PDA

View Full Version : Should Bud Selig Overturn Jim Joyce's Call?


barrysloate
06-03-2010, 06:01 AM
There is a groundswell opinion that Bud Selig should make the unprecedented move and award Armando Galarraga a perfect game. What do you think?

This was supposed to be a poll, and I messed it up. Oh well, you can still offer an opinion.

ullmandds
06-03-2010, 06:02 AM
i agree.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 06:05 AM
I vote for Selig to set a precedent by overturning Joyce's bad call and giving Galarraga his perfect game. Nobody will be hurt by it. Future situations can be evaluated as they come up.

rdixon1208
06-03-2010, 06:11 AM
I vote for Selig to set a precedent by overturning Joyce's bad call and giving Galarraga his perfect game. Nobody will be hurt by it. Future situations can be evaluated as they come up.

I Agree

Chris Counts
06-03-2010, 06:12 AM
While reversing the call would set a dangerous precedent under normal circumstances, it wouldn't matter if baseball allowed instant replay to settle disputed calls. The commissioner could solve two problems at once by reversing the call and enacting instant replay at the same time. A few hardliners would grumble, but I believe the vast majority of fans would quickly accept it, just like they do in football. Plus, they already allow instant reply on home run calls ...

Jay Wolt
06-03-2010, 06:12 AM
I agree as well, its the right thing to do

D. Bergin
06-03-2010, 06:16 AM
No, bad call but what makes it any different then if it was made in the 3rd inning and not the possible last batter of the game?

toppcat
06-03-2010, 06:21 AM
Reverse the call!

53Browns
06-03-2010, 06:31 AM
He needs to reverse it, the call was inarguably suckish. But I wouldnt bet on him reversing it. The hit king is still on the outside looking in.

FrankWakefield
06-03-2010, 06:33 AM
No. The bad call stands. For the rest of our lives, and the lives of our progeny, we don't want a Commissioner tampering with the calls between the foul lines.


What should have happened is one of the other 3 umpires moves out in front of the plate, between the mound and the plate, and stares at the remaining 2, they'll get the idea and approach. They then look over at Joyce and wait for him to decide to approach. They can't help him unless he asks for help on the call, but they could have huddled there waiting for him to come over, and eventually he'd realize he should ask the crew chief for help on the call. I think we'll see the results of a meeting with umpires discussing this process.

Golly... if the Commissioner can 'fix' calls, I can think of a few that could do with 'fixing'. Where would it end? The problem here, I think, is that emotion and desire to reach a certain outcome (a perfect game) has pushed reason to one side. And that hit king walked by a sign every day as player, coach, and manager... the sign proscribed gambling. He should get in the hall any of the 363 days it's open, after he's bought an admission ticket.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 06:38 AM
Frank- I'm not suggesting that all bad calls should be subject to review. If an ump misses a call with two outs in the 5th inning of a 7-2 game, it should not be reversed. But there are exceptions to any rule, and can any call be more egregious than the one made last night? If ever there was a need to set a precedent, that was it.

timzcardz
06-03-2010, 06:40 AM
Only if he reviews all of the other calls in the game including called strikes. Maybe the perfect game shouldn't even have lasted through 26 outs, or a called strike that wasn't gave the pitcher a favorable count to work with.


Would this even be a topic for discussion if it had occurred in the 2nd or 3rd inning?

FrankWakefield
06-03-2010, 06:50 AM
It is a topic because of a desired outcome.


And that, to me, should not be a factor in the decision. "Because if I reverse and correct this call the pitcher can have a perfect game, that's why I'm changing it." No, can't accept that that is right.

Who knows what might happen if ARod hits what might have been an 800th home run, but he stepped out of the batter's box and is ruled out... video shows he was out, but the lime had long ago been rubbed away so ARod couldn't see that he was out... and after all it would be his 800th home run... Or maybe Jeter is about to hit in that 57th consecutive game... No, Barry, we shouldn't look at a desired outcome and let that affect our decision-making.

pgellis
06-03-2010, 06:55 AM
You don't reverse it. That opens up a can of worms that I don't think anyone wants to open with the "human element" of baseball.

Also, if the commissioner were to step in and rule that an out because of a perfect game, how tarnished is that effort now? The best part of a perfect game, no-hitter, walk off HR is the immediate celebration of the team, player etc. Now, the next day you are going to rule it an out? Where's the celebration? There isn't one.......kind of a lost moment that you can never get back.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 07:00 AM
Didn't George Brett hit a home run at Yankee Stadium that was negated because of too much pine tar on his bat? And then didn't that call get reversed shortly thereafter when common sense prevailed, and the last inning was ultimately replayed? Like it or not, the commissioner's office recognized that an exceptional situation occurred.

Keep in mind if the outcome of last night's game were reversed (and I know it won't be), it would not change who won and lost. The only negative would be Donald losing an infield hit. Yes, it would open a can of worms. I say go get the can opener.

Leon
06-03-2010, 07:02 AM
I added a poll for you. For the record I don't think he should....

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 07:06 AM
Thanks for opening the poll. I too understand it won't be overturned...I'm just trying to present an argument for why it could or should.

Exhibitman
06-03-2010, 07:09 AM
No way. Crappy calls are part of the game. What we need is instant replay review.

Besides, there'll be another perfecto next week. :)

CardTarget
06-03-2010, 07:09 AM
No, bad call but what makes it any different then if it was made in the 3rd inning and not the possible last batter of the game?

The difference is that it's THE LAST BATTER OF THE GAME. Meaning that nothing can change if that call is corrected. In the third inning every play has an effect on every other play for the rest of the game.

The better question is, if he proceeds to lose the game after this call is made with another hit and then a bomb to tie it does Bud change anything? Of course not.

I think it's a huge shame, and blame lies with Joyce and the crew chief Darryl Cousins for not getting the call right at the time. Bud can't and shouldn't do anything.

Rob D.
06-03-2010, 07:12 AM
Absolutely not.

Leon
06-03-2010, 07:13 AM
IF it was going to be overturned it should/would have needed to be done before the next pitch. That is my thought on it. Then I could have been ok with it...but not afterwards.

Barry- I didn't know what your verbiage would have been on the poll so just made it easy and obvious.

T206DK
06-03-2010, 07:16 AM
No. The bad call stands. For the rest of our lives, and the lives of our progeny, we don't want a Commissioner tampering with the calls between the foul lines.


What should have happened is one of the other 3 umpires moves out in front of the plate, between the mound and the plate, and stares at the remaining 2, they'll get the idea and approach. They then look over at Joyce and wait for him to decide to approach. They can't help him unless he asks for help on the call, but they could have huddled there waiting for him to come over, and eventually he'd realize he should ask the crew chief for help on the call. I think we'll see the results of a meeting with umpires discussing this process.

