IMO i hate to see the game end this way, u know at the end of the yr they r goin to bring back this play and analyze it and debate whether an instant replay system should be installed

 

a catcher always knows if it hits the ground, ive talked to friends who are catchers, and usually u tend to see dirt skip up after the ball hits the ground, which i dont recall seein, but i didnt take a good look at it, but you know what the homeplate ump wasnt in a position to call this, third base ump should be at blame, its to tough to call personally, but paul should have tagged Aj regardless thats a no brainer

Edited October 13, 200520 yr by ChWRoCk2

By the way...is this same umpiring crew with the ALCS throughout the playoffs?

And the Polls open...

By the way...is this same umpiring crew with the ALCS throughout the playoffs?

 

 

I really hope not. That strike zone that Washburn got was insane.

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".

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.

In this case, a picture is almost worthless. You need to see the zoomed-in frame-by-frame replay that FOX showed.

And the Polls open...

Oh no! The ESPN fans are deserting us!

In this case, a picture is almost worthless.  You need to see the zoomed-in frame-by-frame replay that FOX showed.

To be honest cause I haven't seen the replay that you have, even though it's really difficult to see, that ball looks on the ground to me.

just got back from jimbos, awesome game, Im glad I did shots with about half the bar, go sox!!!

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!!

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!!

yeah not a very good poll

Seeing as none of you guys mentioned it was probably the beer getting to me but I thought they showed an angle from foul territory down the 3rd base line of the catch/no-catch and a bunch of dust/dirt shot back from the catchers glove possibly indicating that the ball hit the ground.

Just listen to the replay off of mlb.com from the fox feed you can hear a tha-kunk, didn't really sound clean.

Seeing as none of you guys mentioned it was probably the beer getting to me but I thought they showed an angle from foul territory down the 3rd base line of the catch/no-catch and a bunch of dust/dirt shot back from the catchers glove possibly indicating that the ball hit the ground.

 

I'm quoting myself here but upon further review I can't see dust in any of the replays, but freeze-framing does make it look like the ball touches ground and bounces back up.

I just took a bundle of looks through the replay myself...and I'm totally unconvinced either way...the ball could have hit the dirt inside the mitt or it could have not done so...it's like a receiver catching a football a centimeter above the dirt...you just can't tell if he trapped it sometimes, no matter what angle you get. Here we have an even smaller ball, and it's shrouded inside a darker mitt.

 

That's the whole key IMO...did the ball touch the dirt. That, we will never know. It sure seems like everyone's agreeing that the ump didn't yell "He's out", so there's no way that Paul could have known exactly what call the ump made with the arm.

 

It's a complete judgement call, and one we just don't have a good answer for. I'm glad it went our way.

I have come to this temporary conclusion, the umpire made the wrong call, he called him out.

Baseball Tonight did an outstanding, fairly detailed review of the 9th inning situation. Here are several key points discussed within the video montage:

 

1. Eddings had been consistent with the same fist pumping motion the entire game to desonate both a strike and a strikeout. Whether the specific call was strike one or strike three the same clinching motion was used. Thus, it's obvious to conclude the commands (ie--"you're out") were verbalized to the catcher/hitter.

 

2. The sweeping motion several Angels fans regard as an out was simply Eddings specificying no contact had been made. Again, consistent throughout the game.

 

I consider this a perfect storm of circumstances which tied themselves together for our benefit. Edding's umpiring mechanics, questionable trajectory of Escobar's pitch, Paul's absence of basic fundementals, and Pierzynski learning from a similar mistake last season tied itself together for the rally.

 

I know I'd be infuriated if I were an Angels fan now. But unless the call dictated the actual outcome of the game, which it didn't, you can't entirely blame the umpire. Did Eddings hang a breaking ball on a 0-2 count to Joe Crede? Compare this to Jeffrey Maier in 1996. His situation was decidingly worse; if for no other reason than it involved a home run. THAT is an example of an umpiring decision which directly effected the outcome of a game. Last night was not.

Edited October 13, 200520 yr by Flash Tizzle

I know I'd be infuriated if I were an Angels fan now. But unless the call dictated the actual outcome of the game, which it didn't, you can't entirely blame the umpire. Did Eddings hang a breaking ball on a 0-2 count to Joe Crede? Compare this to Jeffrey Maier in 1996. His situation was decidingly worse; if for no other reason than it involved a home run. THAT is an example of an umpiring decision which directly effected the outcome of a game. Last night was not.

And honestly...doesn't fate owe Crede a game or two, after that home run that was taken away from him in Baltimore I believe early last year?

Ok, I think I just saw that replay you guys were talking about where you see the ball change direction, there is now NO DOUBT in my mind that ball hit the dirt.

 

proof

If you guys want to watch that replay I'm talking about it's about 18 minutes or so into espnnews which means it should be shown again at about 2:48. Krush, I know what you're saying about how the ball can deflect in the mit but Paul's mit had not even began to close yet when you see the ball change direction and because of that the path change would have nearly been impossible if it didn't touch the ground.

seriously after looking at that still pic how can you possibly argue that it DIDNT hit the ground?