Saturday, May 21, 2011

Ejections: Gary Darling (1)

HP Umpire Gary Darling ejected Rockies Third Base Coach Rich Dauer for arguing a ball (no swing) call in the bottom of the 6th inning of the Rockies-Brewers game. With two out and one on, Brewers batter Yuniesky Betancourt successfully attempted to check his swing on a 2-2 slider from Rockies pitcher Clayton Mortensen. Replays indicate Betancourt did not appear to attempt to strike the ball, the call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the Brewers were leading, 3-1. The Brewers ultimately won the contest, 3-2.

This is Gary Darling (37)'s first ejection of 2011.
Gary Darling now has 4 points in the Umpire Ejection Fantasy League (0 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 4).
Gary Darling was not drafted in 2011.

This is the 43rd ejection of 2011.
Video: N/A


Anonymous said...

Why would a third base coach argue a ball/no swing call of his own batter??

Jim said...

It was the bottom of the inning, so it was a Brewers batter who was ruled to have not swung. Rockies coach gets ejected for arguing he should have been called out on strikes... Makes sense to me (other than the fact that a 3B coach is getting himself tossed).

Anonymous said...

Oh right, misread the write-up. Doh.

kickersrule said...

Why are so many ejections not getting posted on

Anonymous said...

They're onto us! hahaha. I dunno, these ejections lately seem to be more commonplace over more trivial things like balls/strikes. Maybe we'll get to see the batter out of the box ejection from the Nationals/Orioles game -- I mean, that's a pretty good one, if you ask me.

tmac said...

First of all this is a horrific call. it was a 2-2 pitch that was a non-swing call with two on and one out. (not the other way around) Braun on 2nd Fielder on 1st.

Whoever wrote that up should get -4 points for inaccuracies!! :)

And this is about as bad of a miss as you can have from 2 umpires Darling called no swing (followed by Dreckman backing him up).... If you actually watch this it is a swing plain as day.

Remember this game was not on TV or on until after the FOX window was closed. The only way to see it was how I saw it by having a subscription and watching it after the fact on delay.

Anonymous said...

@tmac Dude... Not sure if you know this, but a no swing call IS a ball call... chill out.

tmac said...

@Anon... And Colorado... Correctly wanted a SWING to be called a swing! NOt sure if you know THIS but a swing is a strike. I'm guessing nobody on this site watched it.. b/c you can NOT objectively call it a no swing.. unless you are completely pro umpire and blind to the fact it WAS a swing.... why can't umpires EVER be wrong?

Gil "CASD" said...

Tmac, the limited (one) real time replay I viewed was not overt either way as far as Quality of Correctness is concerned. In this situation, we must consider the Rules Book, which defines the check swing call as one in which the umpire, using his own informal framework, decides whether the batter attempted to strike the ball. The default QoC must be correct until such point when pro-ball adopts a check swing rule that uses definitive boundaries or actions (break of the risk, barrel crossing the front edge of the plate, etc.) to define their swing/no swing calls.

UEFL write-ups are done in such a way as to refer to the call on the field as the argued call. In this situation, "ball call" refers to Darling's call of no swing, as the play resulted in a ball added to the count. The phrase "check swing" was removed from the summary statement (first sentence) because it had caused confusion in the past whether "arguing a check swing call" referred to a call on the field of swing or no swing. I've gone ahead and added "no swing" to the first sentence.

Post a Comment