Master Index of Archived Threads


Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Frayed Knot Oct 05 2012 03:27 PM

StL @ Atlanta Lohse v Medlen 2 Ks each in the 1st inning. Heyward robs Yadier F. Molina of a HR to lead off 2nd.

Gwreck Oct 05 2012 04:36 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Beltran single + Chipper error + Holliday double sets the Cardinals up for three runs and a 3-2 lead.

Frayed Knot Oct 05 2012 04:43 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Braves' Andrelton Simmons gets flagged for running inside the baseline on a bunt negating two Atlanta runs. The throw caromed off his helmet right after he suddenly veered about 3 feet inside the line making it the most obvious post-season interference call since Reggie hip-checked a throw to 1st (oh wait, that one didn't get called) or the Jeffery Maier HR play (oops, not that one either).

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 05 2012 05:46 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

The difference-making Card runs-- and Brave non-runs-- have all come via fundies mistakes... which was a strong point for the Bravos in the regular season, IIRC.

duan Oct 05 2012 05:54 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

wow. worst call ever. worst fan reaction i've ever seen too. NOBODY comes out well.

Kong76 Oct 05 2012 05:54 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I don't even know where to begin, if you're watching you know what I mean.

Gwreck Oct 05 2012 06:01 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Just when you think the umpiring can't get worse. This is why some basic replay is needed. The correction is easy.

Frayed Knot Oct 05 2012 06:05 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

It's a judgement call, no replay is going to fix that even though it's a very BAD judgement call. No way that should have been an IFR

Gwreck Oct 05 2012 06:10 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

It's not a judgment call (safe/out). It's misapplication of the rule, because the call was not made immediately as prescribed by the rulebook. The "ordinary effort" thing is the judgment part (which was ALSO wrong).

Kong76 Oct 05 2012 06:28 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

It was bad ... and the reaction by the fans was unbelievable. Can you imagine if that happened at CitiField, they'd be talking about it for three weeks.

Kong76 Oct 05 2012 06:37 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

It's over, Cards advance. Weird game for Larry's last.

Gwreck Oct 05 2012 06:47 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Wonder how the St. Louis Post-Dispatch will treat their headline tomorrow.

Frayed Knot Oct 05 2012 06:54 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Amazing how often the extra umpires in post-season seem to screw things up more often than they help. Almost as amazing as how often an Atlanta strength turns into a weakness in October. As far as the rule, with no specific time limit on the call I don't see that one being over-turned even with a rule change that would allow that play to be replay reviewed. It's the judgement part of the play that I found more objectionable but, even there, a case can be made that the StL SS intentionally letting the ball fall could have been used to turn a DP. Obviously that wasn't what happened but the ump seemed to make that call as soon as he saw the SS stop backpedaling with that in mind. The protest, of course, has zero chance of succeeding.

themetfairy Oct 05 2012 06:58 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

D-Dad feels that it was the right call, but that the umpire should have made it immediately.

Kong76 Oct 05 2012 07:18 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

The outfield ump called infield fly rule ... it's too funny. Those extra umps should watch the lines, make sure balls aren't trapped instead of caught and stuff like that.

Ashie62 Oct 05 2012 07:48 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

It feels like Lance Berkman is in the post season most years..

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 05 2012 07:53 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

That would probably make this year part of the minority-- though he's traveling with the team, he's unlikely to see action. Tight one through three-and-a-half in Arlington.

Elster88 Oct 05 2012 08:12 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

As expected, Torre denied the appeal. Funny that the guy doing it managed and played for both of the teams involved.

Mets – Willets Point Oct 05 2012 08:12 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I had no idea that Braves fans cared so much about what happened on the field, or even showed up for playoff games.

smg58 Oct 05 2012 08:12 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

The ump may have thought the SS was getting out of the way of the ball with intent to cause a force out, and then raised his hand. Honestly it looked like Kozma (who?) had the ball lined up the whole way until the very end, so I can see that aspect of it. I think the timing of the call is the biggest issue, because otherwise the play falls comfortably within the rules' description of what an infield fly is. It "should be called immediately," as the rule states, but does that mean it can't be called after a few seconds but before the ball hits the ground? That part of the rule is rather vague; i.e., it doesn't say it must be called immediately. And even if it were an egregiously blown call -- which, quite frankly, it isn't -- it does not even remotely begin to justify the disgraceful behavior of the Braves' fans.

