bixler

What a thread.....:hurah::hurah:


----------



## Piratefan98

hilmar2k said:


> I can't see how you an infer anything else.


Of course you can't. :lol:

Definitely an agree-to-disagree situation.


----------



## hilmar2k

Piratefan98 said:


> Of course you can't. :lol:


Well played.


----------



## hilmar2k

bixler said:


> What a thread.....:hurah::hurah:


I love it. Nothing better than a good baseball debate. Completely respect those on the other side of it. Make a good argument one way or the other, that's all I ask.

And being that it's a baseball thread, let me just add one thing.....GO SOX!!!!


----------



## Piratefan98

hilmar2k said:


> Well played.


I like that "well played, Mauer" commercial.

P.S. I'm glad we agree on instant replay. There are definitely plenty of purists who think we're kooks with this view.


----------



## hilmar2k

Piratefan98 said:


> I like that "well played, Mauer" commercial.
> 
> P.S. I'm glad we agree on instant replay. There are definitely plenty of purists who think we're kooks with this view.


Yeah, I don't get it. Since when do blown calls equate with being "pure"?

I wonder if Selig wishes that instant replay had been put into play already to avoid this kind of thing? Has has always been staunchly against it in the past. Will that now change?


----------



## yosoyellobo

Piratefan98 said:


> I like that "well played, Mauer" commercial.
> 
> P.S. I'm glad we agree on instant replay. There are definitely plenty of purists who think we're kooks with this view.


Call me one of the purists who is in the instant replay camp.


----------



## hilmar2k

yosoyellobo said:


> Call me one of the purists who is in the instant replay camp.


Wait, what? I'm confused. 

Are you pro or anti replay?


----------



## yosoyellobo

Pro.


----------



## hilmar2k

yosoyellobo said:


> Pro.


Cool. Generally those against replay are considered the "purists".


----------



## hilmar2k

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...and based on the various polls at ESPN, USA Today, and other news outlets, I suspect many others will gain respect for both.


But the poll in this thread shows things are a little closer to 50/50.


----------



## jaywdetroit

hilmar2k said:


> But the poll in this thread shows things are a little closer to 50/50.


Yeah, how are you stuffing the box like that? :lol:

I'm a bit surprised about this actually.


----------



## yosoyellobo

hilmar2k said:


> Cool. Generally those against replay are considered the "purists".


I don't like the designated hitter rule, interleague play and the winner of the allstar game gets home field in the World Serie.


----------



## hilmar2k

jaywdetroit said:


> I'm a bit surprised about this actually.


So am I. With something like this, people tend to react emotionally. Emotionally I say give the kid the perfect game. But when I step back and think about what that would mean, I can't agree with it.


----------



## hilmar2k

yosoyellobo said:


> I don't like the desinated hitter rule.


I do. NL games can be tough to watch.



yosoyellobo said:


> I don't like interleague play


Me neither.



yosoyellobo said:


> I don't like the winner of the allstar game gets home field in the World Serie.


Me neither.


----------



## sigma1914

My opinion:
The commish should not go back and grant this unless he plans to go back and grant every blown call that resulted in a player not getting a certain stat. The play had no affect on who won. It's simply giving the kid a stat. If he gets the stat, then every missed call needs to have stats fixed, too. That will never happen.


----------



## dcowboy7

Yes.

baseball is zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.


----------



## bixler

hilmar2k said:


> And being that it's a baseball thread, let me just add one thing.....GO SOX!!!!


Yes, love those Chi Sox as well........:eek2::eek2:


----------



## jaywdetroit

sigma1914 said:


> My opinion:
> The commish should not go back and grant this unless he plans to go back and grant every blown call that resulted in a player not getting a certain stat. The play had no affect on who won. It's simply giving the kid a stat. If he gets the stat, then every missed call needs to have stats fixed, too. That will never happen.


This really depends on how you look at things. If you look at the Stats, its 26 straight outs, as opposed to 27. And 1 hit, vs none.

But the "stats" aren't really what's at stake here. There is much more: A Perfect game first and foremost, which is more than a stat, it's an achievement, and not a small one.

Prior to the replay rule, If someone had one more at bat left in his career to beat the home run record, he hit one, and the call was blown, people would be screaming for the call to be overturned, as they should be.

A Perfect game is much more than a stat, it's a career achievement, and its so rare, that not acknowledging it because of "the arrogance of authority" (Keith Olbermann) would be a travesty.

I'm guessing the umpire is crying for Selig to overturn him.


