I don't think it was clear at all. I agree he should have challenged it, it was the 9th, not worth saving your challenge at that point but I don't think it would have been over turned. Then again, I could be wrong but we don't know that because Farrell didn't use the challenge for some reason.KillerBs said:Why didn't Farrell come out and insist on a video review of the tag play at 3rd in the 9th? Davis was pretty clearly out wasn't he?
MakMan44 said:I don't think it was clear at all. I agree he should have challenged it, it was the 9th, not worth saving your challenge at that point but I don't think it would have been over turned. Then again, I could be wrong but we don't know that because Farrell didn't use the challenge for some reason.
RT @ScottLauber On play at third base in 9th, Farrell said Sox determined replay was "inconclusive," decided not to challenge.KillerBs said:Why didn't Farrell come out and insist on a video review of the tag play at 3rd in the 9th? Davis was pretty clearly out wasn't he?
KillerBs said:No you are not being too harsh. Very clearly poorly played by WMB for reasons you state. But still looked like he was out. I thought the days of critical blown calls after the 6th were over?
KillerBs said:Just asleep at the switch. The obvious response is to go out, beg the umps to review on own, wait for word from the dugout while you delay and use the freakin challenge if the umps refuse to review on own.
soxhop411 said:
RT @ScottLauber On play at third base in 9th, Farrell said Sox determined replay was "inconclusive," decided not to challenge.
https://twitter.com/ScottLauber/status/452200464872783872
Still think they should have challenged, since It was the 9th, and even if they lost the challenge they could still ask the ump to review a play if they needed to later in the game
Sampo Gida said:
I watched it a few times on mlb.tv clip and pausing and he was safe, or at the very least it was inconclusive. The ball was certainly there in time if WMB was closer to the bag to apply a quicker tag.
Sampo Gida said:
I watched it a few times on mlb.tv clip and pausing and he was safe, or at the very least it was inconclusive. The ball was certainly there in time if WMB was closer to the bag to apply a quicker tag.
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/replay_review.jspDennyDoyle'sBoil said:Does anyone have the actual text of the rule? Google was unhelpful but I am a bad googler. MLB only has 2013 rules online.
rembrat said:Sigh. Farrell gets his cues from personnel above who can watch multiple replays. If they tell him to stay put he is going to stay put. New year, same old shit it seems.
No.rembrat said:Sigh. Farrell gets his cues from personnel above who can watch multiple replays. If they tell him to stay put he is going to stay put. New year, same old shit it seems.
Does not appear to be correct. What he was talking about is that fair foul is not revieawable in front of the bag. In other words when the ball first lands before the bag, whether it bounds over the bag or over foul ground when it passes the bag is non reviewable. Fair foul where the ball lands first past the bag (e.g., on the line or not) is reviewable.terrisus said:According to Castiglione during the game when it happened, plays can't be challenged if they happen in front of the umpire.
Which, if true, is absolutely absurd. Since, as we saw during the 2013 World Series, umpires are perfectly capable of blowing calls that are right in front of them.
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:Does not appear to be correct. What he was talking about is that fair foul is not revieawable in front of the bag. In other words when the ball first lands before the bag, whether it bounds over the bag or over foul ground when it passes the bag is non reviewable. Fair foul where the ball lands first past the bag (e.g., on the line or not) is reviewable.
Maybe the idea is that video is not that helpful for over the bag calls. I find it always to be inconclusive because the camera doesn't show depth. A camera directly over the bag or a triangulating system like in tennis replays would maybe be helpful for a replay official, but this is actually one area where a properly positioned and trained human might be more reliable than a camera mounted 200 feet away and at an angle different from the foul line.terrisus said:
That still doesn't make too much sense to me, but if that is the case, it's at least not nearly as egregious. So, that's something.
This is my pet peeve and something Butterfield has to work with our infielders on. Apply the tag, keep it on the baserunner. Sometimes the runners momentum pops them off the bag OR the fielders applied tag can slightly nudge an off-balance baserunner from the bag. It happened twice yesterday with WMB and Pedroia.Savin Hillbilly said:
I've swatched the mlb clip about six times now and I can't see how you say this. The throw is a little short and toward the foul line of where it should have been. As it was, WMB had to field it near his shoetops, and reaching back a little across his body away from the runner (see screenshot below). If he had been straddling the bag he would have had to backhand it in the dirt. You can fault him for not keeping the tag on Davis' body longer, maybe--though the ump's position, with Davis directly between him and the glove, might have made this moot--but whatever is wrong with the initial tag seems to me to be more Mujica's fault than WMB's.
DrewDawg said:I have a hard time faulting JF for this. The Sox put a system in place, that system said a challenge would not have worked, so they didn't challenge.
If there's an issue it's whoever made the call on whether or not to challenge needs to be a bit more liberal at that point.
edoug said:Middlebrooks thought he did get him. He held up the glove to show he had the control of the ball.
The ball is in the glove. If it pops out then he doesn't have control, if it stays in the glove it is under control. He doesn't need to show it to the Umpedoug said:Middlebrooks thought he did get him. He held up the glove to show he had the control of the ball.