Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Ejection 099: Jeff Kellogg (1)

HP Umpire Jeff Kellogg ejected Dodgers Manager Don Mattingly for arguing balls and strikes in the bottom of the 10th inning of the Dodgers-Cardinals game. With one out and none on, Cardinals batter Skip Schumaker took a 3-2 fastball from Dodgers pitcher Josh Lindblom for a called fourth ball. Replays indicate the pitch was located over the plate and below the hollow of the knee (norm_ht of -1.03), the call was correct.* At the time of the ejection, the contest was tied, 2-2.

This is Jeff Kellogg (8)'s first ejection of 2012.
Jeff Kellogg now has 4 points in the UEFL (0 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 4).
Crew Chief Jeff Kellogg now has 6 points in the UEFL's Crew division (5 Previous + 1 Correct Call = 6).
*A Balls/Strikes Exemption has been applied. Of 6 callable pitches in the b-10th, Kellogg called 5 accurately (all balls). The 6th was a called strike, which benefited the Dodgers and is therefore not eligible for review.
^UEFL'er Heyblue wins 2 points for correctly predicting Prop Prediction Q4: Mattingly Date.

UEFL Standings Update

This is the 99th ejection of 2012.
This is the 49th Manager ejection of 2012.
This is Don Mattingly's first ejection since June 17 (Jerry Meals; QOC = Incorrect).
This is Jeff Kellogg's first ejection since July 10, 2010 (Terry Francona & Mike Cameron; QOC = Correct).
This is the Dodgers' 8th ejection of 2012, 1st in MLB and the NL West (LAD 8; SF, SD 3; COL 1; AZ 0).

Wrap: Dodgers at Cardinals, 7/25/12
Video: Mattingly visits mound for pitching change, "discretely" yells at Kellogg, is ejected arguing balls/strikes
Pitch f/x courtesy Brooks Baseball
Pitch #6 (Left) and the circled green triangle (Right) are the same pitch. The left plot is not normalized (actual distances), while the right plot is normalized (meaning the strike zone "box" is standardized). The left plot's strike zone as drawn runs from 1.5 to 3.5 feet above home plate, with no consideration made for the batter's actual hollow-of-knee and midpoint locations. The right plot's strike zone as drawn runs from a normalized value of -1.0 to +1.0, with the bottom of its zone at the hollow of the knee and the top of its zone at the midpoint between the batter's shoulders and top of uniform pants. For determining pitch location in real-measurable distances, the left (not normalized) graph is ideal. For judging balls and strikes, the right (normalized) plot is used. For the purpose of QOC, the latter is used.

56 comments :

Anonymous said...

Kellogg used a vulgar word when he ejected Mattingly. I looked at it twice.

Anonymous said...

Who cares. I'm sure he gets them thrown at him a bunch...

Anonymous said...

Once he's ejected it's free game.

Anonymous said...

That's a pity. Kellogg was pretty inconsistent and outright missed several pitches to the detriment of Los Angeles, so Mattingly had finally seen enough after that strike 2 call followed by the ball 4 call. Unfortunately for Donny Baseball, Kellogg was right to ball that last pitch.

Mike said...

There were multiple players who started heading to first on called strikes tonight. His zone must have been a little off because both teams were doing it.. I thought there were several pitches that seemed high and were called strikes..

Anonymous said...

Kellogg had a pretty bad game. I can see why Mattingly was peeved. Actually, in the game ending at bat with Furcal, Kellogg balled a pitch that was clearly down the heart of the plate, not even close. Just blew that and several other calls throughout the game

Turducken said...

http://bit.ly/Q99wt0
I think Mattingly possessed some ire about this at-bat in particular. UEFL rules would preclude this from being utilized in a potential QOC, but Mattingly, and Harang, for that matter, weren't too pleased with this call.

http://bit.ly/NZVJ7O
In regards to Anon 10:15 -- not necessarily the heart, but clearly over the plate.

http://bit.ly/SVcJj7
And while you can isolate these at-bats, Kellogg didn't necessarily post the worst chart in the world last night, either.