----------



## kikkenit2

After watching several replays on youtube I think everyone is overreacting. This wasn't that bad a call. Only one camera angle I saw on fsdetroit showed that the pitcher barely caught the ball initially, and had to reposition it deeper into the glove after the runner passed first base. The umpire clearly saw a snowcone in the glove. Where is his camera angle? This barely catching and repositioning in the glove is what caused him to call it safe. If the ball is being bobbled in the glove while the runner tags the base, then the runner is safe. Upon slow motion and the proper (leftfield zoomed in) camera angle review even the umpire agrees that he got it wrong. But it was almost bobbled and at least the correct team still won. These close plays happen a lot in baseball. Instant replay would correct most mistakes, but slow things down to where who would watch?


----------



## hilmar2k

kikkenit2 said:


> After watching several replays on youtube I think everyone is overreacting. This wasn't that bad a call. Only one camera angle I saw on fsdetroit showed that the pitcher barely caught the ball initially, and had to reposition it deeper into the glove after the runner passed first base. The umpire clearly saw a snowcone in the glove. Where is his camera angle? This barely catching and repositioning in the glove is what caused him to call it safe. If the ball is being bobbled in the glove while the runner tags the base, then the runner is safe. Upon slow motion and the proper (leftfield zoomed in) camera angle review even the umpire agrees that he got it wrong. But it was almost bobbled and at least the correct team still won. These close plays happen a lot in baseball.* Instant replay would correct most mistakes, but slow things down to where who would watch*?


Not if implemented correctly.


----------



## sigma1914

jaywdetroit said:


> A Perfect game is much more than a stat, it's a career achievement, and its so rare, that not acknowledging it because of "the arrogance of authority" (Keith Olbermann) would be a travesty.


Career achievement? It's a big deal, but can any fan name the perfect game pitchers? Looking at the list, I recognize about half the names. Addie Joss, Charlie Robertson, & Len Barker are a few perfect game guys who I doubt anyone knows.


----------



## bixler

kikkenit2 said:


> After watching several replays on youtube I think everyone is overreacting. This wasn't that bad a call. Only one camera angle I saw on fsdetroit showed that the pitcher barely caught the ball initially, and had to reposition it deeper into the glove after the runner passed first base. The umpire clearly saw a snowcone in the glove. Where is his camera angle? This barely catching and repositioning in the glove is what caused him to call it safe. If the ball is being bobbled in the glove while the runner tags the base, then the runner is safe. Upon slow motion and the proper (leftfield zoomed in) camera angle review even the umpire agrees that he got it wrong. But it was almost bobbled and at least the correct team still won. These close plays happen a lot in baseball. Instant replay would correct most mistakes, but slow things down to where who would watch?


I would tend to agree with this but the ump said he thought the runner beat the throw, not that he thought the pitcher bobbled the ball in his glove, not that he didn't think the pitcher had control of the ball, and not that the pitcher's foot wasn't on the bag with the ball in his glove.

This was the umps quote. "I thought he beat the throw. I was convinced he beat the throw, until I saw the replay,"

I just don't see how he can say that. I could tell in real speed while the play was happening that the runner didn't beat the throw. Now looking at replay, like you stated, you might determine he bobbled it or his foot wasn't on the bag, but to say the runner beat the throw.....


----------



## Tom Robertson

Ok, this really isn't a DIRECTV thread, so I've moved it. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## dpeters11

The big thing I take from this is that Galarraga handled this in a totally professional and sportsman like way. The ump is still hurt that he made the call. Reports I've read on the game today, Galarraga gave the lineup card to Joyce, who was fighting back tears. Galarraga also has a new Corvette, but I'm sure he'd like a perfect game. But he's gained respect with how he's handled it.


----------



## cmasia

bixler said:


> It depends on when the blown call is made, as in last out of the game, and what kind of call it is, strike/ball/fair/foul.


Your comment, "It depends" is exactly the reason you are wrong.

There are rules or there are no rules. "It depends" has no place in a rule book. The first out of a game is equally important as the last.

Also, Fay Vincent only changed the definition of a no hitter to be 9 innings or more. I don't agree with the Andy Hawkins no hitter being redacted. ( He pitched 8 innings and was the losing pitcher to a home team who did not bat in the 9th. )

But Vincent did not reverse an on field call.


----------



## BKC

I'm not reading this whole thread so I;m sorry if this has already been posted. If MLB did what's in the quote, a precedent has already been set to change the call.



> In 1991, a panel headed by then-commissioner Fay Vincent took a look at the record book and decided to throw out 50 no-hitters for various reasons.


----------



## yosoyellobo

If this was the NFL the Manager would have come out to discuss the call for about a minute. As he was going back to the dugout he would be told about what the replay show.
He would throw out the red flag and the official would go to the replay booth and look at it for three minutes. He would than confirm the play because their was not enough conclusive evidence to over throw. The team would lose one of it's challenge.


----------



## ajc68

I'm usually against overturning calls after the fact, but this is a very special situation. There are no "what if's" in this scenario as it was on the last out of a perfect game in which even the umpire and runner agreed the call was blown. It has no impact on the direction or the outcome of the game. I don't see this as setting a dangerous precedent for these reasons.

