Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Ejections: Chris Guccione (2)

HP Umpire Chris Guccione ejected Angels Manager Mike Scioscia for arguing a check swing call in the top of the 6th inning of the Angels-Yankees game. With two out and three on, Angels batter Jeff Mathis was ruled to have swung on a 0-0 knuckle curve from Yankees pitcher A.J. Burnett for strike one. Replays indicate Mathis was unable to check his swing and made an attempt to strike the ball, the call was correct. Mathis hit the next pitch for a two-run ground-rule double. At the time of the ejection, the contest was tied, 1-1. The Angels ultimately won the contest, 6-4.

This is Chris Guccione (68)'s second ejection of 2011.
Chris Guccione now has 8 points in the Umpire Ejection Fantasy League (4 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call) = 8.
Chris Guccione is owned as a Secondary Umpire by tt49, who is now tied for 11th place in the UEFL with 16 points.

This is the 152nd ejection of 2011.
This is the 72nd Manager ejection of 2011.
This is Mike Scioscia's second ejection of 2011.

Wrap: Angels at Yankees 8/9/11 Wrap
Video: Guccione Gives Scioscia the Hook

18 comments :

Anonymous said...

Guccione badly blew a similar call in the first against Abreu where he said he swung when it was painfully obvious he didn't, so I think Scioscia was a little upset with him for refusing to ask for help on check-swings.

That being said, this call was correct, but this was one of the quickest hooks I have ever seen. Also, Guccione has the Rob Drake/Doug Eddings arrogant demeanour about himself in this argument, very off-putting.

Anonymous said...

I understand that this call might have been correct, but when its that close, it was just a guess. The plate umpire does not have the best angle on a check swing and needs to get help when they are that close. Sure the call was correct, but not asking for help was incorrect. Scioscia was not ejected for arguing balls and strikes, he was ejected for arguing the decision to not appeal to the first base umpire

Anonymous said...

All together, say it with me...

GOOOOOOOOOCH!

Brett said...

Anonymous 8:22 - He is still arguing balls and strikes. There is no need fir an appeal there as Guccione adjudged him to have swung calling it a strike, which you cannot argue. The only time you get an appeal is if he calls it a ball.

Zac said...

Anonymous @ 8:22:
Scioscia knows that the PU can't ask for help on a check swing when the PU calls the pitch a strike to begin with. He wasn't born yesterday, he has been around for a long time. As Brett said, there is no help to get here and Scioscia knows that.

It did look a little quick and Guccione looked pretty aggressive when Scioscia came out. Hard to know what was said though.

Anonymous said...

It was called a swing. The base umpires have a better view than the plate ump does of a check swing. Lose the ego and ask for help.

Anonymous said...

apparently anonymous doesn't know the rule book or the umpire's manual.....

Anonymous said...

Scioscia wasn't ejected for arguing balls and strikes, he was arguing the decision not to appeal?
Now that's funny I don't care where your from!

1st, Scioscia was a catcher, and he knows once Chirs calls strike, any further discussion is arguing balls and strikes. He also knows there can be no appeal. So he was clearly mad about the strike, and argued. He probably said something borderline, and put Chirs to a test. Scioscia more than any other manager, knows umpires. He wasn't too mad about getting tossed, he seemed a little mad about getting caught, and maybe mike thought he should be able to say something from the dugout. On the video it looked like Chirs told Scioscia what he said, and Scioscia denied saying it, and that's when Chris said are you serious? And then Chirs said something like you know me a long time Mike. I think he added to that sentence, my guess is, by saying, you know me, I wouldn't lie, and make something up. I also think Mike was just upset Chirs heard him, and did something about it. Like I said, it was borderline. Mike wanted to inflict the most damage, and still stay in the game..
I think Chis said, "Boom".....
Thought I could hear that on the video.

Anonymous said...

I was watching the Red Sox Twins game last night and it looked like Tim McClelland had a rocky night. Just wondering if you have the percentage called correctly?
Thanks

Anonymous said...

