Major League Baseball blew it last night.
If the end of the Rockies-Padres game doesn’t prove the need for instant replay in baseball, I don't know what does.
The San Diego Padres may not have deserved to win the game—but Matt Holliday was out at home plate.
It wasn't “inconclusive,” no matter what you hear.
If you watched the replays, you saw Holliday's outstretched hand blocked well in front of the plate by Padres catcher Michael Barrett.
Don’t believe me? Check out the YouTube clip—but make sure you turn the sound down, because the commentary will make you sick.
The angle of Holliday’s fingers indicates that he couldn’t have gotten home. Don't give me any of this “inconclusive” nonsense—just because you can no longer see the plate at the end doesn't mean the replay is inconclusive.
Do what the people on TV don't do and use your brain to form a logical conclusion. If you know where home plate is before it's obscured, you should know where it is after it's obscured.
Unless the gopher from Caddy Shack somehow tunneled underneath Coors Field and moved the dish, it's in exactly the same spot. There's no way Holliday made it based on the angle of his slide and where his hand trailed in the dirt.
Home plate umpire Tim McClelland should have known this too—but let's not blame him. The expectation that anyone could make the right call under those circumstances isn’t only illogical—it’s cruel.
(Then again, maybe we should blame McClelland, because I just watched the clip again and it's clear he wasn't in position until the last second. Why he couldn't make it five feet to his right in the time it takes Matt Holliday to make it 90 feet, I don't know.)
Tim Kurkjian, among others, says that instant replay would destroy the sanctity of baseball.
He’s a complete f---n idiot.
I don't think any two words in the English language could sum it up better.
If anyone needs a refresher on the technological changes that have made the game better, how about lighter bats, bigger gloves, more comfortable uniforms, night games, padded walls, better fields...
Additionally, and excuse my journey into the existential, but I need to go there to get to the real heart of the matter:
Back in the days before multiple camera angles and slo-mo replays, an umpire's judgment was what people relied on to keep the game "pure." Since no one could ever really see what happened, the umpire must have gotten it right...so the "purists" associate an umpire's judgment with preserving the sanctity of the game.
In a world with ever larger gray areas, sports is the only black-and-white/right-and-wrong we have left. Holliday's hand either hits the plate or it doesn't—and that's what should affect the game, not someone's interpretation of what happened.
To NOT use instant replay in 2007 violates that purity of baseball, because we're bombarded by images and close-ups of what really happened. Sports shouldn't be subject to the same bureaucracy and hidden truths as the rest of the "real" world.
Fraudulent presidential elections, a bogus war in Iraq, Dick Cheney and Co.'s corrupt power practices—we watch sports because we expect an escape from all of that.
We want to know that what we see is what we get.
With their season on the line, Brian Giles and Michael Barrett combined for one of the most clutch throw-and-plate blocks you'll ever see. It was perfect, and might have saved the Padres season.
Of course, we'll never know for sure, because the lack of instant replay took an earlier home run away from Colorado. So really, the game was a fraud from the seventh inning on.
Someone explain why I bother to watch Major League Baseball. If I want to see a bunch of people who can't do their jobs correctly supervised by an incompetent idiot who doesn't take steps to fix anything, shouldn't I be watching CNN?
comments (25) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 year ago
Fortunately, in this case that mistake was cancelled out by the home run that was ruled a double in the 7th inning. But that said, I agree that every sport should use every reasonable tool at its disposal to make its officiating as accurate as possible.
from about 1 year ago
I agree, it seems like it could be a make up call from the home run that wasn't. And we should probably still be playing, since Barrett never tagged him out either.
I think there needs to be some limited form of replay--perhaps only on run-scoring plays, fan interference, fair/foul calls and the like. But I think having managers challenge every controversial bang-bang stolen base or close play at first, even if completely inconsequential to the game, would detract from the game.
from about 1 year ago
"I think having managers challenge every controversial bang-bang stolen base or close play at first, even if completely inconsequential to the game, would detract from the game."
Why does this argument comes up everytime someone proposes that a professional sports league have replay.
Don't get me wrong: I agree with the statement. But the fact of the matter is that what detracts more than anything from the game are incorrect calls. And honestly, no replay system has existed in quite some time where there were unlimited challenges.