I would also like to see instant replay expanded so that each team gets two challenges per game, which would cover plays in the field of play, but not balls and strikes.


----------



## Carl Spock

dpeters11 said:


> I'm sure [Galarraga would] like a perfect game. But he's gained respect with how he's handled it.


So much better in the long run than a record.

Plus baseball is a game of long memories. Just ask Pete Rose. We'll all know, for the rest of our lifes, that Galarraga pitched a perfect game. He will be honored forever by the fans.

There is no way in the world Commissioner Bud will change the outcome of the game. No freakin' way. :nono:

And yet, this _is_ Mr. All-Star Game Ends In A Tie. 

I could be wrong here.


----------



## fluffybear

While the ump blew the call, I don't like the idea of Selig using his powers to reverse the call. There have been many rotten calls over the years and quite a few of them have actually affected the outcome of a game, a season, etc.. and the commissioners office has kept clear and needs to continue to do so. Reversing the call will set a precedence which I believe will cause more damage in the long run.


----------



## spartanstew

Yes, of course it should be overturned.


----------



## Nick

No. The umpire's call was the right call. Perfect game or not, Gallagra didn't have control of the ball when the runner touched the bag.

No overturning -- that's silly. The call stands.

Period.


----------



## spartanstew

Nick said:


> No. The umpire's call was the right call. Perfect game or not, Gallagra didn't have control of the ball when the runner touched the bag.
> 
> No overturning -- that's silly. The call stands.
> 
> Period.


You can certainly have your opinion about overturning the call, but to say the call was correct is ludicrous. I watched that replay a hundred times last night. If you think he didn't have control, you've never played ball. He caught it originally in a partial snowcone and then as he started to rise up, he transferred the ball deeper into his glove. It happens all the time. Just because the ball isn't nestled into the pit of the pocket doesn't mean the player doesn't have control over it. Period (see, I can be cool too).


----------



## Steve

I don't believe Selig should overturn the call, so I voted "no".

That said, the umpire should have had the ability (instant replays) to see his call should be reversed while the game was still in progress, rather than after the fact. Just my .02.


----------



## SPACEMAKER

Bud Selig = Nutless Wonder


----------



## SPACEMAKER

Nick said:


> No. *The umpire's call was the right call.* Perfect game or not, Gallagra didn't have control of the ball when the runner touched the bag.
> 
> No overturning -- that's silly. The call stands.
> 
> Period.


:lol::lol::rolling::lol:


----------



## bixler

Nick said:


> No. The umpire's call was the right call. Perfect game or not, Gallagra didn't have control of the ball when the runner touched the bag.
> 
> No overturning -- that's silly. The call stands.
> 
> Period.


But that's not how the ump saw it. He said the runner beat the throw, he never said the pitched bobbled the ball (didn't have control).


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

bixler said:


> Yes, calls that are blown on the 27th out of a perfect game should be overturned. When blown calls are made during the game, the teams have time to overcome them. In this situation the game was over if the correct call is made.


I agree that call should be overturned. It was a bad call. Half the time when teams turn a double play they dont even touch second base. As long as they are close to the bag they call them out


----------



## hilmar2k

Not being overturned.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5248118


----------



## drpjr

I am in the pro replay camp however it should never be used for balls and strikes. I think it should be used in some sort of limited fashion. Possibly like football where each team can have a couple of challenges per game. The umps would retain replay for ground rule type plays like home runs, foul balls, fan interference etc and coaches could challenge field of play type calls such as tags, trapped balls, out of baseline, balks etc. It could be a nice blend of keeping the human factor in the game with the ability to get that one crucial play right. Selig could use this play to implement replay and everybody would win, the pitcher, the ump, the fans, Selig, baseball -everybody. What would be especially cruel if replay were instituted next year because of this play and not reaping the benefit of overturning an obvious bad call EDIT: Almost forgot I voted yes.


----------



## hilmar2k

JACKIEGAGA said:


> I agree that call should be overturned. It was a bad call. Half the time when teams turn a double play they dont even touch second base. As long as they are close to the bag they call them out


Wait, so you want all of the "neighborhood plays" overturned? :nono:


----------



## jahgreen

It's Game 7 of the 2010 World Series. The Tigers are up 1-0 with two outs in the bottom of the ninth, but the Cubs are batting and have men on 2nd and 3rd. Wrigley Field is going crazy as the greatest World Series in history reaches its climax.

The count is 3-2 and the runners are off with the pitch and will score easily on any hit. Soriano lines the ball to right field. Ordonez races in, dives, and holds his glove up, with the ball firmly in place. Soriano is out and the Tigers win the Series.

Not so fast.

Instant Replay shows that the ball hit the grass before Ordonez could reach it, but the view of all 6 umps had been blocked by Ordonez's body. Thank God for that centerfield camera with the special super-ultra high speed functionality.

