Rex Hudler

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 06:40 AM) The ball changing direction upwards doesn't mean a whole lot, as it could have occured inside the mitt. ESPN also showed quite a few replays on strike three calls where he did the arm and the fist pump. When Molina struck out and the ball hit the dirt, he did the arm...then nothing. AJ then tagged Molina, and then he did the fist. Based on the precedent he set over the course of the game, he used the wrong mechanics during the AJ at bat. I still disagree with ya on that part Krush. How can the ball change direction inside the mitt before it touches the mitt? The glove didn't move until the ball hit the webbing, which was after the change of direction. Even if the catcher's mitt completely surrounded the ball it is not a catch until it actually hits the glove. It did not hit the glove and move up inside the glove because you would have seen the glove move before that. For a change of direction to occur, the ball has to hit something and that occurred before it touched the glove. Watch it again in slow mo. I think you will agree. I do agree that the mechanics used were incorrect. The fist pump should not have been used there. But that did not affect what Josh Paul did.

QUOTE(jimb408 @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 12:19 PM) Earlier in the game, Garret Anderson swung and foul tipped a third strike which AJ threw down to third for the 3rd strike. But the ump said the ball hit the dirt, there was a discussion and they checked the ball for dirt. Why didn't they do this on THE PLAY? Because the ball had been rolled on the ground already??

I am off to bed, but I'll add one more thing.... Typically in that situation, if there is any uncertainty over whether the ball hit the ground, the umpire will allow the players reactions to dictate the call or look to the 1B or 3B umpire. That is a VERY difficult call for the home plate umpire to make. They didn't have cameras on the 1B or 3B umpires, but a trick umpires often use is if they see it, and the home plate umpire does not call it right away, they will point toward the ground or show a fist so the home plate umpire can get help. It is not an official appeal, just a signal to help the plate umpire. I'd like to see how they reacted initially.

The press conference with the umpires tonight is a prime example of why it is so rare to see one. They aren't public speakers. They aren't trained debators. They aren't used to being grilled. And for what it is worth, the press asked stupid questions. Better questions might have been: 1. Doug, tell us exactly what you did and said as the play developed. 2. Doug, explain to us the signals you made and what they mean. You initially raised your right arm out like half a safe call and then made what looked like an out gesture shortly after that. What exactly is the function of those signals and how do they go with what you say verbally? 3. To the umpires supervisor: What is the taught protocol for such situations? What are the umpires instructed to do? Did Doug do exactly that tonight? 4. Doug, the Angels in the field seemed confused by the perceived out call you made as Josh Paul was rolling the ball back to the mound. Do you think it is fair for those such as the pitcher who may be too far away to hear you, to assume that you are calling the hitter out at that point? Do you not think that Escobar could not have gotten to the ball and thrown the runner out if the signaling were not more clear? 5. Doug, how sure were you when you made the call and how sure are you now that the ball skipped into the catcher's glove? There appeared to be some indecision on your part from what I saw. Were you convinced the ball hit the ground? 6. Doug, did you signal out and then realize as AJ was simultaneously taking off toward 1B that the ball may have hit the ground? Did you make a signal you shouldn't have, but let the play go on? Just a few off the top of my head..........

I heard the press conference and no Eddings did not sound confident or well spoken. But then again, how often do you hear umpires giving a press conference? That is not their job, so I am sure there was apprehension there. I did hear what Paul said about "no catch" and since I have never umpired professionally, I can't see he is right or wrong with 100% certainty. But I know in that situation I was always taught to acknowledge the swing/strike three, but be silent on the rest. Think of it this way... Typically in a play like that, the catcher makes a quick tag of the hitter and all is said and done. Eddings had to be expecting that, so his delayed/confused reaction is not a total surprise. Let's say that AJ is walking back to the dugout thinking the ball was caught and the umpire says "no catch" as Paul was suggesting. Rather than waiting for the runner to head back toward 1B, Paul routinely flips the ball to 1B for the out. But instead, Paul throws the ball into RF and AJ, who is still standing between the plate and the 3B dugout runs and makes it to first safely. It could be argued then that the umpire created the situation because he told the players what to do even though AJ was in essence giving himself up. In situations like this, the players are responsible to know what is going on. It is not up to the umpire to tell them how to play. Paul did not see the umpire make the fist motion, so I can't accept the argument the Angels are making. If they say, "Hey, Escobar could have thrown the guy out", then we could argue. But Paul created his own confusion. That was his fault, not Eddings.

We win this thing in 5 or 6 games and it will be forgotten. Look out if we end up going to Game 7. lol

QUOTE(Brian @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 04:20 AM) How the hell is Michigan a 3 point favorite over Penn State? because they will win

That's a bad poll on ESPN. Did they miss the call? In what regard? Did the ball hit the ground? Did the umpire react properly? Did he verbalize as he should have or should not have? Did the umpire signal correctly? Way too vague!!