Anonymous said...

Foster has no right to speak, go away. kellogg is a big boy crew chief, your a disgrace foster, anyone who thinks foster is the best is dumb, yet their are people out there that think he is the best.

RichMSN said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RichMSN said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RichMSN said...

I could only hope that I'm that terrible in games that I umpire.

UmpsRule said...

@ Anon 2:20

Yeah, whatever.

I could see this coming. I actually thought Mattingly had been ejected back in the 8th when the commercial break ended and Hillman was holding the lineup card. Seemed pretty obvious who Mattingly was really upset with and I doubt he was all that surprised to be tossed.

Anonymous said...

Where is the video of the ejection at?

Double Down for Donuts said...

Not a fan of Kellogg, who did not eat his Wheaties that day obviously....No one is perfect, but come on, why eject Mattingly for that?

tmac said...

You can't leave your position to argue balls and strikes looks like Mattingly was warned several times and then ejected.

Donny baseball is a young manager (who at this rate will break Bobby Cox's record) that doesn't know what is permissable to say yet and as long as he keeps building a reputation of being a hard ass on stuff he's not going to get the benefit of the doubt on the small things he disputes.

Anonymous said...

@tmac,

I usually really appreciate what you have to say, but I'm questioning this one: "Donny Baseball is a young manager...(who) doesn't know what is permissable (sic)...."

Really? After playing for 13 years, working under Joe Torre for several years before managing, you don't think Don knows what'll get him run? I think he figured he'd get tossed, but it was worth it.

I will agree, though, that he won't get the benefit of the doubt just for being "Donnie Baseball."

Anonymous said...

ok, i didn't watch the game live but it looks like don and jeff both did very good jobs in this argument. Don is looking at his defense while apparently arguing with jeff, he may not have been arguing he may have just been firing his team up and jeff comes out to say "Ok don it's time to get started" then as jeff starts to walk away he turns back to see if don is still out there, sees that don is not leaving the mound so he gets run. This is just a theory, but it shows the ambiguity of what managers and umpires do to keep spectators thinking as to what is going on. Seeing as don never turned to jeff to look at him and argue, and being a professional umpire myself, i would think that jeff ran him for staying out there too long, and the fact that don may have been arguing balls and strikes on the mound or yelling about balls and strikes from the dugout gave him a shorter time to talk to his team on the mound. Again... just a theory...

tmac said...

@ anon... A professional umpire is probably not going to be a fan of calling all your infielders around for a pitching change/mound visit and blasting an umpire. Pitcher catcher manager umpire you don't need 4 infielders there... That part of it is a respect thing.... And under your idea an apprentice should always turn into a master when the master leaves. It's quite clear in some spots this season Mattingly is a novice in talking to umpires.

Torre almost NEVER argued balls and strikes. Mattingly disputes balls and strikes a lot. It is night and day with the two.

Curt Crowley said...

Here's the problem. Whatever Mattingly was saying, Kellogg was listening to it and participating in the conversation. At roughly the 20-21 sec mark, Kellogg starts to leave to return to HP, but then stops to stick his face back in the huddle one more time. That's when mattingly said whatever it was that got him tossed.

If Kellogg had taken his butt back where he belonged, there would have been no ejection. An umpire should not be allowed to participate in the argument, keep it going and then eject the manager for arguing. At some point, the manager stops being the aggressor.

UmpsRule said...

@ Curt Crowley

Actually, the problem here is that Mattingly is deceptively trying to make Kellogg look bad. I think we all know who Mattingly was really directing his ammunition at, and it wasn't one of his players. If Mattingly wants to bark at the umpire, he should go directly to him instead of being a coward.

BAPACop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Curt

Do you say the stuff you say just to make us umpires mad or do you actually mean the things you say?

wwjd said...