Two hours after the stadium is emptied, Commissioner Selig proclaims the Cubs the 2010 World Series Champions. The 103-year drought is finally over.

"What else could I do?" Selig asked. "After I set that precedent with the perfect game, I had no choice."

That's why the perfect game call cannot be overturned.


----------



## drpjr

jahgreen said:


> Two hours after the stadium is emptied, Commissioner Selig proclaims the Cubs the 2010 World Series Champions. The 103-year drought is finally over.
> That's why the perfect game call cannot be overturned.


Why would it take two hours and the commissioner to overturn a call the umps could do with replay in two minutes. Umps conference all the time to get the right call. Watch a monitor, correct the call. Game over. CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN!


----------



## MikeW

jahgreen said:


> It's Game 7 of the 2010 World Series. The Tigers are up 1-0 with two outs in the bottom of the ninth, but the Cubs are batting and have men on 2nd and 3rd.


Quite an imagination and very good point. Now..let's see if the Cubs can break .500 before putting them into the 2010 series


----------



## drpjr

hilmar2k said:


> Wait, so you want all of the "neighborhood plays" overturned? :nono:


Not overturned. Like the travelling call in basketball needs to be- called correctly. Mr. Rogers didn't play baseball


----------



## jahgreen

drpjr said:


> Not overturned. Like the travelling call in basketball needs to be- called correctly. Mr. Rogers didn't play baseball


Next you'll be saying the umps should call the strike zone the way it's written in the rulebook.


----------



## drpjr

jahgreen said:


> Next you'll be saying the umps should call the strike zone the way it's written in the rulebook.


What a novel concept to actually follow the rules.  (My previous post was meant in jest) EDIT: As was yours- touche'


----------



## Game Fan

A bad call. A classy response by the one person affected the most. Case closed.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Commish has a the power to overturn it, and he should. 
1 it wouldn't change the score, or the win loss records, after the Fact.
2 it was for a record, and it was the LAST out, in the 9th inning. Not the 1st or 2nd out.
Agree that Baseball should institue replay, crazy not to have it.


----------



## hbkbiggestfan

The call should be overturned. Same result with one slightly modified CORRECT stat. The next play (which shouldn't have happened) was a ground-out to end the game. All blown calls don't have to be overturned if this one gets overturned. The reaction to an overturn will be far more positive with some scattered negative reactions from extreme traditionalists. GET OVER YOURSELVES AND LET THE KID HAVE THE PERFECT 
GAME HE EARNED AND DESERVES!!!


----------



## Sixto

Last night, I thought overturning the call might be a good idea (after watching the replay a zillion times all night on every channel ).

After sleeping on it, voted no.

It opens up a large can of worms to overturn.

Best to leave as-is, and look to future with instant replay.

If commissioner changed this call, then every important call in future would be protested, such as a critical call in the bottom of the 9th in a playoff game, when maybe the call might not be so clear but found to be wrong.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I'm not a fan of baseball... but this seems like a call that could be overturned without setting any kind of dangerous precedent.

It was (or should have been) the last call of the game... and the game ended with the next at-bat... so the only stats that would be changed would be the at-bat for the next guy and the on-base for the guy who would be retroactively called the final out. That's it.

I'm not for taking back calls that effect outcome of games, even if my team loses... because you can't retroactively fix those things in the same way. Just like I hate when the NCAA takes wins away from a school as punishment... so does that mean someone else won that game and got to the title game or bowl game? It's insane, even if trying to be fair, to take back some calls after the fact.

But if ever there was a call that could be over-ruled after the fact, this one seems to be the poster-child for such a thing.

That said... I'm most pleased to see the class that everyone has handled this with... I'd perfectly understand the pitcher being pissed and going off, but he didn't. The ump could have been stubborn, but he owned up to the error... and heck, from what I saw even the fans didn't heckle the ump today like they could have... he got some boos, but frankly, it sounded to me like even the fans saw the dignity displayed by the ump and didn't want to pile on.


----------



## cmasia

It astonishes me how cavalier people are with the rules of the game when an outcome does not suit their desires.

Why is the 27th out any different than outs 1 through 26?

Why should no change in the game outcome or standings have any impact on a retro-active scoring decision?

Why would a Commissioner's edict make for any less an asterisk on this game than now already exists?

Selig did the right thing today.

Hopefully, replay will be instituted. 2 replay requests per team for all decisions except balls and strikes. No umpire requested replays.

If this happens, Galarraga will be remembered for 2 great things:
1) Being the only pitcher to pitch a 28 out perfect game, and
2) Being the catalyst for a long overdue rule improvement.