Golly... if the Commissioner can 'fix' calls, I can think of a few that could do with 'fixing'. Where would it end? The problem here, I think, is that emotion and desire to reach a certain outcome (a perfect game) has pushed reason to one side. And that hit king walked by a sign every day as player, coach, and manager... the sign proscribed gambling. He should get in the hall any of the 363 days it's open, after he's bought an admission ticket.

I think Frank makes a good point. I was watching the game, and was waiting for any of the other umps to run over and at least say something to Joyce. Maybe it's time for instant replay to be used

pgellis
06-03-2010, 07:18 AM
You want instant replay for routine judgement calls? Where would it end?

PolarBear
06-03-2010, 07:23 AM
When the commissioner voids Bonds/McGwire/Sosa etc. HR records, then I'll listen to his reasoning for reversing this call.

Chris Counts
06-03-2010, 07:26 AM
If instant replay was enacted in baseball, there would no doubt be limits to how often a call could be reviewed, just like in football. If a manager knew he could call for a review just once a game, he wouldn't blow that opportunity on a petty call ...

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 07:26 AM
Leon- the poll is fine as worded.

I too was a little surprised that the umps didn't huddle after the play and have a conference. Is it possible the home plate umpire saw the play well enough to reverse it? Probably not, but that was the moment to discuss it.

And Adam is probably right- seems like we'll just have another perfect game in a week or so.

Ladder7
06-03-2010, 07:27 AM
No.

But, Selig's appointment should be reversed.

ChiefBenderForever
06-03-2010, 08:00 AM
It's a real mess, it was a perfect game except in the record books but will go down as a historic game much more talked about than had he gotten the correct call. What I don't understand is how a home run can be reviewed but a routine play like this cannot, doesn't make sense. Also have to really question where Joyce had his head was he not even aware that a perfect game was on the line ? I don't think this can be overturned and won't be but get rid of the home run reviews wtf.

Robextend
06-03-2010, 08:07 AM
I voted "no". As sickened and disgusted as I was, it is part of the game and it should stand.

Al C.risafulli
06-03-2010, 08:14 AM
Absolutely not.

A hundred years from now, they'll be talking about this game. This will be the second most famous perfect game in the history of baseball. Everybody knows it, including the young man who pitched it and the umpire who blew the call.

Absolutely everything about the way this has transpired has been wonderful. The class of Jim Joyce - a respected umpire - for immediately owning up to his mistake, not placing blame or making excuses, and personally apologizing. The grace and dignity of Armando Galarraga, for accepting the apology and conducting his postgame interviews with such poise, never with a negative word to say.

This is baseball, and this is life. People make mistakes that sometimes hurt, and admitting wrongdoing (and accepting apologies) is what we want people to do.

This is how we WANT our athletes to behave. They almost never behave the way we want them to. Why ruin all that by overturning a call?

-Al

D. Broughman
06-03-2010, 08:19 AM
Leave things as they are. Armando should be remembered for being a class act and someone that should be looked up to by our kids. He will be remembered more if it is not changed then if it is changed. I think this has been handled with great class by all. Baseball is a game by humans lets keep it that way.

CardTarget
06-03-2010, 08:20 AM
This is baseball, and this is life. People make mistakes that sometimes hurt, and admitting wrongdoing (and accepting apologies) is what we want people to do.

This is how we WANT our athletes to behave. They almost never behave the way we want them to. Why ruin all that by overturning a call?
l

Well put.

pitchernut
06-03-2010, 08:21 AM
Don't like the call but that's just the way baseball is played and imo the less replay used in all sports the better.

ElCabron
06-03-2010, 08:23 AM
Does this mean the Cardinals won the 1985 World Series?

-Ryan

sreader3
06-03-2010, 08:24 AM
No way the call should be reversed. Home plate umps blow at least 10% of ball and strike calls every game (I don't have the exact numbers, but when you watch any game on TV you can clearly see all the miscalls). These ball and strike miscalls, which are routine, make more of a difference than calls in the field on whether any game is perfect or a close miss. Galarraga was no more perfect than many other pitchers before him who were "robbed" by ball and strike miscalls that led to a walk or a basehit.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 08:28 AM
All good points...and I too was impressed by Galarraga's grace. But I still feel awful for what he lost. Haddix lost his perfect game but that was from a play on the field. There was an error, followed by a hit. This one is much worse. It will be talked about forever, but still...

B O'Brien
06-03-2010, 08:29 AM
I hate to say it, but I voted YES.

I consider myself to be a purist of the game, and would hate to see intsant reply go into effect, but I think this is one of the very small number of times in history that this would be a good decision. It would be fun to do some history digging and see if any of the countless appeals to the main office back in the day, ever overturned an on field decision.

I would also like to say what a good job the kid did taking it in stride. It would be hard not to blow a gasket, knowing that is your one chance at the history books.

Bob

wolfdogg
06-03-2010, 08:35 AM
I voted NO......we don't need instant replay in baseball. Although it was a terrible call it was a judgement call and it happened fast. Jim Joyce made the call, he didn't hesitate. He felt he was safe and he stuck with it. If I was a MLB umpire I wouldn't want replays. I would feel like I really wasn't needed out there. Just look at a replay and make every call. Yes, I'm a purist, Love this game and I'm old fashion. This game has been around for 150 years....lets not change it.

Although I stated that I would have been ejected had it been me, my hats off to Galarraga, he didn't say a word to Joyce after the call, just a "I can't believe you called him safe" look. I was actually hoping Cabrera would get face to face with him at first while they were "jawing" at each other. Thought he was....why not? Last inning....one out to go.....cause a scene:D

And, I also tip my hat to Jim Joyce for going to clubhouse after he reviewed the call and realizing he missed it to apologize to Galarraga for the missed call. Took a man to do that and to admit he cost him his perfect game.........

Life goes on....its a game...

kkkkandp
06-03-2010, 08:41 AM
As has already been pointed out, there is precedent for doing just that - the George Brett Pine Tar incident.

When almost everyone else in the world thinks the call should be overturned, not overturning it will just make those people feel it is one more example of the commissioner sitting on his hands rather than taking an action, which he has the power to do, that could right a wrong.

Conversely, if he does reverse the call and award the perfect game, I think it will have a very beneficial effect. It's a "feel good" move that should not be ignored.

pgellis
06-03-2010, 08:50 AM
As has already been pointed out, there is precedent for doing just that - the George Brett Pine Tar incident.

When almost everyone else in the world thinks the call should be overturned, not overturning it will just make those people feel it is one more example of the commissioner sitting on his hands rather than taking an action, which he has the power to do, that could right a wrong.