If of the six callable pitches five were correctly called why is there a balls strike exemption

Adam said...

thought it was a great ejection but I thought Mattingly did a great job as well. Mattingly knew that the longer he stayed out there Kellogg would eventually come out and instead of turning to Kellogg he yells in the direction of his players. Give the announcers credit they immediately picked up on what was happening. To an average baseball fan Kellogg looks like a fool and Mattingly an innocent victim. Mattingly knew he was gonna get tossed but people will be sympathetic toward him because of the perception. Kellogg was right to eject him and Mattingly looks like he has been wronged. Good job on all accounts by all parties.

Curt Crowley said...

UmpsRule, I get that. The question is whether Mattingly did it deceptively so that Kellogg would look bad when he threw him out, or did he do it deceptively to avoid showing Kellogg up so he could say what he had to say and not get tossed. No one can be sure, but I don't think mattingly is the "set up" kind of guy.

Either way, I'm neither defending nor criticizing Mattingly. I'm just saying Kellogg should have followed his first instinct which was to walk back to HP and leave mattingly standing there.

Curt Crowley said...

@4:54, you will have to narrow down what you mean by the "stuff I say.". If you are referring to my contention that Kellogg should have proceeded back to home plate, then yes I believe that. Apparently Kellogg believed it to, as he started to walk that way but stopped.

I didn't even mention the fact that Kellogg kept right on jawing post-ejection, much to the delight of lip readers everywhere. Kellogg should have shut his mouth and walked away. If that makes you mad, I do apologize. I must ask, though, do you also get mad when you read that directive in the manual, or is it just when I say it?

Anonymous said...

Curt

It just seems like almost everything you say is agaisnt umpires?

Anonymous said...

I would ball that marginal pitch based on the way the catcher pulled it.

Curt Crowley said...

@7:03, I understand that perception. When I say complimentary things about an umpire or agree with the way an umpire handled a situation, it just isn't memorable. Umpire-friendly comments simply blend in with what the majority is saying.

When I post comments that disagree with or criticize an umpire, everyone remembers it because it is in the minority. To make matters worse, there is always some wannabe poser pretending to be a professional umpire (such as Zac) who wants to jump in and lecture me and everyone else like he's Doug Friggin Harvey. That, of course, leads to follow-up comments, and the perception that I'm anti-umpire.

I've said nice things and/or agreed with Tschida, Nelson, Bellino, Porter, Holbrook and Eddings. It's not always negative.

Zac said...

Once again Curt "fanboy/rat" Crowley runs his fat mouth and shows us just how little he knows. I've never pretended to be a professional umpire, but I would bet I know how things work a hell of a lot better than you do.

Your "disagreeing/criticizing" is often made up of two things: personal attacks (Reyburn)and your contention that managers and players should be able to say and do whatever they want and the umpires should just turn and ignore them.

Once again with this clip, Mattingly knew exactly what he was doing and Kellogg didn't play his game. Just because you're "talking to the players" doesn't give you the right to say what you want. Kellogg went back to the huddle to tell him to wrap it up and give him one more chance to get off the mound, and Mattingly punched his ticket. Too bad for you Curt. Get your box of Kleenex.

Zac said...

I forgot this part of Curt's gem:
"If Kellogg had taken his butt back where he belonged, there would have been no ejection. An umpire should not be allowed to participate in the argument, keep it going and then eject the manager for arguing. At some point, the manager stops being the aggressor."

1. Kellogg belonged at the mound. You don't leave the mound and leave the catcher or the manager out there. Take the catcher with you and make sure the manager is headed to the dugout. Mattingly could have left when Kellogg was first out there but chose to stay. Whatever happens after that is on him.

2. Kellogg didn't keep it going. He clearly warned Mattingly and was going to go back to the plate until Mattingly wouldn't leave.