Ceetar Oct 05 2012 08:15 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

smg58 wrote: The ump may have thought the SS was getting out of the way of the ball with intent to cause a force out, and then raised his hand. Honestly it looked like Kozma (who?) had the ball lined up the whole way until the very end, so I can see that aspect of it. I think the timing of the call is the biggest issue, because otherwise the play falls comfortably within the rules' description of what an infield fly is. It "should be called immediately," as the rule states, but does that mean it can't be called after a few seconds but before the ball hits the ground? That part of the rule is rather vague; i.e., it doesn't say it must be called immediately. And even if it were an egregiously blown call -- which, quite frankly, it isn't -- it does not even remotely begin to justify the disgraceful behavior of the Braves' fans. If it's called immediately, the runners would've retreated and it would've been first and second instead of second and third. Would've actually been worse for the Braves fans.

Kong76 Oct 05 2012 08:19 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

It was a bad call, a bad call in a very important game.

Frayed Knot Oct 05 2012 08:27 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Yes it was, but I also think some are over-reading the word "immediately". The way I read it, immediately doesn't mean the moment the ball is in the air but rather as soon as the umpire determines that all conditions exist to make it fit the description. In this case, with the ball and SS being as deep as they were and the fact that he was still back-pedaling until the last moment, that moment came rather late. If it's that late I think the better move is simply not to call it but I don't read the rules as meaning he can't call it at that point.

Kong76 Oct 05 2012 08:33 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I agree. And I think the OF umps should keep their hands in their pockets on plays like this in the future.

Ceetar Oct 05 2012 08:36 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Kong76 wrote: I agree. And I think the OF umps should keep their hands in their pockets on plays like this in the future. with Instant replay on home runs, and soon boundary type calls down the line and traps......is there a need for the extra two umps?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 05 2012 08:37 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

But that's just it-- if he hasn't made the call on this particular ball by that point, he really can't; the ball has drifted 50 feet or so into the infield, and the SS has run/backpedaled that distance OUT of position to reach it. Both of those are essentially counter to the rule, which specifies "ordinary effort" for an infielder (which, in practice, has always been interpreted as something like "easy play within the regular positional territory of the infielder"). Had he made the call earlier, and the ball merely drifted that far AFTER the call was made, it would be more understandable. The issue, IOW, is not just that a call that should be made early was made late, it's that THAT particular call was made once a number of infield-fly-eliminating determinants had already come into existence.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 05 2012 08:46 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: But that's just it-- if he hasn't made the call on this particular ball by that point, he really can't; the ball has drifted 50 feet or so into the infield [sic] , and the SS has run/backpedaled that distance OUT of position to reach it. Both of those are essentially counter to the rule, which specifies "ordinary effort" for an infielder (which, in practice, has always been interpreted as something like "easy play within the regular positional territory of the infielder"). Had he made the call earlier, and the ball merely drifted that far AFTER the call was made, it would be more understandable. The issue, IOW, is not just that a call that should be made early was made late, it's that THAT particular call was made once a number of infield-fly-eliminating determinants had already come into existence. Yeah. What he said. Word for word. Except for one.

Ceetar Oct 05 2012 08:49 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

He _was_ settling under it though. To me it becomes more understandable if he thought that Kozma or whatever was vacating in order to try to turn a DP, which is the point of the rule in the first place. And also would've been possible depending on where he thought Holliday was standing.

Kong76 Oct 05 2012 08:51 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

How 'bout them O's?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 05 2012 08:53 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

If a guy can turn a DP from 50 feet in the outfield on a pop fly he's backpedaled to reach, and is now going to let hit the ground... then, holy shit, he's earned two outs, and not the easy way. The rule is not meant to prevent DPs on pop-ups... it's meant to prevent EASY DPs on infield flies. And how about Nate Fucking McLouth?

Gwreck Oct 05 2012 08:58 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Wait, why did we let Darren O'Day get away again?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 05 2012 09:01 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Gwreck wrote: Wait, why did we let Darren O'Day get away again? Because we needed an extra starter and we-- or rather, a non-false-hustling former member of "we"-- couldn't master basic roster management.

