Chisoxfn

I'm just going to respond...a win is a win, is a win. I've already heard it from Angel fans and all I can say is that Escobar hung it and Crede bashed it. Its a brand new series.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:54 PM) No but he sure as hell came through tonight. from your worst critic on Soxtalk! I hope you took a shot for that double Nukie Man that was sweet. When it left the bat I was just yelling at the tv, stay fair, stay fair and when it did I went nuts.

Tomorrows an off day and than on Friday the Sox are gonna have to come out and excecute and play good baseball. Come on White Sox...GO GO GO GO WHITE SOX....Chicago's proud of you

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:53 PM) Yeah I don't blame Josh Paul either. It was one of those things where he honestly thought he made the catch. Also look at Escobar. You have AJ running down to 1st and Escobar is watching him do so and the ball isn't that far from him. Erstad was there in case a throw was made (or at least relatively close). I think if I were a pitcher and saw AJ start running I'd have gotten out and started running towards the ball and at least given it a shot. I just know your taught to continue playing until you know the inning is over. Whether that was clearly called or not, who knows.

QUOTE(Brian @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 08:22 PM) Too bad umps don't have press conferences. Umm...it was just on.

The other umps seem to be backing the ump, but I guess that should be expected. I just find it intersting that ball said he heard the ump say something and AJ said he heard nothing.

I think my argument is that Paul threw the ball out to the mound before the 2nd signal by the umpire. I think that right there is interesting, because had he waited I think they have a better argument. I hate the questions being asked. Some are so bias (on both sides) and I have yet to see any clear evidence for the it was clearly caught side, imo. Not that I'm 100% that it hit the dirt, but I'm hard pressed to believe that it wasn't trapped. We'll see though, the ump sounds relatively accurate and he had been doing the same strikeout call the entire game.

Welcome aboard...the more Sox fans here the merrier

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 08:13 PM) THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE ARGUING!!!!!! Sheesh. We don't know what was said, but it's absolutely pathetic seeing some people defend this call like they KNOW it was called correctly. We don't know what was said from the umpire. I'm sorry, I just think it's extremely pathetic to see some people act like they know it was the correct call (sorry for sounding like a broken record). I'm not saying they made the right call, or the wrong call, but GMAB... I think its indecisive. I see some saying it was 100% one way and others saying it was 100% another way. That right there tells me it was totally questionable. I don't think we'll know for sure, but I thought it hit the dirt. Now we can argue the umps stuff as much as possible.

QUOTE(S720 @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 08:05 PM) Chisoxfn, what do make of the umpire's clenching his fist? Why did he do that if it wasn't an out? I know the ball was trapped. My question is in regard to the umpire's motion. I cna't say for sure. Only the ump knows what he was thinking. Umps sometimes make different signals...that was the case and I definately can see the Angels perspective of it. At the same time, I saw Paul already throw the ball out to the mound before the strikeout sign was given so what does it matter. Its not like Paul was motivated based on that call, imo. I should add, this is a judgement thing, so by no means am i necessarily right. Just my 2 cents on the issue and I agree with Kruk and Reynolds.

QUOTE(Linnwood @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 08:04 PM) Josh Paul is on Comcast right now insisting that he caught it. He just said that the Ump said "No catch" If he said no catch, doesn't that mean that it wasn't caught.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:55 PM) JUst win three more focking games this series, and it all doesn't matter. s***, what a momentum changer. Its big for the Sox, but at the same time, Mike is an awesome manager and he's gonna have these guys ready to play. Big came on Friday...and I can't wait for it. It will be the first time in my life I get to see the Sox in the playoffs in person

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:58 PM) Boards of all teams are criticizing the call and with good reason. It was a terrible call. You can diagnose this for hours but the fact remains, the White Sox and Angels are tied at 1. If it hit the dirt, it wasn't a horrid call. There was no he's out (not a definitive one) there was no anything (either way) that indicated that the Angels should have stopped and threw the ball back. I vehemently disagree with this idea, imo. The ball hit the dirt and its a players job to keep playing until something is ruled final. Plus how can it be a horrible call when no replay shows that the ball clearly went into his mitt. In fact I think most replays show that there is a pretty likely chance that it did hit the dirt.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:56 PM) I said this right off the bat. There is a clear change in direction of the ball, it bounces up. Now it is possible that it bounces in the lower part of the mitt and goes to the upper part, but it shows that there is no certainty about the call. It was a judgement call, and even with the high tech equipment there is no absolute answer. I believe the reason we got the call is that the White Sox showed hussle on the play, where as the Angels were just taking the strike out for granted. SB Plus if you look you see the ball bounce up and if it didn't hit the ground, it wouldn't have went up higher into the mitt. I think its the right call.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:52 PM) Jas- It's different because you dictate how players react on a call like that. That's one of the immediate calls you have to make so the catcher knows if he needs to throw or not. Let's say there is a runner on 3rd or something...if he throws for s***s when the ump knows he's out but is slow on the call and throws it down the line and a run scores...that's on the ump. If the home plate umpire rules out, he's out. He could ask for help before calling him out, or signal to an umpire he needs help (or more so a base umpire will show a closed fist for yes, it was a catch or open hand for no, it hit dirt. Then the ump can make a call. But lets say a runners on 2nd base and the ball is ruled a trap...he has to stay half way and than run back to 2nd instead of head to 3rd because its originally called out. Doesn't that in fact dictate what a player does, yet it can still be changed. I've seen umps have all kinds of different strike out calls. I also think a lot of umps make that similar call (which is what he claims) where you do the strike 3 call with an out sign. That said, I long said if I were Sciosc, I'd be mad at the umps signaling because I still think that ball hit the ground. I have yet to see any conclusive evidence to tell me it didn't. I also never heard any footage of the ump saying it was caught clean or saying it wasn't caught clean. Sure the ump could have done a better job about being loud, but at the same time, its the catchers job to make the tag and I think the one case you can make from the Sox side is that Paul threw the ball back to the mound before the ump even made his next signal (because AJ had turned around) and than ran back.