Conversely, if he does reverse the call and award the perfect game, I think it will have a very beneficial effect. It's a "feel good" move that should not be ignored.

First of all, Pine Tar incident was overturned because it was a "rules interpretation" and those are the only rulings that can be overturned, not a judgement call on a player out or safe at a base (that happens about 35 times per game).

Second, the commissioner is not sitting on his hands, he doesn't have the power to overturn a judgement call on the field.

celoknob
06-03-2010, 08:52 AM
Unfortunately this will probably lead to instant replay. Combined with all the loud music, stupid scoreboard games etc., I may just stop going to the games. A ballgame used to be a place to get away from distractions and excessive technology, now it is just another source.

I'd trade a perfectly umpired game for the simple game of baseball as it was meant to be played with all its errors (umpires and otherwise).

alanu
06-03-2010, 08:56 AM
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but if the call was the other way, he was called out when he was safe, would the perfect game be taken away?

In either case I don't think it should be reversed.

ctownboy
06-03-2010, 09:05 AM
I consider myself am a purist (an NL fan) but I am also all about getting calls right.

If this were the NBA, the NFL or the NHL, instant replay would have been used and the call would have been made right.

Bud Selig has been against instant replay but he CAN NOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. He can not be against instant replay while also not having to be held responsible for standing up and changing an incorrect call.

David

kkkkandp
06-03-2010, 09:07 AM
Second, the commissioner is not sitting on his hands, he doesn't have the power to overturn a judgement call on the field.

If he doesn't have the power by some document, I don't think anyone would argue if he took the common-sense, good-sportsmanship step. This is a game. Games are supposed to make you feel good. A lot of people feel angry about that game. He should make them feel good.

ctownboy
06-03-2010, 09:15 AM
As much as the Commissioner's Office might have wanted to do something, as far as steroids go, it was the Players Union who didn't want to take a stand against steroids and other PED's.

There had been a ruling by fay Vincent that said steroids and PED's were illegal since 1993 but the Players Union saw their guys makingtoo much money to change anything. It took Congress getting into the act to amke them change their tune.

As far as Pete Rose goes, he knew what he was doing was wrong and is paying the price for it. It hurts me to say this because I have been a Reds fan since 1975 but he is getting what he deserves.

Finally, ALL Major League sports tell kids to "do the right thing". Well, Bud Selig has a chance to "do the right thing" but will he?

If he would have allowed greater use of instant replay he would NOT be in this spot now. But since he didn't, he NOW has to grow a pair and "do the right thing".

David

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 09:15 AM
It's very odd that instant replay can be used to overturn a home run call but nothing else. What is the common sense behind that? Why couldn't a manager have say one challenge a game, like they do in the NFL? Or why couldn't there be one umpire in a booth somewhere watching instant replay? If there were no controversial calls then the game would proceed as it always does (very slowly indeed). But if there was an obvious mistake he would have the power to fix it. Not necessarily every ball and strike, but a significant play within certain parameters. Something along those lines couldn't really hurt the game.

pgellis
06-03-2010, 09:44 AM
If he doesn't have the power by some document, I don't think anyone would argue if he took the common-sense, good-sportsmanship step. This is a game. Games are supposed to make you feel good. A lot of people feel angry about that game. He should make them feel good.

So where do you draw the line....if this wasn't going to be a perfect game, but rather a 1 or 2 hitter, do you review it?

If it was going to be a no-hitter, but not a perfect game, do you review it?

If it was just a regular game do you review it?

If a pitcher has a perfect game going in the sixth, do you start reviewing any and all close calls?

Where does it stop? Are you saying only in this rare instance of a possible perfect game being broken up with 2 outs in the ninth? Is that the only time you review it?

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 09:54 AM
The NFL has instituted a rule that allows certain plays to be reviewed, and most fans of the game feel it has worked. Baseball could do the same thing, although a good deal of thought would have to be put into how to do it.

Not every blown call is the same. Umps probably miss at least 10-20 balls and strikes calls per game. It would be inefficient to review every pitch that was two inches off the plate and called a strike.

But what if last night Galarraga had a 3-2 count on the last hitter, threw the next pitch right down the center of the plate, and it was called ball four. Can we agree that there are some situations that are more critical than others, and deserve closer scrutiny?

Sure, umpires miss safe and out calls every day. There are hundreds of them during the course of the season. But would anybody really say that what Joyce did last night was just your garden variety missed call? Most missed calls are forgotten five minutes later; the one last night will be remembered for a generation.

I do think some plays are more crucial than others that appear to be similar. Couldn't there be some way to assess this and improve the game?

I'm using a simple premise here: it's always better to get the call right than to get it wrong. If the NFL found a way to cut down on errors by reviewing key plays, why can't baseball?

Jim VB
06-03-2010, 09:56 AM
Second, the commissioner is not sitting on his hands, he doesn't have the power to overturn a judgement call on the field.



Of course he does. The Commissioner has the ultimate power to do anything he deems to be "in the best interest of Major League Baseball."

pgellis
06-03-2010, 09:58 AM
Of course he does. The Commissioner has the ultimate power to do anything he deems to be "in the best interest of Major League Baseball."

And you think "best interest" involves overturning a routine judgement call/play?

egbeachley
06-03-2010, 10:00 AM
It is a topic because of a desired outcome.


To me this is very interesting. If he was called out on the last play and replay showed he should be safe, there would not even be a discussion of overturing the perfect game.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 10:01 AM
Do you genuinely think last night's play was routine? I don't.

Leon
06-03-2010, 10:06 AM
Do you genuinely think last night's play was routine? I don't.

For a professional this was a routine play.....now, the circumstance was far from routine but I do think it was a fairly routine play that we see hundreds of times a season. (if I were to watch hundreds of plays ;))

pgellis
06-03-2010, 10:07 AM
For a professional this was a routine play.....now, the circumstance was far from routine but I do think it was a fairly routine play that we see hundreds of times a season. (if I were to watch hundreds of plays ;))

I couldn't have said it better myself. Absolutey correct.

tesitzes24
06-03-2010, 10:10 AM
I voted Yes, that the call should be overturned, but I clicked it with my eyes closed, because I do agree that it would be setting a dangerous precedent.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 10:10 AM
But Leon- the circumstances are exactly what I am talking about. To again use the NFL as an example: it is said that there is offensive holding on nearly every play from scrimmage. Does even one person believe that therefore every play should be reviewed? No, it would kill the game. But the league was able to implement a review that works efficiently and helps get critical calls right. That call last night was critical.