----------



## GrumpyBear

hbkbiggestfan said:


> The call should be overturned. Same result with one slightly modified CORRECT stat. The next play (which shouldn't have happened) was a ground-out to end the game. All blown calls don't have to be overturned if this one gets overturned. The reaction to an overturn will be far more positive with some scattered negative reactions from extreme traditionalists. GET OVER YOURSELVES AND LET THE KID HAVE THE PERFECT
> GAME HE EARNED AND DESERVES!!!


Thats really the only reason to even consider the call to be overturned, as the next play was a ground out. This was a clear cut out mistake, it doesn't rewrite the win/loss records. The very next play ended the game. Its not like turning back the clock on a game that should have ended, and then somebody went on to win the game, with the next bat. This game ended on the very next play. Records and scores didn't change, this wasn't a close call, and yes this was a PERFECT game. Sorry even a non baseball fan like me understands the meaning of a PERFECT game, vs a hitless game, or just a win.
If the next batter would have gotten on place and then the following batter hit a grounder this would be different, as then there would have been a onbase issue to deal with.


----------



## Laker44

hilmar2k said:


> The Brett thing was a misinterpretation of the rules, not a blown call by an ump. That's different.


No it isn't. His misinterpretation of the rules at that time. Not only cost Brett a home run but it also ended the game. Therefore it was a blown call by an ump that was overturned.


----------



## jahgreen

Laker44 said:


> No it isn't. His misinterpretation of the rules at that time. Not only cost Brett a home run but it also ended the game. Therefore it was a blown call by an ump that was overturned.


Yes, it is different. Baseball rules allow for a game to be played under protest over improper application of the rules. The rules do not allow any protest (or retroactive change) where the rules were properly applied and the question is whether the ump's judgment call was correct (strike, ball, out, safe). The blown call in the perfect game falls in the latter category.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

cmasia said:


> It astonishes me how cavalier people are with the rules of the game when an outcome does not suit their desires.


I have no horse in the race, so I think I can be as objective as anyone since I really don't watch any baseball that isn't a highlight reel on SportsCenter.



cmasia said:


> Why is the 27th out any different than outs 1 through 26?


Technically, it isn't... but it is the only out that can be corrected, potentially, without affecting the rest of the game.

IF it were the 3rd out in the 6th inning, there would be no way to go back and correct that even if we had the same video evidence available after the game... because you'd have to unravel the way the whole rest of the game was played from that point forward.

But... on out 27, when the very next play results in out "28"... you can go back and correct the error without affecting the outcome OR the remaining play of the game.

That's what makes out #27 and easier one to correct a mistake in this particular case.



cmasia said:


> Why should no change in the game outcome or standings have any impact on a retro-active scoring decision?


There was no other on-base, no further hits, and no runs scored after the erroneous "safe" call... so IF one wanted to correct the mistake, it could be done without effecting the rest of the game's stats.

Again, IF the error was a 6th inning mistake... you couldn't go back and correct that, because both teams likely made some different decisions in innings 7-9 after the "error" than IF there was still a perfect game in play.

So a middle-of-the-game mistake is harder to correct after the game without messing with the integrity of the game itself. Whereas a mistake that occurs on what should have been the last play of the game, and the game is only extended by one more play that didn't change the outcome or score, then no one would be harmed by making the correction.



cmasia said:


> Why would a Commissioner's edict make for any less an asterisk on this game than now already exists?


That's a different question... and truthfully, if the call were reversed after the game (since no instant replay rules in effect during the game)... then yes, there would be an "asterisk" associated with the outcome in many people's minds.


----------



## Laker44

jahgreen said:


> Yes, it is different. Baseball rules allow for a game to be played under protest over improper application of the rules. The rules do not allow any protest (or retroactive change) where the rules were properly applied and the question is whether the ump's judgment call was correct (strike, ball, out, safe). The blown call in the perfect game falls in the latter category.


I know what the rules say. But baseball can and has overturned calls in the past, whether it be by protest or ump's judgment calls. Merkle's Blunder is one of them.
http://miscbaseball.wordpress.com/2009/10/28/the-official-decision-on-merkles-boner/


----------



## jsg

I don't think the call should be reversed, and I'm not in favor of instant replay for baseball.

I was watching the last couple of innings of the game with my wife. She is a big Tigers fan--that's why we left cable for Dish and why we have DirecTV now. I wasn't paying much attention until I heard (I think in the 7th) that there hadn't been a base runner for Cleveland for the whole game. That got my attention and I went for Wikipedia to look up "perfect game" although that phrase wasn't uttered by the commentators.

I was rooting for Galarraga all the way, completely invested in wanting to see a perfect game.

After the game, though, I feel a strong need to accept what happened, just as Leyland and Galarraga have. My opinion relates to what I think the rightful role of baseball is and what we should expect from it. I believe many commentators want to see justice for Gallaraga. That idea makes no sense.

Just what do the box score and other stats measure? It seems to me they measure a composite of individual ability, individual effort, teamwork, and a large number of random events.