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 05:13 AM) Hey Rex...just wanted to say. Really appreciate your insight on the issue. Same with you Krush...the two have you done a great job explaining both perspectives and each of your opinions. Thanks... I don't completely disagree with Krush, I just think there is a bigger issue. Paul didn't see the "fist" plain and simple. He was tossing the ball back to the mound anyway. So to me, that is not an issue. The play goes the same way with or without it. Just chalk it up to a weird play that went in our favor. Ozuna still had to steal 2B and Crede still had to hit the bad pitch from Escobar. If the Angels had not burned most of their bullpen already, maybe Escobar isn't in there to make that bad pitch?? Lots of what ifs....

QUOTE(fathom @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 05:09 AM) Has it been confirmed that the umpire never said "you're out"? I know AJP said he never heard it, and all I heard from Josh Paul was that the umpire never said "no catch". The umpires say they never verbally called him out. AJ never heard it. Josh did not say he heard it. I'd say pretty confidently the umpire said nothing, which he should do.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 13, 2005 -> 04:59 AM) Rex, the one thing i point to is that on BBTN they went back and looked at some strikeouts swinging by our batters. He did the exact same motion. Arm out for swung through, fist for out. If Eddings is trying to defend himself by saying "that's my strike call", on the two replays they showed, he would have went arm out, fist...another fist? or some sort of other motion? But he didn't. So that's kind of interesting. Also, though the ball changed direction, it could have done that in the mitt, easily. I still have no clue if it did or didn't, but if it hit dirt, you would have seen dirt fly, no? Also, Rex, i think Paul tossed the ball because he didn't say "no catch" or "no, no!" for the catch, something like that. I realize Paul didn't see the fist motion, but every other Angel did. It's good to hear some other perspective though. -- The motion is irrelevant because Paul made the decision to toss the ball back to the mound without seeing that motion. There is NO way he saw it. He was in front of it. If they want to argue the pitcher could have ran to the ball and thrown him out, fine. But that is not the argument the Angels or media are hanging their collective hats on. -- As an umpire in that situation, you are not saying "no catch" like you would in a trap/no trap call in the infield or outfield. You say strike three and shut the hell up. It is not up to the umpire to in essence tell the fielding team what to do, nor to give the runner a heads up to go. It's the same as if a runner slides at the plate and never touches it and the catcher never tags him. You don't say anything, you just do nothing. It is up to the players to play the game if you don't call him out. -- The motion he made/makes was weird. Sciossia is making the assumption that the umpire called him out, but verbally I don't think he did. Maybe 9 out of 10 times that call goes against the Sox, but that doesn't make tonight's call wrong. The catcher typically will tag the runner as he stands in front of him just to be sure 9 out of 10 times. Paul didn't. So be it. -- The ball can't change direction in the glove while the glove remains still. The glove did not move until the ball hit the web of the glove, after it changed direction. I agree there seemed to be indecision by Eddings which didn't help, but I have no doubt the ball skipped into the glove. And no, a ball barely skipping off the ground would not necessarily throw up dirt in that situation. The way the fields are manicured the infield clay is top dressed with Turface or Pro's Choice, whatever dressing they use. The field is very hard. There is no loose dirt and if it just skipped, you would not necessarily see the field dressing fly when that close to the glove. --I'm not saying Eddings did everything right on the play. His actions were confusing to say the least, but the bottom line is that AJ finished out the play and the Angels did not.

His signal was certainly questionable, but Josh Paul didn't see it, so that in itself did not affect how Paul reacted throwing the ball back to the mound. Paul was in front of the umpire running away out of his crouch. The fist pump was made almost simultaneously with Paul tossing the ball back to the catcher. So that cannot be used as an excuse for Josh Paul. If the Angles want to claim that motion froze the other players such as the pitcher who may have reacted in time to throw him out, then we can argue that. But they aren't making that argument. It's clear no one really knew what was happening and Josh Paul, Chicago boy that he is, made an assumption he should not have. All he had to do is tag AJ as he was standing in front of him. Catchers do it all the time, just to be sure. It's the same as if an infielder catches a low line drive in the infield, they are taught to go ahead and throw to 1B and not assume the umpire will rule it a catch.