There are dozens of errors made every day in the major leagues, and thousands in the course of a season. An error is a routine outcome as a result of a batted ball. But would you say Bill Buckner's misplay of Mookie's ground ball was a routine play? No, it was a monumental play. Not all plays that look the same are equal.

bbcard1
06-03-2010, 10:12 AM
Let me throw this into the mix...how about he add the effort to the official list of perfect games in the same way Ernie Shore's perfect game is...for the two people on this board who do not know, Ruth started the game, walked the first batter and was ejected for arguing with the ump. Shore entered the game, the batter was caught stealing and he retired the next 26. He is generally credited with a perfect game.

For what it is worth, he will probably have more enduring and marketable fame from this than if he had pitched the perfect game. He and Joyce will be linked like Branca/Thompson or Buckner/Wilson...probably can make a few dollars off dual autograph appearances for years to come.

Jim VB
06-03-2010, 10:15 AM
And you think "best interest" involves overturning a routine judgement call/play?


I think having 3 of the 21 perfect games in history occur within a month is far from routine.

I think last night's game, and the play that should have ended it, were routine, only until the incorrect call was made. At that point, they ceased being routine.

I am all for getting things correct, and if that means correcting correctable errors, I am generally for it. If things had unfolded differently last night I might have felt differently. If the following batters had gotten hits and/or scored runs, I may have felt differently. But they didn't. That makes this the easiest of errors to correct. Batter is out. Game is over. Next guys AB doesn't count. Perfect game goes in the book. Apologize to the kid for ruining his celebration.


However, I feel that both sides of this argument have valid points. What isn't valid is saying that the Commissioner doesn't have the power to change it. He does. Whether he should or not is what's debatable.

dstudeba
06-03-2010, 10:15 AM
If he doesn't have the power by some document, I don't think anyone would argue if he took the common-sense, good-sportsmanship step. This is a game. Games are supposed to make you feel good. A lot of people feel angry about that game. He should make them feel good.

? A lot of people feel angry about a lot of games, should they get reversed? I think the poise that the pitcher had was admirable. Through this mistake he was given the opportunity to show a great amount of character which will be remembered more than if the call had been right and he had pitched a perfect game.

Jim VB
06-03-2010, 10:17 AM
Let me throw this into the mix...how about he add the effort to the official list of perfect games in the same way Ernie Shore's perfect game is...for the two people on this board who do not know, Ruth started the game, walked the first batter and was ejected for arguing with the ump. Shore entered the game, the batter was caught stealing and he retired the next 26. He is generally credited with a perfect game.



Shore is NOT credited with a perfect game by MLB.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 10:25 AM
Shore came into the game as a relief pitcher. I never understood why he was ever credited with a perfect game, even before the rules were changed.

pitchernut
06-03-2010, 10:29 AM
One thing left out of all this is that if the 1st baseman had played his position and left the ball to the 2nd baseman we would not be debating this. So, imo Detroit did make an error?

pgellis
06-03-2010, 10:30 AM
So Jim & Barry....are you guys saying since it was going to be a perfect game, then we should throw everything else aside from the last 120 years of baseball and make this one exception?

So the only time we make an exception is when there is a close play on the last out of a potential perfect game? What about a no-hitter? What about a shutout? Where do you draw the line?

The human element is what is great about the game and we, as fans, have been pretty comfortable with that for over a century. It seems that some people would just assume have robots and computers making calls, "as long as they get the call correct" is all that some people care about.

What if it was a 3-2 count and he threw one right down the pipe that got called ball 4.......do you want to review balls and strikes with instant replay? No, but if it was going to be a perfect game then you do?

As for the commissioner having the power to do anything "that is in the best interest of MLB", well maybe you are right.....but I can't see how a commissioner can intercede and call a batter out a day later. Maybe he will, he's done dumber things before, but how do you think the Umpire's Association will feel about that? Jim Joyce has already publicly apologized...he got it wrong....he owned up to it. He is human.

bbcard1
06-03-2010, 10:33 AM
Concerning Shore:

His most famous game occurred on June 23, 1917, against the Washington Senators in the first game of a doubleheader at Fenway Park. Ruth started the game, walking the first batter, Ray Morgan. As newspaper accounts of the time relate, the short-fused Ruth then engaged in a heated argument with apparently equally short-fused home plate umpire Brick Owens. Owens tossed Ruth out of the game, and the even more enraged Ruth then slugged the umpire a glancing blow before being taken off the field; the catcher was also ejected. Shore was recruited to pitch, and came in with very few warmup pitches. With a new pitcher and catcher, runner Morgan tried to steal but was thrown out. Shore then proceeded to retire the remaining 26 Senators without allowing a baserunner, earning a 4-0 Red Sox win. For many years the game was listed in record books as a "perfect game in relief," but officially it is scored as a no-hitter, shared (albeit unequally) by two pitchers. Following the game, Ruth paid a $100 fine, was suspended for ten games, and issued a public apology for his behavior.

I had missed/forgotten that it had been removed from the perfect game list.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 10:34 AM
Phil- I actually feel that last night's game is old business and it is too late to change it. But what I am suggesting is using last night as a wake-up call for baseball to address the need for a better way to do things, so that something like this can hopefully be avoided next time. Nothing wrong with trying to make improvements.

deadballera
06-03-2010, 10:35 AM
I hate to say it, but I voted YES too.

Instant replay would be good in certain situations.

Jim VB
06-03-2010, 10:39 AM
So Jim & Barry....are you guys saying since it was going to be a perfect game, then we should throw everything else aside from the last 120 years of baseball and make this one exception?

So the only time we make an exception is when there is a close play on the last out of a potential perfect game? What about a no-hitter? What about a shutout? Where do you draw the line?

The human element is what is great about the game and we, as fans, have been pretty comfortable with that for over a century. It seems that some people would just assume have robots and computers making calls, "as long as they get the call correct" is all that some people care about.

What if it was a 3-2 count and he threw one right down the pipe that got called ball 4.......do you want to review balls and strikes with instant replay? No, but if it was going to be a perfect game then you do?

As for the commissioner having the power to do anything "that is in the best interest of MLB", well maybe you are right.....but I can't see how a commissioner can intercede and call a batter out a day later. Maybe he will, he's done dumber things before, but how do you think the Umpire's Association will feel about that? Jim Joyce has already publicly apologized...he got it wrong....he owned up to it. He is human.


I never suggested anything, one way or the other. I only commented on your thought that Selig did not have the power to change this. The Commissioner's powers are far reaching, although vague. He can do whatever he deems best for MLB.

Now when he runs into trouble is when he gets either side (owners or players union) ticked off. That doesn't seem to be the case here.

pgellis
06-03-2010, 10:44 AM
Phil- I actually feel that last night's game is old business and it is too late to change it. But what I am suggesting is using last night as a wake-up call for baseball to address the need for a better way to do things, so that something like this can hopefully be avoided next time. Nothing wrong with trying to make improvements.