We look at a perfect game as a measure of a pitcher, but it isn't just that by a long shot. It's a measure of all of the above, including the random, the "luck". Gallarraga didn't deserve a perfect game, particularly after the 25th out (Jackson's miracle catch), though he didn't deserve not to have a perfect game either. It's simply not a question of "deserving". If a mosquito had distracted Jackson at just the wrong time, or there had been just a whisper of additional breeze the ninth could have started with a hit, just as one example. Galarraga wouldn't either deserve or not deserve either.

The box score measures some arbitrary factors about the whole team, the whole other team, and the luck (including the decisions of the umpires). Galarraga had great luck to pitch when the Indians weren't hitting very well, when Jackson, among others, were at the top of their game, and when he was at his very best. His luck ran out with the 27th out because he had an umpire on first who wasn't going to let the prospect of a perfect game color his judgment, and who happened to make a mistake in real time in a close call.

I call it close because my impression when I first saw it was that it was close. I didn't know if it was an out or if he was safe and I really wanted it to be an out. How it looks after seeing a dozen slow motion replays shouldn't affect my opinion about whether the play was close or not because my first impression better matches what Jim Joyce experienced.

The box score and the stats measure all of the above factors, including the luck, and that's certainly imperfect any way you look at it. You can't expect to get justice out of sport. The only thing you should be confident in from baseball is that you will get a winner and a loser--and that only if it doesn't rain. That is all a score really tells you and it isn't a truth, but it is a motivation for the teams to play hard and for us in the crowd to care. The truth is much more complex and in this case much more fun.

With regard to instant replay my opposition has nothing to do with the speed of the game. That seems to be the most often quoted reason not to do it.

In other sports like the football the fiction that the score tells you who is the better team is even more readily accepted. People demand and to some extent get "accuracy". But when you aren't clear what you are measuring you can get precision but you can't possibly get accuracy because you are always measuring the luck with everything else.

In college freshman physics the time of a ball to decline a sloped ramp measured by a stop-watch is not 10.435 seconds--that's points off on the grade of the lab report. The time is 10.4 +/- .3 seconds (maybe). Any more decimals, or leaving off the +/- has you reporting more than you know, and that's wrong. 10.435 is more precise, but also inaccurate.

We forget that we are doing that in sports because of the random factors, but we are, in every game. The score is only part of the story. That's fine--that's built in--that's how it has to be. But we mustn't take that too seriously. If you don't think chance plays a part in football consider what happens when the team captains meet with the referees before the game. The chance is explicit.

Baseball is called "America's Pastime", not "America's Sport". By dollar amount I guess American football is America's Sport.

George Carlin pointed out that football is played in a stadium while baseball is played in a park. I believe I heard him say that something along the lines that football has 0-0 scores while baseball games are "scoreless".

He also said: "Baseball is a nineteenth-century pastoral game.
Football is a twentieth-century technological struggle".

In the nineteenth century (and well into the twentieth) an umpire's call was as close to truth as you could get. People accepted them as truth or argued about them (part of the pastime). People were playing a game in a park and those people included umpires, and there was a score. I doubt people expected justice from that endeavor--they expected a good time.

I hope no one turns baseball into a twenty-first-century technological struggle and I hope baseball accepts the fact that the score and stats reflect both the talent and the luck--but not the whole event.

I hope Galarraga's game is included as a _unique_ footnote to baseball's short list of perfect games.

I hope in the next five years some sports announcer says "and that Cubs pitcher has just achieved Major League Baseball's twenty-third perfect game, not including the game pitched by Armando Galarraga in 2010 for the Detroit Tigers against the Cleveland Indians."

(I'm not picking on the Cubs).

I hope that baseball will remember what it is as a pastime and will forgo more instant replay, and in the process not confuse some score or stat with truth, or precision with accuracy, or compulsion with progress.

I hope people will accept the results of the game a couple of nights ago as a wonderful and unique outcome of a ball game. It is what it is and the stats measure what they measure and I know my memory will remain a wonderful one.

I hope to see Galarraga pitch more wonderful games and I hope to hear more of his grace and see more of his wonderful pixie smile. I'm liking Jim Leyland a lot more now, too.

And finally, most of all, I hope that none of you tell my wife what I said.


----------



## yosoyellobo

I would completely agree with everything you have said, except that baseball have made so many changes to the game that I have love so much all of my life. If instant replay had been in effect when Gallarraga threw his perfect game(to me he did throw one) and the umpire had over turn the call at first would we have put an * after his name in the record book. I don't think so.

by the way I won't tell your wife.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I don't disagree with some of the "days of yore" type of sentiment...

But if one wanted to return to the "pastime" of old in Baseball... shouldn't that include no televised games so that you only see the game if you go to the stadium? You don't get the "experience" on TV... and lack of TV would also remove instant replay from the mix.

Technology is not always evil... If the technology exists to get some calls right that are sometimes wrong, why not use that?