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:35 PM) Exactly. Although his rebut right now on ESPN is that he makes the out fist when a player strikes out swinging at all times. And the replays will show that, imo. You can make the calls he made. His explanation makes sense. The debatable fact is whether or not the ball hit the ground, imo.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:42 PM) I'm not an expert on protests, but i'm pretty sure nothing can happen as far as an official protest goes. It's similar to a safe/out call, etc. They can't appeal whether the ball hit the ground, they could only appeal something based off Eddings mechanics behind the plate. And i don't even know if that is possible. Ya, because there is no official way to call outs (I don't think) and he can say my way is to signal once for no contact, 2nd time that it was a strike. Its basically his word and you can't change anything. And the only thing you can protest is that, you can't protest whether it was in the dirt or not. Not 100% on that, but 99.9% on it.

QUOTE(fathom @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:40 PM) I know this is probably is a very amateurish question, but there's no way that the Angels protested this, is there? No. I'm 99% sure, but I think the only time you can protest a game is if you do it during the game. You can't do it after the fact, you have to make it known and the remainder of the game is played under protest.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:39 PM) From what it sounds like is that the arm meant no contact and the call meant strike, and he does use that call all game so it's interesting. I still dont know if he caught it. Whoever that head ump guy dude is he seems to think that it hit the ground. I don't think there is any set out rule either because you can always change the ruling on a play. How is it any different than a guy being called out and than the umps discuss it and someone else has a better angle and says the ball was trapped. Different situation, yes, but I dont' think there is any set this is your out call. Afterall a lot of umps call different things different. I still say that hit the dirt so whether the ump motioned wrong or not, Paul should have made the tag (if its close you usually do so).

QUOTE(Balance @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:31 PM) While I agree with you 100%, that situation didn't result in a run for the Angels. That would weaken our "they got some breaks with calls, too" argument on that particular instance. Glad we won, just pointing that out. It was an inning ending double play and the game winning run scored on the play. Had that slide not been made, the inning would have been over and one less run would have scored.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:17 PM) If you are correct, tune in to the Baseball Tonight crew. You will get a good laugh at how bad they're butchering this rule right now. I don't think its correct. But I could be wrong. I always thought you call the out and than from there on you make the 2nd call out. Who knows though. I still think it hit the dirt (well i'm fairly confident in that).

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:10 PM) Wow, I'm just STUNNED. I think he was out, whether the ball hit the dirt or not, the ump called him OUT. End of story. He blew the call. No, the ump will make that call and than go back. It looked like he called it twice, but I think it hit the dirt. Mainly because I thought that pitch was impossible to catch without hitting the dirt and I saw a replay where the dirt kicks up. That and the slow motion (still) photo looks like the ball is sitting right in the dirt. You can't tell for sure though.

QUOTE(whitesoxmanager @ Oct 12, 2005 -> 07:24 PM) this is what 99% of all sox fans are thinking. who f***ing gives a s***terdpoopoo about how the heck we did it. it is over and when you go to the window in vegas if you bet on the WHITESOX YOU FREAKING GET PAID! no questions asked. cant you imagine the teller in vegas before he gives you the loot? DO YOU FEEL LIKE THE BALL HIT THE DIRT. STFU and payme homebucket! You watching the local broadcast. They just had a bunch of Angel fans saying the White Sox suck and that they don't deserve a win and that they aren't capable of winning anything if they have to win this way. I hate how they always interview moronic fans. Why can't they interview someone intelligent. I know if I were an Angel fan I'd be ticked, but at the same time, you could of made the tag, you could of stepped up and got Crede, you could of scored earlier in the game, you could have not made the error earlier in the game that led to the Sox first run. There are a lot of things you could of done. Sure you should be ticked. I think that would be my feeling. It was a call that could of went either way and I'm glad it went in our favor.

Put it this way...if this is the NFL and they review it. Whichever call was the original call would of been the one that stood. There was not enough evidence on either side to overturn it. I'll say this though, the announcer out here on the local fox broadcast (local sports guy) said he thought the ball bounced in the dirt. They had the ball stopped and I swear it was half mitt, half dirt.

What a ball game. I don't know if that was an out or not (regarding AJ) but I thought the side angle showed dirt get kicked up. The Angle fox kept showing was too hard to see that from. The Fox TV crew was obviously decided on it being an out, but the radio crew was quite different thinking it got some dirt. I can't say for sure, but one angle (the side angle) made it look like it may have hit the dirt. Regardless, Buehrle pitched awesome, Crede came through huge and AJ was heads up going down to 1st.