OK.....and what I am saying is how do you draw up a set of "instances" where we go to instant replay or booth review or something? In the NFL, NHL, NBA there are very few instances that need to be reviewed if you don't want to micro-manage every second of every game. Those games have a clock. MLB has every pitch and every play that could be scrutinized...it is not as fluid a game as the other 3 major sports.

So, how could you possibly come up with a list of instances for baseball that you could use instant replay.....I think it would be exhausting and discriminatory in nature. For example, close plays at homeplate only...then why not 3rd base or 2nd base. Only when a scoring play is affected? Well then last night wouldn't count. Only when a lead change is affected? Well then last night wouldn't count again.

I just really think that there are way too many plays that "could" be looked at during a major league baseball game that I feel it would almost be impossible to narrow down a list of instances.

Let's see if you can narrow it down (like the NFL did) to a reasonable size set of instances. Go ahead....

esehombre
06-03-2010, 10:49 AM
I think this case hardly calls for any type of "precedent" to be set. I am sure there are others but George Brett's Pine Tar incident come to mind. Be that as it may--great post, but this seems like a very elemental decision. By all accounts the umpire made an honest mistake--Make the correct call and move on.
In basketball, you have reviews under a minute, hockey has reviews and so does football. It would take a few seconds to overturn a call like this--and with the amount of importance riding on this, how can you not?
I would rather lose a game with the correct call, than win one with an incorrect call.

tbob
06-03-2010, 10:56 AM
No.

But, Selig's appointment should be reversed.

I agree with Steve on both counts.
No way should it be reversed. It opens up a whole can of worms. Do we now reverse Denkinger's call in the WS? How about the horrible call on Maurer's foul ball that might have changed the entire playoffs between the Yankees and Twins?
The one thing that does bother me is that the ump, even though apologetic and contrite and admitting his mistake, violated an unwritten baseball rule which gives the pitcher the edge on a close call in a situation like this. I remember Larsen's 2 strike pitch in the WS which was in Dale Mitchell's eyes and was called a strike to preserve the perfect game. This wasn't even a close call. The ump blew a call the previous inning which changed a 1-0 game in to a 3-0 game and he isn't even talking about that one.
We don't need to open Pandora's Box. I feel sorry for the pitcher but don't take that one horrible step.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 11:04 AM
Phil- how baseball might implement a review would of course entail some thought. Perhaps it should be only allowed from the ninth inning on. Or maybe a manager is given say one challenge per game, and hope he hasn't used it by the time there are two outs in the ninth inning of a perfect game.

Frankly, I think the umps being allowed to review a home run call is arbitrary. Why is a disputed home run in the first inning any more important than a call at first base to end a perfect game? So it's already compromised. What if you have a disputed double or triple-why can't that be reviewed?

bigtrain
06-03-2010, 11:25 AM
A small point but the Brett pine tar home run decision was overruled by Lee McPhail, American League President, not by the Commissioner. And although it was called a "rule interpretation" that is nonsense. Brett used too much pine tar. They measured it. It violated the rule. At that point, it was an illegal bat. Brett was justifiably called out. McPhail was wrong to overturn it. Brett reacted to being caught breaking the rules by behaving like a maniac. He should have been suspended in addition to being called out. A great contrast to the classy behavior of Galarraga who, unlike Brett, was the victim of a bad call. Sorry but I would not rely on the Brett decision to justify the Commissioner getting involved in this one. I hope umpires will always be part of the game. Would it be the same game we love if there was an electronic strike zone?

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 11:41 AM
So Cleveland and Detroit have an afternoon game today, and Jim Joyce refused to take the day off and is umpiring behind home plate. But get this: Armando Galarraga brought out the line up card and presented it to Joyce, who at that moment proceeded to break out in tears.

There is an amazing story going on here that really is unique. And I also heard that the fans cheered Joyce when they easily could have called for his head.

pgellis
06-03-2010, 11:43 AM
Phil- how baseball might implement a review would of course entail some thought. Perhaps it should be only allowed from the ninth inning on. Or maybe a manager is given say one challenge per game, and hope he hasn't used it by the time there are two outs in the ninth inning of a perfect game.

Frankly, I think the umps being allowed to review a home run call is arbitrary. Why is a disputed home run in the first inning any more important than a call at first base to end a perfect game? So it's already compromised. What if you have a disputed double or triple-why can't that be reviewed?

Barry, I don't like the HR review either. Giving managers one challenge per game could work, but what are you allowed to challenge? See, there goes "the list" again of what a manager could challenge. Can he challenge balls or strikes? Balks? The phanton swipe on the double-play? Runner out of the baseline? Out of the batter's box.......it just goes on and on.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 11:45 AM
Well it doesn't go on and on if the rules are carefully spelled out. I guess I have a natural tendency to want to see things called correctly. I was heartbroken by last night's ending and just felt it was unfair, even if we all agree that bad calls are a part of the game.

Zach Wheat
06-03-2010, 11:48 AM
I agree with Barry...there does seem to be another story going on here. Both Galarraga and Joyce were classy in how they handled it both as it was happening and afterwards during the fallout. Joyce admitting he was wrong and apologizing and then having Galarraga change his attitude once Joyce had apologized in person. Both handled it in a classy manner.

Zach

pgellis
06-03-2010, 12:26 PM
Well it doesn't go on and on if the rules are carefully spelled out. I guess I have a natural tendency to want to see things called correctly. I was heartbroken by last night's ending and just felt it was unfair, even if we all agree that bad calls are a part of the game.

That's what I am asking you.....do you think that you could come up with a black & white, defined list of instances that can be challenged? I don't think you can without including hundreds of instances, which is too much.

Barry, what would be your basic outline for acceptable plays that can be challenged?

Leon
06-03-2010, 12:52 PM
So no comments (yet) on the poll percentage. I am a bit surprised, based on the responses, that it's almost 50/50. I would have thought more folks would have voted that it shouldn't be overturned. :confused:

mybuddyinc
06-03-2010, 12:57 PM
No -- It's Baseball.

Oldtix
06-03-2010, 01:00 PM
The commissioner just ruled...the call stands (according to the Associated Press).

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 01:13 PM
Phil- I'm not sure I should be the one to make that call, although I don't mind trying. I would certainly lean more towards reviewing controversial calls at the end of a game. I don't think what happens in the first inning is as critical as what happens in the ninth (and I admit even that is debatable). I would also permit a manager at least one challenge during the game, similar to what is allowed in the NFL. And I think there is nothing wrong for the umpires to make the decision that they feel in the best interest of the game they need to go to the videotape.

There is no question in my mind that after the call last night they would have taken the initiative to review it, if the rules allowed them. Yes, it would make these painfully interminable games even longer, and I hate that. But I would rather see an extra five minutes added to a game to avoid what happened last night.