I would rather my team lose on a good call than win on a bad one. History is littered with scenarios where a team I rooted for won at least in part due to controversy... and that tars the memory for me. I have much more fond memories of times my team lost in a fair and accurately called game.

There are lots of judgment calls... and those are part of the game. And I don't like to see instant replay used for 10 minutes over a play that could go either way... but if we have a situation where instant replay reveals a clear mistake made by an official that he missed in real-time... I'd like to correct those.

In the case of baseball.. I agree ball/strike would be a nasty way to use replay to "correct" though.. just like in football it would be a waste to judge offsides/false start... or in basketball measuring steps for travelling or foul calls... so don't use replay for everything... but definitely use it for bang-bang kinds of plays OR ones that happen during a natural stoppage of play anyway.


----------



## Michael D'Angelo

Since it would have been the last out I think it should be overturned but it won't.


----------



## Nick

Michael D'Angelo;2486578 said:


> Since it would have been the last out I think it should be overturned but it won't.


In the first place, the ump's call was the right call, but even if he had blown the call, why should the last out be any different than (not then) the first, the fifth or 17th? Just be cause the kid was going for a "perfect" game doesn't matter. An out is an out, but a blown call it was not.

You don't always get a happy ending -- just ask the folks on the Gulf Coast.


----------



## Msguy

It takes baseball forever to make changes on ANYTHING. Gallaraga's perfect game that was taken away from him because of a blown call will probably never be overturned in our lifetimes. And It should be overturned.


----------



## David Ortiz

Nick said:


> why should the last out be any different than (not then) the first, the fifth or 17th?


If the umpire had made the out call, the game would have been over. That's the difference.


----------



## cmasia

David Ortiz said:


> If the umpire had made the out call, the game would have been over. That's the difference.


So, you're saying if the bad call was the 1st out of the game and he retired the next 26 guys, and then retired the final out for a one hitter, it's not OK to reverse the bad call.

By your incorrect logic, shouldn't the 1st inning call be reversed after the game is over as well?

What's the difference?

1 bad call, 27 other outs without a base runner.

After a game is complete, there is NO difference.

Hence the bad call should not be reversed.


----------



## spartanstew

cmasia said:


> So, what if the bad call was the 1st out of the game and he retired the next 26 guys, and then retired the final out for a one hitter.
> 
> Should the 1st inning call be reversed?
> 
> There is NO difference.


Umm, yes, there is, and it was already pointed out. In your example, if the right call was made, the game wouldn't be over.

In the case that were discussing, it would have been. That's the difference.


----------



## David Ortiz

cmasia said:


> So, what if the bad call was the 1st out of the game and he retired the next 26 guys, and then retired the final out for a one hitter.
> 
> Should the 1st inning call be reversed?
> 
> There is NO difference.


If the umpire makes the correct call on the 1st out, there are 26 to go. If the umpire makes the correct call on the 27th out, the game is over.


----------



## cmasia

To Spartan and David:

I edited my post while you guys were posting. Read #118 again.

I still think you miss the point.

The reversal would have, under current rules, happened at least 12 hours after the game was over - or when Bud Selig decided to wake up that day!
So, again, with that delay, what is the difference in reversing Out 1 or Out 27?

2 other observations about what happened:
1) That was an easy, routine ground ball to second base. What was first baseman Cabrera thinking?

2) There are many plays where umps gather after a tough call, and many times they reverse it. I'm surprised he didn't at least talk to the other umps.


----------



## Boston_bill

Im glad Selig didn't overturn the call. I feel bad for Gallaraga but it would have set a very dangerous precedent to overturn the call.


----------



## djlong

Arguments against reversing the call have a problem. Several, in fact.

- Umpires reverse calls after arguments. Rare, but it happens.

- Umpires reverse calls after having Umpire Committee Meetings. NEVER happened before a few years ago.

- The "Pine Tar" incident. Not only did the commissioner overturn a call, but they had to REPLAY parts of the game.

- Scorers reverse calls (making a hit and error or vice-versa) all the time. Players can appeal a scorer's ruling. Wade Boggs used to be notorious for lobbying official scorers.

- We now have Instant Replay for home run calls.

Any call that would not require replaying parts of a game already played could be considered "fair game".


----------



## txtommy

A perfect game is rare because it requires several things to come together perfectly:
The pitcher must have his best control and best stuff working.
The opposing team must be having an off day for hitting.
The fielders must make every play perfectly and most likely make a couple exceptional plays.
There must be some luck involved to prevent the poorly hit bloop from falling safely.
The umpires must make all calls correctly or if incorrectly at least in favor of the pitcher seeking perfection.

This game was perfect in all ways but the last, one error by an umpire. This means the game was not perfect.