Why does everyone always assume that this is even possible? No one wants to watch a 5 hour baseball game and the idea of unrestricted replays would never be implemented in a million years.
The system could work just like the NFL. Managers could challenge two calls a game but if they got it right they don''t lose a challenge. Because of the amount of calls umps have to make, perhaps the officiating crew would essentially get two "challenges" per game themselves.
I think it is always better for sports when you have some minor checks and balances on the human element of the games. The idea that some of the Padres players/fans might feel that their 162 game season was ruined by a single call is just awful.
Players, fans, and coaches alike need to feel like the games are called fairly, or it ruins everything for everybody.
about 1 year ago
You are correct but with the instant replay the game would have been over in the seventh. Yes thats right the no home run would have been overturned and the game over in 8 1/2 innings. Rockies 7 Padres 6.
from about 1 year ago
the rockies are cheaters. we need instant replay for game deciding decisions, no matter which team it was for. and your theory doesnt work because even if he had scored, the opportunity to rally and overcome would have still been available for the pads. And as we all know, our teams play differently when they are tied than they do when they are rallying to overcome. I believe the home run should have counted as much as i believe Halliday didnt touch home. At least the padres could have overcome that.... ive seen them overcome a lot worse. face it, our teams play beter when they need to rally. where your theory fails is assuming the game would have ended with that home run. but that miscall does not excuse the one made at home plate.
about 1 year ago
Serves the Padres right for getting that bad call on Atkin's HR. I as a fan of the Rockies am happier that the Padres got robbed than if he were actually on. Its an in your face for taking it past the 9th on a bad call. You guys shouldn't have been breathing pas the bottom of the 9th. Have fun watching the Broncos destroyed the Chargers.
from about 1 year ago
Your a fiesty one, aren't you Dirk?
about 1 year ago
Actually Dirk, you are right. I re-wrote this to include that the game was basically a fraud anyway. The point is the same. I'm not a Padres, so shut up about the stupid Broncos.
Also, on instant replay they should do two things. They should have an officials that work for Major League baseball, NOT the umpires union manning the replay booth and they should watch every replay at every base after a play and if they see something that doesn't fit they should review it. I can watch tv and see on one replay if the right call was made, there is no reason this shouldn't be a quick process. Also, each team should have the right to challenge once a game, and if they are right, they keep the challenge. Just in case the MLB officials miss something. Every home run should be reviewed and this could be done in the amount of time it takes for the guy to run the bases. If people only care about time, then record the game on DVR and skip the commercials, or just don't watch at all. Watch sportscenter for all I care. The reason I watch, is because I want to see what happens, and if it isn't called the way it happens, what's the point of anything.
about 1 year ago
Cricket, a sport with a similar amount of tradition to baseball has instant replay. Baseball should at least try it out, maybe at the minor league level (like the Arizona Fall League). If it flops it flops but I have a feeling the process could be refined to make implementation easy for everyone.
And if you think about it, instant replay is not going to take as long as a manager giving an umpire a piece of his mind.
about 1 year ago
You're wrong. No brainer !@@!
Best look is UTube right down foul line to home plate. Home plate is (for the uninitiated) in fair territory. Frame by frame stop action shows ball bouncing 1 foot in front of catcher's mitt--but catcher's left leg is already extending to the foul line blocking the runner's fair territory path to touch home plate--thereby blocking Holliday's hand (or bodily access) from its direct fair territory path to touch home base. Catcher had neither contact nor possession of the ball at the instant the runner needed access to the base. Catcher doesn't have the right to block base-path access (in anticipation of catching a throw) without the ball. Pretty technical--but that's the way it is in a technical situation.
Blocking access to plate without the ball is catcher obstruction. Runner is entitled to home base. One foot bounce without the ball, nth of a second premature block of base-path may as well be a mile...
It's a really tough call, though--especially with the umpire positioned behind the catcher's back--not being able to see 3-4 events happening nearly simultaneously.
(Base path access, catcher & ball contact/possession, blocking plate, runner sliding.) I'll guarantee you--no fan or sportswriter in their right mind would want to be in plate umpire's shoes on that call! Result is correct, Umpire ruled safe--but should have proclaimed "Obstruction!" Not perfect.