And I spent maybe five minutes on this, it certainly needs more time and consideration.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 01:15 PM
Rick- according to what was announced on the Yankee game this afternoon, the commissioner is not rushing to judgment and will review the play in more detail. That includes interviewing people, whomever they may be. But that may not be the official word.

ErikV
06-03-2010, 02:02 PM
Selig played his cards right. As bad a call as it was, he backed the
umpires call. Here's MLB's official statemet from last night's game.
I see instant replay coming soon......

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20100603&content_id=10760448&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Chris Counts
06-03-2010, 02:23 PM
While I disagree with the commissioner's decision, I understand why he made the call and I agree with his right to make it. What I truly can't understand is why this clown is still the commissioner. The sooner baseball dumps Bud, the better ...

tbob
06-03-2010, 02:48 PM
On any other day, baseball fans who want instant replay would be pointing to the horrible call late last night that gift wrapped the Mariners a 2-1 win over the Twins in extra innings due to a blown call on a 3rd out groundball which clearly made it to the shortstop covering for a forceout long before the runner arrived.
As far as Selig's statement, although I am glad he didn't reverse the call, for those of you who wanted it overturned, did you really think slick Bud would do it? Has he ever done one thing right as commissioner? Ever?

FUBAR
06-03-2010, 03:12 PM
after hearing Joyce's apology, I am sure he would want it overturned....

but in hindsight, he was awarded an awfully nice Corvette convertible as a consolation prize!

martyogelvie
06-03-2010, 03:16 PM
i think too much time has passed and now the bad call must stand.

no reversal.

if you want to reverse calls, try replay, otherwise play with the rules that are in place.

Anthony S.
06-03-2010, 03:35 PM
Do you think Bud ever loses track of all committees he's formed to study MLB issues?

whycough
06-03-2010, 03:51 PM
Mrs. Claypool: Mr. Driftwood, three months ago you promised to put me into society. In all that time, you've done nothing but draw a very hansome salary.
Driftwood: You think that's nothing, huh? How many men are drawing a handsome salary nowadays. Why you can count them on the fingers of one hand, my good woman.:p

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 03:57 PM
Night at the Opera.:)

whycough
06-03-2010, 04:27 PM
And I'm sure you understand the point of my drift.:)

kmac32
06-03-2010, 05:01 PM
evidence for instant replay in baseball!

Tom Hufford
06-03-2010, 06:47 PM
It was a really, really bad call - and everyone agrees. Is the call for "Selig to make it right" REALLY a desire to get the call correct, or is the desire to make sure the pitcher gets a Perfect Game (albeit, one that he deserved)?

Let's say conditions were the same as last night, the batter hits a ball which is fielded by the 1st baseman, who flips to the pitcher covering 1st. "Out!" calls the ump, and the celebration begins - a Perfect Game and the pitcher is carried off the field! Then someone looks at a replay which clearly shows that the runner was safe at first, and anyway, even though the pitcher had the ball in his glove, he never stepped on the bag.

Would there be a public outcry to change the call and get it correct? And take away a Perfect Game after the celebration? If not, why not? If the goal is to get it correct - and not to achieve a desired outcome - what is the difference in these two games?

I don't think the results of last night's game can be changed, unless we're ready to accept a change in the other direction.

Today, I had lunch with Braves' GM Frank Wren, who watched last nights' game. As he put it, "There were obviously no other runners on base, the batter was either safe at first (and not trying to go to second), or he was out (game over). Joyce made the call, but as soon as Leyland came out to question it, all that needed to be done was for the umpires to confer and come up with a definite answer. They didn't do that, and Joyce gets all the blame. All this could have been avoided it the umps had just talked to each other, but they didn't. What a shame." Derryl Cousins is the Crew Chief of that umpire crew, and I haven't heard his name mentioned once.

barrysloate
06-03-2010, 07:02 PM
Tom- good points, and if it happened the other way, with a perfect game awarded because the ump missed the call, there would still have been a small outcry from the fans, but not on the national level it achieved. This story seemed to transcend baseball, and became a parable about how good sportsmanship is such a rare commodity in today's world. No question some unique things came out of it, but bottom line is a perfect game is a once in a lifetime achievement that few major leaguers have ever achieved. And a humble and not that well known pitcher had one and had it taken away.

M's_Fan
06-03-2010, 07:16 PM
I would just say that it wasn't such a bad call if you put yourself in Joyce's shoes. The ball never hit the meat of the glove to make the audible "whack". Instead, it bounced around a little bit. Without the sound to compare to, you go off of what you see, which isn't easy at all. So I disagree with the view that it was an easy call. He was clearly safe from the replay, but it was not such an easy call, in my opinion.

Also, I heard an umpire on the radio today say that umpires rarely conference over a first base call like that. One ump is in position, and the other umps hardly ever conference and overturn a call like that.

nolemmings
06-03-2010, 07:19 PM
It was an easy call in the sense that Joyce never claimed he considered a bobble, and never considered a swipe foot tag that might have missed the base. He claimed he was convinced that the runner beat the throw. The call was gross incompetence.

nolemmings
06-03-2010, 07:22 PM
BTW, I don't put that much stock in Joyce's contriteness, especially as he had little choice in t he face of the evidence. To me he can apologize until he's blue in the face, he should still be suspended. Please don't give me that everyone makes mistakes schtick. This was the final out of a ballgame, and a potential perfect game. His attention should have been as acute or morseo than any other time in the game. His job was simple, and he blew the call. There should be consequences, remorseful or not as he might be.

If you are in an important position for your company or, better still, your profession and, at the height of an important decision, you blow it, you should expect to be fired or disciplined in some fashion. Period. If you don't like the pressure of being in that position, find another line of work. Bottom line, you embarrassed the game. Man up and apologize--fine, you did. Now man up and take some punishment too.

I'm not saying the guy should be accosted in the streets, his kids ridiculed at school or his pension taken away, but that call was inexcusable and incompetent, and he should be penalized for it (BTW, he flat out blew another call in the 8th that led to 2 Tiger runs--is this guy horseblip or what?). Seems like some time off without pay might help him become more focused and disciplined, if not, move on and let someone else do the job.

ctownboy
06-03-2010, 08:40 PM
For those who say Selig does NOT have the power to overturn the cal, I say BS!!!

The Commish has the power to ban guys for life (Jackson, Cicotte, Rose, etc).

The Commish has the power to overturn trades (Vida Blue to the Reds, other Oakland A's to different teams).

The Commish has the power to suspend All Star Games.

If the Commish can do all of those things, which can affect more than one person and more than one season then he can EASILY overturn a CORRECTABLE call.