If this call were to be reversed, we should also go back in history and reverse those perfect games where the umpire made a questionable call in favor of the winning pitcher. This would include Don Larsen's perfect World Series game where anyone watching knows that the final called strike was no where near the strike zone and a couple other games where the umpire gave the pitcher the 'benefit of the doubt' on close calls knowing the game was 'near' perfect. Changing the decision for one would open up a can of worms for all other past near no-hitters, shutouts, decisive games, record setting situations and any situation where the umpire's judgement could be called into question. 

The way to handle this is to immediately institute replay during the game. Let the umpires instantly review any play that is close or questionable but once the decision is made, it should stand. The same should remain true for all past games, the umpire made the call based on best judgement within the rules of the game and the call should as made.


----------



## Sharkie_Fan

txtommy said:


> The way to handle this is to immediately institute replay during the game. Let the umpires instantly review any play that is close or questionable but once the decision is made, it should stand. The same should remain true for all past games, the umpire made the call based on best judgement within the rules of the game and the call should as made.


We were having a discussion at work the other day. I'm not sure I want replay in baseball. It would have to be done JUST right... it's already a "slow" game.... lets say you give each side 2 "challenges" per game, similar to football. If the calls are particularly tough, by the time you go out and argue with the ump, and issue your challenge, etc... if all 4 challenges were used in a game (2 by each team), you could turn a 3.5 hour game into a 4.5 hour game. I don't think anyone wants to see that...

So replay would have to be done exactly right.

But, one idea someone in the office came up with is what if they had a "protest" system similar to little league baseball.... In Little League, if you think the umpire totally botched something, you notify the umpires and scorers that from this point on you're playing the game "under protest". You finish the game, and officials review your protest after the game and make a ruling.

Generally in LL it's a rule interpretation that is protested... and I don't think you'd see that sort of protest at the ML level... but I think it could also work as a method to remedy the most egregious errors (by the umpires) in the field.

Generally I think umpires do a good job, and to some extent, I like the human element in the game of baseball.... so when a coworker suggested a "protest system", I thought it was actually a halfway decent idea.


----------



## n3ntj

Baseball doesn't want to set a precedence of reversing a call after an ump has made his real time decision and days have gone by. If they did this, think about what the future would be like..ever batter would want a call reversed that was close and later seen on video as the incorrect call.


----------



## djlong

So the scorer can change a hit to an error and vice versa - even if no player asked - but an umpire can't change a call that wouldn't affect the outcome of a game?


----------



## txtommy

Sharkie_Fan said:


> We were having a discussion at work the other day. I'm not sure I want replay in baseball. It would have to be done JUST right... it's already a "slow" game.... lets say you give each side 2 "challenges" per game, similar to football. If the calls are particularly tough, by the time you go out and argue with the ump, and issue your challenge, etc... if all 4 challenges were used in a game (2 by each team), you could turn a 3.5 hour game into a 4.5 hour game. I don't think anyone wants to see that...
> 
> So replay would have to be done exactly right.


Replay would most likely speed up the game. How much time does it take for the player and manager to argue a call? How much time is wasted if the player or manager gets ejected? With replay, it would be just a matter of the manager requesting the play be reviewed. That might take 2 minutes and then the argument would probably not occur. My guess is replay would reduce total game time by 5 - 10 minutes for every questionable call.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

djlong said:


> So the scorer can change a hit to an error and vice versa - even if no player asked - but an umpire can't change a call that wouldn't affect the outcome of a game?


I'm 100% with you here. This seems screwy.

I agree after-the-fact changes have to be weighed more carefully... but it's amazing that some changes that impact the game are OK and being done already, but this particular scenario of correcting a call that doesn't affect the outcome of the game or any meaningful stat is wrong?

I'm ok if they don't reverse the call... but some of the reasons given for not doing so, just don't ring true to me either.


----------



## spartanstew

djlong said:


> So the scorer can change a hit to an error and vice versa - even if no player asked - but an umpire can't change a call that wouldn't affect the outcome of a game?


That's one thing I wondered about.

When it was clear that the call was wrong (1 minute later), why didn't the official scorer change the play from a hit to an error (could have said the pitcher bobbled or got there late, or something)? Still would have been a no hitter, although not a perfect game.

Would there have been a backlash?


----------



## djlong

And here's another thing.

Some years ago, the comissioner's office said that you had to have pitched the full 9 innings in order to get credit for a complete game no-hitter.

This means that visiting teams who had a pitcher throw no-hit baseball for 8 innings but a run scored (due to a combination of walks/errors) and the home team doesn't have to bat in the 9th had ALL of their no-hitters stricken from the records. Boston's Matt Young lost a no-hitter a couple of YEARS after he pitched it. Most of these games were lost by the visiting team 1-0.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Bud Selig should just award him the perfect game due to the betterment of Baseball. This way there is no precedence. It was the last out of the game he got the next batter out there was no change in the outcome.


----------