Frayed Knot Oct 05 2012 09:10 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

In other news: the contest for the world's worst sideburns has been concluded.

bmfc1 Oct 05 2012 09:18 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Gwreck wrote: Wait, why did we let Darren O'Day get away again? Because we needed an extra starter and we-- or rather, a non-false-hustling former member of "we"-- couldn't master basic roster management. Exactly. Pelfrey had to miss one start and Omar didn't want to put him on the DL because he would have miss another so he waived O'Day to call up Nelson Figueroa for a start. And then he waived Figueroa to replace him with Casey Fossum.

Swan Swan H Oct 05 2012 09:26 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

According to the announcers on the NL game (and I may have misheard) the teams that win today can reset the roster after today's games. Doesn't that lead to all sorts of potential shenanigans? No need to carry your second and third starters for one game - drop them and replace them with pinch-runners and/or defensive specialists who you had on the expanded September roster, then reinstate them if you win. I have a feeling that this is a loophole that slipped by in the mad rush to get this thing implemented, and that next year the roster for the WC and Division round will need to be the same.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 05 2012 09:33 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I don't know that I'd call it a loophole, per se-- I think the aim was to give teams the opportunity to tune their roster for a one-game "round." Hell, they're already playing an extra game after hastily-arranged, short-notice travel, with the winners getting more travel early the next day, and no opportunity to "reset" their rotation; treating this like an additional round-- with allowed roster tweaks-- merely gives the wild-card winner a smaller disadvantage in the next round.

Swan Swan H Oct 05 2012 09:41 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I see your point, and I don't disagree that it may have been intentional rather than a loophole, but I don't like the idea. I'll buy it if the guys taken off can't come back in future rounds.

Kong76 Oct 05 2012 09:45 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

B'more tackin' on insurance runs!!

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 05 2012 09:59 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Well, hey, Dallas-- you've always got the Cowboys.

Edgy MD Oct 05 2012 11:30 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Kong76 wrote: The outfield ump called infield fly rule ... it's too funny. Those extra umps should watch the lines, make sure balls aren't trapped instead of caught and stuff like that. I always thought their best position would be back by the foul poles --- putting them in position to call deep fair/foul plays and homeruns. I think the infield umps have the best perspective for the trap calls most of the time.

Frayed Knot Oct 06 2012 05:59 AM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Maybe, when the series starts in Baltimore, they can get Jim Biden to throw out the first ball.

smg58 Oct 06 2012 06:07 AM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

bmfc1 wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Gwreck wrote: Wait, why did we let Darren O'Day get away again? Because we needed an extra starter and we-- or rather, a non-false-hustling former member of "we"-- couldn't master basic roster management. Exactly. Pelfrey had to miss one start and Omar didn't want to put him on the DL because he would have miss another so he waived O'Day to call up Nelson Figueroa for a start. And then he waived Figueroa to replace him with Casey Fossum. And Bobby Parnell's future would have obviously been ruined if his first month in the majors were interrupted for a few days.

Kong76 Oct 06 2012 08:09 AM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Harold Reynolds just talked me into the infield fly rule call was a reasonable call. Like him a lot by the way on tv.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 06 2012 08:18 AM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I see that one of the popular themes about last night's AL Wild Card play in is how the O's shocked the Rangers. Or how the O's stunned the Rangers. I just don't get how any result from a one game series involving two pretty good teams could surprise anyone.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 06 2012 09:12 AM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Kong76 wrote: Harold Reynolds just talked me into the infield fly rule call was a reasonable call. Like him a lot by the way on tv. He's great until he starts assaying advanced stats/the "assault" on traditional stats. (Or, apparently, giving colleagues hugs.) I see the other side. But I'd still argue that it was poorly done-- the call should come at or near the ball's apex-- and that the call, while technically accurate, was against the spirit of the rule, and contrary the way that the rule has been interpreted in practice by the 2-3 generations of umps I've watched in my life.

smg58 Oct 06 2012 09:38 AM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I see that one of the popular themes about last night's AL Wild Card play in is how the O's shocked the Rangers. Or how the O's stunned the Rangers. I just don't get how any result from a one game series involving two pretty good teams could surprise anyone. Right. The A's winning the division on a three-game seep after the Rangers had been leading for pretty much the entire season was stunning, especially given pre-season expectations. The Orioles, with an identical record, winning one game? About 50-50.