3. The manager stops being the aggressor when he gets his ass back in the dugout after a mound visit. Do that and you have nothing to worry about.

Try again, junior.

Bob Loblaw said...

Here's what you need to know, Curt (Which I hope isn't your real name given your knack for making a ass of yourself on this site)

Would I ever let a manager chew me out about something that BY RULE he may not leave his position to argue, while facing his players? Hell no.
Would any professional umpire I know? Hell no.

I know it may be difficult to see through your self-importance as a fan, but there comes a point where it doesn't matter what the fans in the stadium see. Imagine if I came to Subway and chewed you out in front of 5 coworkers for making my sandwich wrong-- When you choose to gather your players on the mound so they can have a front row seat of you chewing out the umpire, you also choose to accept the consequences. Even the broadcasters knew what was going on.

I'm not saying Mattingly did anything egregious or that he didn't have the right and/or obligation to do what he did. But so did Kellog. End of story.

But then again, maybe MLB should heed your advice and have the old lady in the nosebleeds decide wether or not the player/manager has "showed up" the umpire, and have this be the only grounds for ejection.

Bob Loblaw said...

And yes Curt, you are anti-umpire. When I see your name I immediately wonder what in the world you pulled out of your ass this time. I've never once seen one of these "nice things" you speak of. I don't need Zac's help or anyone else's because it's obvious you only ever have negative things to say from a narrow and frankly uninformed point of view. It's just, man... you just DON'T know what your talking about. All I can say. You just don't have a clue.

Curt Crowley said...

Well Bob, all I can say is that you are poorly informed. I can't help the fact that you don't read thoroughly. I also can't help the fact that you are too lazy to look at the ejections I cited where positive things were said.

Furthermore, most of my criticisms are aimed at conflict management errors, not calls themselves. If you believe that umpires have a license to shine their asses post-ejection, that's fine. You are fool if you believe that, but you've got the right to be wrong. Not only do I say that's wrong, but so does baseball.

You and Little League Zac might do better to address the issues raised in *this* ejection, not some generalized (incorrect) view of my comments on other posts.

Re this particular ejection, it appeared to me that Mattingly took great pains to not show up Kellogg and say what he had to say. Mattingly's post-game comments support this. Kellogg actually participated in the discussion for a while. It just did not appear to be a big deal. Mattingly was under the impression that he got tossed because he eventually turned toward Kellogg, thereby "showing him up." Mattingly did not do this until Kellogg leaned in after beginning to leave.

Given Mattingly's explanation and the video, it appears that Kellogg did not eject Mattingly for anything he said while looking at his players, and that it was Mattingly's actions in turning toward Kellogg that caused the ejection. That would not have happened if Kellogg had not changed his mind and added one more bit of commentary.

My assessment of Kellogg's performance was admittedly colored by his post-ejection conduct. However, I recognize that your analysis of the events leading up to the ejection, while different from mine, is reasonable. Also, I do not mean to imply that Kellogg is a crappy umpire, or that he is one of the MLB problem children. His last ejection was 2 years ago, and he was similarly hostile with Francona. But losing one's temper at work twice in 2 years is a pretty good record in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

There's just one problem with that theory... Kellogg ejected Mattingly BEFORE Mattingly turned toward Kellogg. Mattingly was ejected while still looking at his players, so it wasn't the action of "turning toward Kellogg."

UmpsRule said...

What I don't understand is why people keep saying that Kellogg wanted Mattingly to go back to the dugout. He in the middle of a pitching change, not just a mound visit, and he was waiting for the new pitcher.

Anonymous said...

@ Curt Does anyone not think that what kellogg may have said before he walked off was "Ok Don, Let's go." Then as he walked off and saw that Don wasn't leaving the mound when he looked back he said "Come on don, let's go!" Then Don in response said something along the lines of "I'm not going anywhere!" And then got ejected. I've seen this happen several times, you don't want to stick your head in that conversation on the mound but you don't want the manager to sit there and rip you while you are out there in front of 6 players. Easy way to take care of that one, kellogg wasn't turning back to put in another comment, he was making sure don was walking off the mound.

