Should Bud Selig Overturn Jim Joyce's Call?

[D. Bergin]

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]

Reverse the call!

[53Browns]

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]

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]

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.

[T206DK]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

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]

You want instant replay for routine judgement calls? Where would it end?

[Chris-Counts]

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 ...

[pitchernut]

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.

[wolfdogg]

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

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...

[B O'Brien]

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

[kkkkandp]

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]

Originally Posted by kkkkandp

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.

[kkkkandp]

Originally Posted by pgellis

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.

[barrysloate]

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]

Originally Posted by kkkkandp

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?

[dstudeba]

Originally Posted by kkkkandp

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]

Originally Posted by pgellis

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]

Originally Posted by Jim VB

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?

[mybuddyinc]

No -- It's Baseball.

[celoknob]

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]

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]

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

[bbcard1]

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]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

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]

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.

[esehombre]

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.

[pgellis]

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]

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]

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]

I hate to say it, but I voted YES too.

Instant replay would be good in certain situations.

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by pgellis

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.

[FUBAR]

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]

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.]

Do you think Bud ever loses track of all committees he's formed to study MLB issues?

[whycough]

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.

[barrysloate]

Night at the Opera.

[whycough]

And I'm sure you understand the point of my drift.

[kmac32]

evidence for instant replay in baseball!

[Tom Hufford]

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]

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]

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.

[Butch7999]

Originally Posted by Tom Hufford

... 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?

[timzcardz]

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]

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]

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]

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]

I added a poll for you. For the record I don't think he should....

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

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.

[CardTarget]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

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.