Did Holliday touch home plate? No. With that kind of slide and touch, home plate probably would have had telltale evidence (dirt and/or a dirt crease) left behind. McLellan saw we he saw.
Then again, Holliday could have EMT totaled Barrett on the spot...one hopper makes catcher nearly defenseless. Lucky to survive, let alone catch a ball, make a tag.
about 1 year ago
You guys realize that obstruction counts for catchers too right? Catchers aren't allowed to block the plate if they don't have possession of the ball.
Catchers will have leeway to block the plate to field throws and tag runners out a second or two before runners barrel into them, but that leeway goes out the window if the catcher doesn't make the play. Barrett didn't make the play and should have been charged with obstruction.
7.06
When obstruction occurs, the umpire shall call or signal "Obstruction."
If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batterrunner is obstructed before he touches first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance, without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire s judgment, if there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out.
Rule 7.06(a) Comment: When a play is being made on an obstructed runner, the umpire shall signal obstruction in the same manner that he calls Time, with both hands overhead. The ball is immediately dead when this signal is given; however, should a thrown ball be in flight before the obstruction is called by the umpire, the runners are to be awarded such bases on wild throws as they would have been awarded had not obstruction occurred. On a play where a runner was trapped between second and third and obstructed by the third baseman going into third base while the throw is in flight from the shortstop, if such throw goes into the dugout the obstructed runner is to be awarded home base. Any other runners on base in this situation would also be awarded two bases from the base they last legally touched before obstruction was called.
(b) If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall then call Time and impose such penalties, if any, as in his judgment will nullify the act of obstruction.
Rule 7.06(b) Comment: Under 7.06(b) when the ball is not dead on obstruction and an obstructed runner advances beyond the base which, in the umpire s judgment, he would have been awarded because of being obstructed, he does so at his own peril and may be tagged out. This is a judgment call.
NOTE: The catcher, without the ball in his possession, has no right to block the pathway of the runner attempting to score. The base line belongs to the runner and the catcher should be there only when he is fielding a ball or when he already has the ball in his hand.
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/runner_7.jsp
about 1 year ago
lol, anonymous, you hit the nail on the head 10 minutes before I could post.
about 1 year ago
great game though, Colorado has been on a roll unlike no other. Tony Gwynn Jr. was the straw.
about 1 year ago
Hey Aaron: if you think sports is black and white, you should try umpiring some little league baseball games. And what was so perfect about the throw and plate block, when the catcher dropped the ball?
Instant replay would have decided nothing. None of the camera angles were as good as the view that the home plate umpire had. Some plays are too close to call, but surprise, the umpire has to call it one way or the other.
about 1 year ago
McClellan said in an interview today that after seeing the replay, he would have made the same call. I have to agree with him.
Barrett shifted his left foot over there to block the plate at the last second, and that is exactly where Holliday's hand was headed. The replay shows that the heel of Barrett's foot was on the edge of the plate (with his toes up in the air), and Holliday's hand slips under the foot up to the heel. Then you see the foot being dragged backwards across the plate in an unnatural fashion as Holliday's momentum carries him past it. Something had to have pulled that foot back across the plate. Holliday's hand perhaps? If so, it would have certainly swiped the plate. Benefit of the doubt to the umpire in this case.
But maybe Holliday deeked the umpire by not scrambling back to touch the plate after his slide. In the ump's hesitation, maybe he figured that if Holliday was so sure that he touched the plate that he did not make an effort to get back to it..... And then when he saw the ball rolling free, made the safe call on that assumption.