David

ctownboy
06-03-2010, 08:44 PM
For those who say the Pine Tar incident doesn't count. Well, yes it does.

Brett was reinstated because the Yankees KNEW his bat had too much pine tar on it but did NOT tell the Umpires when they first knew about it. Nope, they waited until he did something which negatively affected them to alert the Umpires about it. The Ump then ruled Brett Out and then the AL President reinstated him and ruled the last four Outs to be replayed.

Notice how an AL President ruled on something important like this and NOT the Commish.

Also notice how four Outs of a game had to be replayed which could have resulted in a different ending.

Changing the Hit to an Out (the correct call) would NOT affect the outcome or ending of that game.

David

ctownboy
06-03-2010, 08:54 PM
For those who say that if the ruling were changed for this game then they might also ahve to go back and change things like the 1985 WOrld Series, I say WRONG!!!!

Even though they had the technology for replays back then, there was NO RULE in the books concerning the use of instant replay. Now, however, there IS a rule for use of instant replay (concerning Home Runs) and since there has been precedent set for changing outcomes of games based on those replays, it is MUCH easier for Selig to make this (correct) change.

The reason he doesn't is because he does NOT have the balls to do it.

In 1993, the Commish's Office ruled that steroids and other PED's were against the rules but the Players Union didn't agree. Selig had a LONG time to stand up to the Union but DIDN'T. It took Congress getting into the act before the Players Union budged and made the playing field mroe fair again.

Selig is against instant replay. So when a call like this comes about (one that HAVING instant replay would keep him from having to rule on) he wusses out and just says no to changing a ruling.

SPINELESS!!!

Now Galarraga never gets into the record books as having thrown a perfect game and Joyce has to forever live with people reminding him he screwed up.

Don Denkinger and his Wife was interviewed about the missed call in the 1985 World Series and they talked about the hate mail and threatening phone calls they received afterward, some more than a year after the incident happened. They also talked about people remembering him blowing the call years after it happened (when they met him in person).

Heck, ESPN is bringing it up NOW, 25 years after it happened.

David

calvindog
06-03-2010, 08:57 PM
The easy route would be for Selig to reverse the call as that is what the public is clamoring for. Selig did the right thing here.

JP
06-03-2010, 08:58 PM
Denkinger's call was nothing like this one, to me. That world series play was bang-bang. This one was BANG (pause a beat or two) bang. A no doubt out. I think Galarraga, Joyce, and the fans of baseball would like to see this reversed. So if no one loses out, why not switch it now?

nolemmings
06-03-2010, 09:17 PM
The easy route would be for Selig to reverse the call as that is what the public is clamoring for. Selig did the right thing here.

Now I know I've had too many beers, as I agree with this poster 100%. Agreeing with Selig and Lichtman at the same time is enough to shake one's self-assuredness to the core. :eek:

ctownboy
06-03-2010, 10:07 PM
A doctor not giving pain medicine or additional treatment to a dying patient might be the easy thing to do but is it the RIGHT thing to do?

A defense attorney telling his client to plead guilty as fast as he can might be the easy thing to do but is it the RIGHT thing to do?

Selig not having the balls to make a controversial decision is easy but is it right?

Honestly, WHO is hurt by him overturning the call?

The pitcher gets his perfect game.

The Umpire gets a load of regret (and threats for himself and his family) off his shoulders.

The Umpires get a break and some good PR (after having a REALLY crappy couple of weeks).

Sure, the batter loses a hit BUT, if you watch the replay, after he crossed the bag even HE was shocked he was called safe AND even he admitted, after looking at the tape, that he was Out. He also said that with the game the way it was and on a close play, he didn't expect the Ump to call him safe. So it sounds like if the call were reversed, the batter wouldn't have that big of a problem with it.

To recap, Selig ahs the power to change the call but not the balls to do it.

If changed, the pitcher would get his perfect game, the outcome of the game wouldn't change and the Umpire would get some relief.

Also, NOT changing the ruling just gives more kids reason to NOT like baseball. They can see an injustice has been done (yet Major League baseball, I am SURE, will continue to barrage them with messages that say to "do the right thing"), yet when it comes to the powers that be doing "the right thhing" they don't.

Also, it gives minority kids in urban areas something else to think about as far as being discriminated against. Gallaraga has a foreign last name and speaks with a Latin accent. How many kids do you think are out there now feeling that his skin color and nationality had something to do with Selig NOT overturning the call? I say quite a few. Just think about what guys like Milton Bradley, Torii Hunter and a few others have recently said about racism and discrimination in the Majors. Just look at the hype that surrounds the Civil Rights game every year.

The kids see what MLB is trying to project yet hear what some of the players are saying and see a disconnect. So, whether they are right or not, some kids probably feel if the pitcher's name was John Jones and he was a white American, then Selig would have reversed the call.

David

calvindog
06-03-2010, 11:19 PM
Now I know I've had too many beers, as I agree with this poster 100%. Agreeing with Selig and Lichtman at the same time is enough to shake one's self-assuredness to the core. :eek:

This turn of events does not bode well for you.

calvindog
06-03-2010, 11:22 PM
Also, NOT changing the ruling just gives more kids reason to NOT like baseball. They can see an injustice has been done (yet Major League baseball, I am SURE, will continue to barrage them with messages that say to "do the right thing"), yet when it comes to the powers that be doing "the right thhing" they don't.

Also, it gives minority kids in urban areas something else to think about as far as being discriminated against. Gallaraga has a foreign last name and speaks with a Latin accent. How many kids do you think are out there now feeling that his skin color and nationality had something to do with Selig NOT overturning the call? I say quite a few. Just think about what guys like Milton Bradley, Torii Hunter and a few others have recently said about racism and discrimination in the Majors. Just look at the hype that surrounds the Civil Rights game every year.

The kids see what MLB is trying to project yet hear what some of the players are saying and see a disconnect. So, whether they are right or not, some kids probably feel if the pitcher's name was John Jones and he was a white American, then Selig would have reversed the call.

David

So you're playing the race card....on this??? Here's some advice: don't. You really do a disservice to the people you are claiming to try to help with this argument.

Butch7999
06-04-2010, 12:59 AM
... Today, I had lunch with Braves' GM Frank Wren, who watched last nights' game. As he put it, "There were obviously no other runners on base, the batter was either safe at first (and not trying to go to second), or he was out (game over). Joyce made the call, but as soon as Leyland came out to question it, all that needed to be done was for the umpires to confer and come up with a definite answer. They didn't do that, and Joyce gets all the blame. All this could have been avoided it the umps had just talked to each other, but they didn't. What a shame." Derryl Cousins is the Crew Chief of that umpire crew, and I haven't heard his name mentioned once.