Scioscia is a rat and everyone knows it. Gooch knows this and thus, his leash is very short for guys like him. The check swing call was an easy way to let Scioscia know that he wasn't going to hear it from him tonite. Mike must of taken it a little too far so Chris got rid of him early. Smart move because most guys would let that stuff go and then it gets worse & worse as the game goes on. Sometimes you just have to remove the "cancer" before it spreads.

Anonymous said...

Tim McClelland had a horrible night last night. He is a solid balls and strikes guy,but last night he was anything but. Bedard had to pretty much throw it down the middle to get a strike. The twins were also getting squeezed but didn't seem as badly.

Timmy C is a better umpire than he was last night..As usual,boston fans are calling for his head.

tmac said...

McClellend has quietly struggled this year. He was very tight yesterday missing about 20 strikes but just about every one was borderline. And that's why he's quietly been struggling. He doesn't make any bad misses

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/zoneplot.php-pitchSel=all&game=gid_2011_08_09_bosmlb_minmlb_1&sp_type=1&s_type=7.gif

Anonymous said...

I watched the Twins game that McClellend worked. I'd like to challenge the strike zone shown on the TV screen. And I'd challenge the pfx. I watched as both catchers would reach outside their frames to catch a pitch, and the chart would have the pitch crossing the zone. I noticed this a number of times in the middle of the game. The catcher didn't seem to have an issue with the pitch, or if it went against the batter, the batter (except Yuokalis) didn't really seem to question the pitches either. Also most of the pitches in question were partly in, and partly outside the zone. It the pitch was recorded entirely inside the zone, Tim called it.
(I'm asking site members here) Is there any chance, because of the way the zone is set up, that the entire strike zone can be calibrated fractionally off? I understand that all edges of the strike zone would be off to one side, but that is indeed what I'm asking.
I will say this, I seen at least 2 instances were both catchers reached outside their frames to catch a ball, in fact I would describe the catcher going into a position where he was anticipating having to block the pitch, and the K-zone had the pitch a strike. It seemed weird to me at the time, the catchers position, but now with the Tim bashing, I must question the technology.

Any chance the zone can be off?

(also, Blyleven was critical in the 1st inning, so if you watched the twins broadcast Burt was the one who started the choir)

Anonymous said...

Why would the plate umpire rule a close or questionable check swing without asking the base ump who has a better view for an appeal? The goal is to get the call right so use the best resource.

jb said...

I agree w/ the 1st anon. Don't see how people are piling on him. Mike is mad that on a close check swing he is ringing them up instead of going for help. Yes, I'm a real life umpire and yes coaches are rats and regardless of circumstances if he crossed the line he deserves to get run. Still, I think anon made a valid point.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said, "Why would the plate umpire rule a close or questionable check swing without asking the base ump who has a better view for an appeal?"

You can imagine the chaos that would ensue if the criteria for which umpire has responsibility on a given play were left up to an umpire that was not the closest to the play. How about asking the plate umpire about a fair foul call, when the base umpire is 50ft from the call VS the plate umpire being 350ft away. I think saying another umpire had a better look is a little inaccurate. Saying the base umpire had "another" look is more accurate. But remember once a swing is ruled a strike, there's going to be no appeal.

So, why didn't the plate umpire ask for help right away? There was no need, he saw a swing and called it, and he was right.

Jon Terry said...

It's a fight that can't be won. If the plate umpire rules a strike, then the offensive coach screams about him not getting help. If he gets help and the field ump rules a strike, then the same coach screams at both umpires, and tells HP ump to make his own damn call. If either rules no-swing, then the other coach us up someone's ass.

Bottom line, the manager always has an answer, and the team's commentators will echo that answer to make the ump look bad in public. All an umpire can do is what he thinks is right, and pull the trigger when necessary.

Anonymous said...

I realize this may be a bit off subject from the EJ,but WEEI in boston discussed Tim McClellend the day after his game behind the dish,and former player Lou Merloni gave some great input on McClellend from the days he was a player..The link is below..

http://audio.weei.com/a/43698906/tim-mcclelland-has-a-terrible-night-behind-the-plate.htm

Post a Comment