about 1 year ago
I was at the game, seats club level 3rd base line, and the first thing I asked my wife when I called her after I left the stadium (which was utter pandemonium), was: "Did he touch the plate???" That was without even hearing/seeing any commentary. So, from where I sat, 100 yards away, it looked questionable. I've now watched the replay about 30 times, from the only two angles I can find, and I have to say, I cannot definitively say he did NOT touch the plate. It's crazy. But anyone who's seen the angles I've reviewed, who claims he definitely didn't/couldn't have touched SOME PART, however small, of the plate is full of it. I sure wouldn't want to be the umpire (I used to ump little league, and parents would literally murder you in the lot if you ever had a call like that!). Everyone's claiming he missed the plate, but you absolutely cannot visually see what happened in the replays I've seen. If the ump saw the same thing we saw, he didn't have much choice but to rule him safe. That's without even considering the very valid, very well-informed comments of the individuals above about obstruction. I heard a MLB umpire this morning who said the catcher is allowed to block IN ANTICIPATION of receiving the throw. So, maybe the rule could use clarification. I wish Holliday would have just pulled a Pete Rose on Barrett, and knocked him into the 8th row. I recall a Rockies game last week against the Dodgers when Kent slid home into a Torrealba block, and injured himself. I think the baserunners should just frickin' destroy the catcher if he's blocking the plate. Less likely to get hurt putting your shoulder to the catcher's chin than sliding head or feet first into his armored shins and feet. In fact, that's what I expect to see. Why don't runners blow the catcher up anymore?
about 1 year ago
i don't care who the fuck you are who ever wrote this article is a fucking retard and should stop talking like he knows everything. you should get your ass kicked for acting so smart you dip shit. you talk about using logic well we all can tell you have none bitch
from about 1 year ago
Is it too early to hand out the 'Most Insightful Comment of the Year' Award?
from about 1 year ago
Wow. Where does this hostility come from?
from about 1 year ago
lol, who are we going to give it to...He's anonymous
about 1 year ago
As an umpire with more than 20 years of experience I have known from the beginning that people were asking the wrong question. Even after a couple of commenters got it right, some people still want to debate - did he touch the plate or not. The replay clearly shows that the catcher missed the ball before contact with Holliday. Having missed the ball the catcher is not entitled to block the base. If Holliday didn t touch the plate it is clearly because he was obstructed by a defensive player without the ball. Personally, I believe he did not touch the base. My evidence is the delayed call by the umpire. Most likely the umpire did not make the safe call immediately because the base was not touched. But then seeing the ball was not in the catcher s possession he realizes that the catcher was not entitle to block the plate and has therefore obstructed the runner. He then makes a belated safe call. Over the years I have seen this same situation on several occasions.
As for the article by Aaron Braunstein it s a bunch of horses__t. There may be some valid arguments for instant replay. (Personally I am not opposed to it.) But this game and call are certainly not. Any umpire (or anyone with knowledge of baseball rules) reviewing this play would see instantly that it is a clear case of obstruction.
about 1 year ago
Here's the bottom line on Monday night's tiebreaker: Both teams got screwed that night. Colorado got screwed with the home run call. San Diego got screwed by the play that ended the game. However, in the interest of fairness, who is doing the most complaining? Is it a diehard baseball fan or is it a grouchy Padres fan who has to openly admit that San Diego handed the wild card to the Rockies? We all agree that instant replay is necessary, but that will just open Pandora's Box. Remember the play in Game 2 of the World Series a few years back between Houston and the White Sox? Same situation. Different teams. The worst part about the Bleacher Report is that you got a bunch of wannabes who spend too much time in their parents' basement in their underwear talking smack to people who actually know what they're talking about. Those people are called "anonymous." However, there are some anonymous people who actually back the writers. But the playoffs have started, and the Rockies are one game away from their first ever LCS appearance. So in all honesty, save the instant replay arguments for next season. Because if you're gonna gripe about IR in baseball, you might as well gripe about a playoff system in college football. Until then, enjoy the games you got, and Padres fans...GET OVER IT!!! IT'S OVER NOW!!!
about 1 year ago
I agree with Ron. Also, replay in baseball would ruin what is so great about baseball. The close calls the lucky breaks that can unite a team. The Padres have been swept in the NLDS what the past 3 years? At least the Rockies can win a game and actually move on. This article was rediculous, how can you call a baseball expert who does that job for a living a "f--ing idiot". Yeah and blame McClellon for being "out of position" maybe the Padres shouldnt've choked and they wouldn't be in that situaition. That's all for now.
11 months ago
CHARGERS 41 broncos 3? What was that score again. Who was destroyed? Rockies are playing some good ball right now, the Broncos are terrible.
11 months ago
This kook is what's wrong with sports. His parents most be proud. How about "Biggest Waste of two people copulating award"?
write a new comment