Our very thought, Mercury. Were all the umps in that game dazed and confused? Given the historic, melodramatic circumstances, did none of them have the rudimentary awareness to huddle up and consider overturning the blown call? Obviously not, and they just left Joyce to twist in the wind.

Maybe it's just that improved video technology in recent years better shows how often the umps are wrong -- and it's not like there weren't some howlers over the years -- but we don't remember there being, back in the day, nearly as many bad calls, or as many outrageously bad calls, as there are now. What do they teach these guys in Umpire School?

Butch7999
06-04-2010, 01:12 AM
... permit a manager at least one challenge during the game, similar to what is allowed in the NFL. And I think there is nothing wrong for the umpires to make the decision that they feel in the best interest of the game they need to go to the videotape...

Much as we hate the idea of reducing the "human element" and having video review in baseball (it's certainly a mixed bag of success and farce in the NFL and NHL), we think Barry's on to something with that suggestion. There's no "slippery slope" or "Pandora's box" of endless replays and complications, as some have suggested, if a simple one-challenge option (or two -- or three as in the NFL, but surely no more than that) is instituted. Save it for a close call on a big play in the late innings of a close game -- was a tag missed on a rally-killing double play? Was a walk-off homer at the pole fair or foul? -- or waste it if you want on a ball-strike call on a 1-1 pitch to the leadoff batter in the 2nd inning. Manager's choice.

pgellis
06-04-2010, 04:28 AM
Much as we hate the idea of reducing the "human element" and having video review in baseball (it's certainly a mixed bag of success and farce in the NFL and NHL), we think Barry's on to something with that suggestion. There's no "slippery slope" or "Pandora's box" of endless replays and complications, as some have suggested, if a simple one-challenge option (or two -- or three as in the NFL, but surely no more than that) is instituted. Save it for a close call on a big play in the late innings of a close game -- was a tag missed on a rally-killing double play? Was a walk-off homer at the pole fair or foul? -- or waste it if you want on a ball-strike call on a 1-1 pitch to the leadoff batter in the 2nd inning. Manager's choice.

You want to review balls and strikes now? That's not going to ever happen and it shouldn't. Just a very bad idea.

timzcardz
06-04-2010, 06:22 AM
Also, NOT changing the ruling just gives more kids reason to NOT like baseball. They can see an injustice has been done (yet Major League baseball, I am SURE, will continue to barrage them with messages that say to "do the right thing"), yet when it comes to the powers that be doing "the right thhing" they don't.

Also, it gives minority kids in urban areas something else to think about as far as being discriminated against. Gallaraga has a foreign last name and speaks with a Latin accent. How many kids do you think are out there now feeling that his skin color and nationality had something to do with Selig NOT overturning the call? I say quite a few. Just think about what guys like Milton Bradley, Torii Hunter and a few others have recently said about racism and discrimination in the Majors. Just look at the hype that surrounds the Civil Rights game every year.

The kids see what MLB is trying to project yet hear what some of the players are saying and see a disconnect. So, whether they are right or not, some kids probably feel if the pitcher's name was John Jones and he was a white American, then Selig would have reversed the call.

David

Or they can see the maturity, dignity, and respect for the game that Galaragga displayed.

He did look shocked and in disbelief over the call, but he didn't go into an expletive laced tirade directed at the umpire like some might have.

He went back to work and finished his job, the job that he is paid to do.

At the end of the day he went home, knowing that he did his job well. He went home knowing in fact that regardless of what the record books say and whether he receives formal recognition for it or not, that he did pitch a perfect game. He went home knowing that he did his job the absolute best that it could be done. He knows it, and everbody with an interest in baseball knows it, as do many with no previous interest in baseball.




So you're playing the race card....on this??? Here's some advice: don't. You really do a disservice to the people you are claiming to try to help with this argument.

THANK YOU!

doug.goodman
06-04-2010, 08:04 AM
I am in favor of giving him the perfect game.

I am opposed to replay.

This is not a slippery slope, and it does not set a precedent.

Next time the 27th out of a perfect game is botched, and everybody including the runner and umpire are in agreement that it was botched, that will be the next time that a ruling of changing this outcome could be used as a precedent.

But, as timzcardz says, the fact that it won't go in the record book does not change what he did. If I had been at that game, I would have left ready to die happy, knowing that I had seen a perfect game, with an extra out thrown in for good measure.

Harvey Haddix and Ernie Shore were probably getting bored talking to each other, now they can be a threesome.

Doug

barrysloate
06-04-2010, 08:45 AM
For the record Pedro Martinez once pitched a nine inning perfect game but both teams were scoreless. He allowed his first hit in the 10th inning. Isn't that pretty much what Haddix did (in three less innings, of course)?

doug.goodman
06-04-2010, 10:14 AM
I forgot about that Martinez game. Now I'm wondering if I forgot anybody else, but I'm too lazy to google it.

Doug

calvindog
06-04-2010, 12:09 PM
There was also a weather-shortened no hitter as well as an 8 inning no hitter (the pitcher was losing at the time).

barrysloate
06-04-2010, 12:37 PM
Dean Chance pitched a five inning perfect game and got credit for a complete game victory. Should that count?

Robextend
06-04-2010, 12:46 PM
Andy Hawkins!!! I remember listening to this game on the radio with my dad.

Hawkins was with the New York Yankees when he pitched a no hitter against the Chicago White Sox in Chicago on July 1, 1990. Going into the bottom of the 8th inning, the score was 0-0. Incredibly, after he retired the first two batters, three errors and two walks allowed four runs to score and the Yankees wound up losing 4-0. At the time Hawkins was credited with a no hitter as he had pitched a complete game although his complete game was only 8 innings. The following season, the definition for a no hitter was changed to require a pitcher to pitch at least a 9 inning complete game to be credited with a no hitter. Since Hawkins' complete game was only 8 innings, he lost credit for the no hitter.

barrysloate
06-04-2010, 01:12 PM
Here's a simply incredible no-hitter achievement that will never be matched:

In 1965 Jim Maloney pitched a 10 inning no-hitter against the Mets, but gave up two hits in the 11th and lost 1-0. He recorded 18 strikeouts in the game.

Amazing as that was, just a month later he pitched another 10 inning no-hitter against the Cubs. This time he won 1-0. He had 10 walks and 12 strikeouts.

So within one month's time Maloney pitched two 10-inning no-hit games, winning one and losing one. It will never be duplicated.

hunterdutchess
06-04-2010, 03:38 PM
Bud Selig is a wimp and would never overturn anything because he would then be exposed by the media for the money sucking (18mill a year) dope that he is. I live here in Detroit and I think as many people dislike Selig now as much as they do Joyce.

Peter_Spaeth
06-04-2010, 07:18 PM
It would be madness for Selig to overrule an umpire's judgment call on the field.