UmpsRule said...

@ Anon 6:31

Yes, I strongly think that Kellogg was not telling Mattingly to go back to the dugout. After all, he was in the middle of a pitching change.

Anonymous said...

Curt,

Im sure you have been asked this a bunch of times already on this site but have you ever umpired a game in your life?

Double Down for Donuts said...

I thought we're supposed to discuss calls as we see them as aspiring umpires? I think half of the conversation (rather, vehement arguments) above should be deleted (in my opinion, of course). I'm not sure what that adds to this discussion.

Russ said...

Nice story and video about the Kellogg crew visiting a St Louis hospital as part of the Umps Care program.

http://fox2now.com/2012/07/24/mlb-umps-bring-smiles-to-children-in-hospital/

Anonymous said...

As an umpire I pray that some of the posters that are saying they are umpires are not really umpires. I do not want to believe that this stuff was written by real umpires. I keep seeing comments where umpires are defending bad conduct by major league umpires. Same people every time too. If you really are an umpire you owe it to the profession to be honest and not defend stuff you know is wrong. Not saying anything would be better than being a mouthpiece.

Why does the same group want to jump on crowley when he is not proumpire. I disagree with him sometimes and agree with him other times but he adds to the forum b/c his posts are logical and intelligent even if I dont agree. Sometimes he is on the umpire's side and sometimes not. He adds more to this forum than the umpires on here that always say our brothers in blue are right even when they are not.

Please grow up people. The public reads this and thinks what a bunch of aholes. This awful personal and arrogant stuff you write affects us all.

Anonymous said...

I retract my 631 am statement as I didn't watch the game and was giving Kellogg the benefit of the doubt there. In which case I think it does look bad that Kellogg did look back at mattingly after he Bahamas to walk off. However there are some things that will give you an automatic ticket out of the game, did mattingoy say this? Well we can't be sure unless we see the ejection report because mattingly stayed looking away from Kellogg and the camera however whether he was oor was not looking at him when he said this, if in fact he did, has no regard in terms of whether or not he should be ejected for saying it. But yes it does look bad that Kellogg did look back and there are better ways to handle the ejection than Kellogg did, but he is an MLB crew chief and I'm only in a ball so who am I to judge him. All I can say is I probably would not have handled this situation like this.

Russ said...

This is off-topic, but Wally Bell is working for Jerry Layne on his crew. The crew is Bell,Vanover,Bellino and Carapazza. Does anybody know who the CC is? I think Vanover has a few more years of service, but Bell has a better playoff record and I think they take that into account ala Everitt being acting CC over Schreiber last week

Mike said...

I think it's funny the way you all rip on people for "defending players" while at the same time saying umpires are "never wrong" regardless of what their actions are.

Zac said...

Rat Crowley said:
"You and Little League Zac might do better to address the issues raised in *this* ejection, not some generalized (incorrect) view of my comments on other posts."

And I'm the one that has poor reading skills? I posted TWICE (9:16 and 9:23) and directly addressed your comments about this ejection. I guess you just skipped over those? Since I've pulled your head out of your lower orifice now, do you care to address those and tell me where I'm wrong? Probably not, as you'll come up with some witty Little League comment again, like that hasn't been worn out already.

It must suck coaching 9U girl's softball while having delusions of being Mattingly or Ozzie Guillen.

Dan said...

Not to excuse Mattingly's behavior, which will get you thrown out every time, but that looked like a strike to me.

Curt Crowley said...

Zac, between me and you, only one of us is a failed baseball coach.

Curt Crowley said...

Oh and Zac, if you want to know where you're wrong, your 9:16 comment is a good place to start. You stated that Kellogg was telling Mattingly to leave the field. Another comment of yours also stated that it was Kellogg's job to end this "mound visit" and make sure mattingly left the field. WRONG.

