Correct call, or desired outcome?
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.
|