I gotta disagree with ya here somewhat Krush.... On the play in question... 1. I have no doubt the ball hit the ground. There was a definite change of direction just as the ball was entering the web of the glove. It was about as close as it can get and most of the time, the umpire will just ring the batter up in that situation, but tonight he did not. 2. The home plate umpire immediately put his right hand to the side, which is an indication that the play is still live. That clearly indicates to me that he thought the ball hit the ground and wasn't calling AJ out. 3. What I cannot figure out is that he made an out/strike indication shortly after that. I don't know what that indication was for. If you go back and look at it, he made that motion almost simultaneously when Paul was letting go of the ball toward the mound. Paul was out in front of the plate along the baseline when he did this so there is no way he was tossing the ball to the mound because he saw that motion. He had already made the assumption the out was recorded. One could argue that the motion Eddings (sp?) made froze other players such as the pitcher, who could have reacted in time to throw AJ out. But I can't buy the argument that Paul threw the ball back because Eddings had called him out. Paul COULD NOT have seen that. If the umpire did not verbally call him out, which all parties seem to agree he did not, Paul cannot make the assumption he did. Again, Paul was throwing the ball to the mound as the fist pump was made, which was behind JP. Paul cannot use that argument. 4. This play is probably called the other way 8 out of 10 times, but if Eddings thought it hit the ground (I am assuming he was going on sound, because that is almost impossible for the home plate umpire to see) then it is legit. I just can't understand the initial motion of safe/ball is live (right arm extended) followed by the strike/out motion. I umpired for 10 years and can't figure out any reasoning for both motions. The bottom line is the Sox caught a break. AJ was heads up, realizing that Eddings never said "he's out" which is typical after such a strikeout. Paul made an assumption that would not get him in trouble most times, but today it did. The Sox got a break, but the Angels DID NOT get screwed!

QUOTE(SS Gload @ Oct 10, 2005 -> 03:10 AM) I don't mean to be an ass, but i think that the Prothro family wanted to keep pictures of the injury off the internet. I hope that tyrone gets better, he is a hell of a player. They may have, although I haven't heard anything about it. But in all honesty, what does it really matter? It was shown in slow motion on CBS, on ESPN Sportscenter and in full color on the front page of the next day's Birmingham News. It's not like it is not already out there.

I tried to warn you guys this would happen yesterday. For those of you that missed it, below is my post from another thread on why they would keep Marte. That said, expect Marte to make a major contribution in the ALCS and many of you to be eating crow!

I know it was only three games, but does it bother anyone that Hermanson didn't pitch at all in the series? In fact, I can't recall him even warming up. If he did, I don't believe it was for long. Ozzie made a point to get Cotts and Politte into the first game. Going with Jenks for two innings in Game 2, rather than Hermy or Politte (who pitched the day before) makes me wonder if Hermanson really wasn't available. This all may be nothing, but it is at least food for thought.

My interpretation from reading that is no, it will not affect the start of the ALCS on Tuesday unless another game is rained out and the series goes 5 games, in which they would have to complete that series on Tuesday.

I'm not saying Marte will or should be kept on the roster, but here are a few points from the opposing viewpoint... -- Two lefties give a manager more flexibility, especially when they need to get out just one hitter. -- what happens if Neal Cotts gets hurt early in the series? Would you want to go through most of a 7-game series with NO lefties in the pen? -- Ozzie is loyal if anything -- Sometimes a manager showing faith in a player pulls them out of a funk. Remember how Francona stuck by Mark Bellhorn last year when Red Sox fans were chanting for Pokey Reese? Bellhorn was practically 0-for the playoffs and finally got hot when most needed. -- I do believe that many Sox fans here and elsewhere were adamant about NOT putting El Duque on the playoff roster since he had been pitching poorly. Do those of you in that group still think that would have been the right move? This was just a couple of weeks ago boys and girls. If I were Ozzie and forced to make the decision alone, the decision I made would have to do more with what transpired during the season. Deep down does Ozzie believe he can get what he needs out of Marte? Does he feel Marte has it in him to pull it out? If based on that, I think Marte could help, I'd keep him on the roster. That's just me (if I were Ozzie)

I'm not so sure. I'm not yet convinced that he will go into the next series with only one LH out of the pen. Plus if Ozzie is one thing it is loyal. I'm not saying keeping Marte is the right decision, but it would not surprise me if it happens.

As much as the strike zone did shrink, the Sox caught a break on the check swing by Johnny Damon, ending the bases loaded threat. That was very much a borderline call and typically in that situation, the home plate umpire does not make the call and it ends up going to the 3B umpire on appeal. Who knows how the 3B ump would have called it. It was very close and could have gone either way. I do think Ozzie's questioning of the zone earlier in the inning helped here. No way to prove it or know for sure, but If I were a betting man.........

radar updated from 3:52 central

Yes the atmosphere is moist, and it may rain, but that radar shot is a little misleading. That mass is moving more northward than eastward.... The rain that is there now is more isolated.

What's with all the comments about the announcing??? I'm not a big fan of Sutcliffe and Berman is far from my favorite, but they are being more than fair today. I think the bias is on you guys today!

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Oct 7, 2005 -> 08:41 PM) I also heard him mumble "I hate you Ozzie" after the bottom of the 1st. at least you are staying consistent......

still waiting on someone to show me bias today...... I have heard them say nothing that is not accurate, nor fair