Ashie62 Oct 06 2012 10:13 AM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Hmmmm...if Hamilton catches that ball in Oakland...FA will be interesting for Josh. He is using an unusual recovery method. Bible based (with a personal keeper) v. a 12 step program...Big risk..

Gwreck Oct 06 2012 12:58 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I see that one of the popular themes about last night's AL Wild Card play in is how the O's shocked the Rangers. Or how the O's stunned the Rangers. I just don't get how any result from a one game series involving two pretty good teams could surprise anyone. No kidding. Worth keeping in mind: the Orioles and Rangers had the same record. This one-game playoff would have been necessary even if they were using last season's rules.

Edgy MD Oct 06 2012 07:46 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Bien punto.

SteveJRogers Oct 07 2012 04:49 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Swan Swan H wrote: I see your point, and I don't disagree that it may have been intentional rather than a loophole, but I don't like the idea. I'll buy it if the guys taken off can't come back in future rounds. FWIW, that's exactly what the Cardinals did with Carpenter, Wainright and Garcia, in favor of another infielder, a 3rd catcher and an extra arm in the pen. All three obviously not on the NLDS roster in favor of the starting rotation guys. I think teams have been able to tinker in between rounds since the start of the Division Series as I've seen statistical tables for a team's postseason go 27-28 deep and some of them I have no recollection of injuries causing a replacement to happen.

Swan Swan H Oct 07 2012 04:54 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I understand the need between five or seven game rounds, but the nature of the single game leads to teams only needing two, or perhaps three starters on the roster, which is not the team's usual configuration.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 07 2012 05:07 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Yeah. True. So? If you're preparing for a seven-game series, you might configure your team differently than if you're preparing for a short five-game series, right? So, if you're preparing for a one-game "series," you configure your team as you think best to win that one game. I can see how this may be disorienting to fans; I don't-- not at all-- see how this is cheating.

SteveJRogers Oct 07 2012 05:22 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

At the same time though, teams that played in Game 163s had the same roster that they had for Game 162. Which meant, for example, instead of Al Leiter and Edgardo Alfonzo being the heroes of the 1999 Play-In Game, it could have been Shane Halter or Dan Murray as the heroes and neither one of them would even be considered to be on the NLDS/NLCS/WS roster that year.

Frayed Knot Oct 07 2012 05:27 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

I would prefer it if they simply treated the WC play-in game and the first round as if all part of the same round for roster purposes. It would be like Round 1 is a 3-of-5 for the division winner but a 4-of-6 for the WC team.

Swan Swan H Oct 07 2012 05:41 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

What FK said, which is what I said two pages ago. I don't consider it cheating at all, and if I implied that it's only due to my limited ability to express myself. Teams would be doing themselves a disservice not to tweak their rosters based on the rules as they stand. I just think the rules make no sense.

SteveJRogers Oct 07 2012 06:12 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Swan Swan H wrote: What FK said, which is what I said two pages ago. I don't consider it cheating at all, and if I implied that it's only due to my limited ability to express myself. Teams would be doing themselves a disservice not to tweak their rosters based on the rules as they stand. I just think the rules make no sense. So Shane Halter as the last guy off the bench drives in the winning run with a pinch hit, seeing eye double in the top of the 15th inning, and Dan Murray as the last guy in the pen, save for Rick Reed and Orel Hershiser, shuts down the Reds in the bottom of the 15th to nail down the game, you say they should be on the 25 man roster for the 1999 NLDS?

Swan Swan H Oct 07 2012 06:23 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Do you understand the difference between a tiebreaker game, which is a regular season game and is contested only when teams are tied for a playoff spot, and the new Wild Card round, which will be contested every year under the current rules?

SteveJRogers Oct 07 2012 06:56 PM Re: Wild-Card Play-in IGTs

Swan Swan H wrote: Do you understand the difference between a tiebreaker game, which is a regular season game and is contested only when teams are tied for a playoff spot, and the new Wild Card round, which will be contested every year under the current rules? Fair enough.