As others have pointed out, this wasn't a mound visit, it was a pitching substitution. Mattingly was entitled to be at the mound at that time. Go find another faulty premise upon which to build your argument.

I didn't respond to your 9:16 comment because it was based on a false premise. It's not my job to educate you.

If you would read what other people have written instead of chasing me down looking for a fight, you could avoid errors like this.

Anonymous said...

One a side note, I think Mike Winters just tossed Chicago's manager Dale Sveum in the top of the 8th.

Bearded Beast said...

To say that Kellogg has no right to be at the mound is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Give me a break! The coach's time was up and it was time to play baseball.

@Curt, So what if Kellogg walked back to HP and Mattingly was still on the mound, talking to his players?! Are we going to have an unnecessary delay because he wont' get off the mound?!

Jeff gives Don plenty of space to voice his opinion. But acting like a fool, no matter if its towards the umpires face or towards the entire infield, will get that ass ran every time!

Curt Crowley said...

AGAIN, it was a SUBSTITUTION, ****not a conference at the mound.****. Mattingly's time wasn't "up.". Get it?

If you don't believe me or the others who have stated this fact, go look at the box score.

I never said Kellogg "had no right" to be at the mound. Presumably, Kellogg can be wherever he desires during a substitution. What I said was that *Mattingly* had the right to be where he was.

My only initial criticism of Kellogg was running his head back into the huddle after he first started to walk away. That's it. The rest of this discussion has been fence post Zac arguing with me because he doesn't know the difference between a pitching change and a conference at the mound.

Anonymous said...

Look, Curt is right about that fact, it WAS a pitching change, Mattingly had the baseball and was waiting for his reliever to run in from the bullpen. He had a reason to be out there and wasn't wasting excess time, he was just waiting for a sub to enter. That said, the only miscue in this ejection was Kellogg turning his head away and then back in. To the common fan and i guess Curt thinks so too, it looks like he was done with the meeting, then came back looking for trouble and found it. When you umpire, sure, there's a desire to break up e argument

Anonymous said...

(continued), but you also can't get caught in a "baited" ejection, like Paul Schrieber and Russell Martin last year in Tampa Bay. It just looks bad on camera to fans who don't know what the manager said to get tossed. If you eject here, it should be when you're still part of the mound visit, not after you take a step to walk away. It just looks more defendable on tape.

Zac said...

Rat Crowley said:
"Zac, between me and you, only one of us is a failed baseball coach."

Really? I didn't say you failed. Just said you are a rat. I'm sure you could be a good coach, but a rat at the same time.

As for this ejection...

Yes, Mattingly was at the mound for a pitching change. I did not know that at first and I was wrong about that part. With that said, it still doesn't change anything. Kellogg was presumably there to ask Mattingly if he was going to make a change or not. When it became apparent Mattingly was making the change, Mattingly let Kellogg know what he thought of that last pitch. (Arguing balls and strikes...you know that thing that's against the rules) Kellogg told him to cut it out and was going to leave, but Mattingly kept going. It was going to happen whether Kellogg stayed out there or went back near home plate. If Kellogg goes to the plate, Mattingly was not going to let up as he left the field.

This one's still on Mattingly, something that is becoming a trend this year.

Zac said...

Bearded Beast:
"@Curt, So what if Kellogg walked back to HP and Mattingly was still on the mound, talking to his players?! Are we going to have an unnecessary delay because he wont' get off the mound?!"

I forgot about this post. Mattingly was going to stay at the mound until he got tossed no matter what. If Kellogg turns around and goes back to the plate, Mattingly was going to stand there and talk to the relief pitcher until Kellogg came back to get them moving, and Mattingly was going to blast him again. Mattingly was going to do everything possible to make Kellogg look like the aggressor here.

Post a Comment