Saturday, July 7, 2012

Ejections 084, 085: Sam Holbrook (3, 4)

1B Umpire Sam Holbrook ejected Brewers pitcher Zack Greinke and Brewers Manager Ron Roenicke for arguing a safe call in the bottom of the 1st inning of the Brewers-Astros game. With one on and none out, Astros batter Jose Altuve hit a 1-1 slider from Greinke to Brewers first baseman Corey Hart (who threw to Greinke covering first) for an infield single. Replays indicate that Greinke's foot did not touch first base prior to Altuve's foot touching first base, the call was correct. At the time of the ejections, the Astros were leading, 1-0. The Astros ultimately won the contest, 6-3.

These are Sam Holbrook (34)'s third and fourth ejection of 2012.
Sam Holbrook now has 16 points in the UEFL (8 Previous + 2 MLB + 2*[2 Correct Call] = 16).
Crew Chief Joe West now has 4 points in the Crew Division (2 Previous + 2*[1 Correct Call] = 4).
*After review, Quality of Correctness has been affirmed by the UEFL Appeals Board (4-0-1).
*Historical Appeals Board decisions may be consulted via the UEFL Portal.*

UEFL Standings Update

These are the 84th and 85th ejections of 2012.
This is the 33rd player ejection of 2012.
This is the 43rd Manager ejection of 2012.
Greinke's final line was 0.0 IP, 1 ER, 2 H
This is Zack Greinke's first ejection since September 24, 2009 (Greg Gibson; QOC = Incorrect).
This is Ron Roenicke's first ejection since June 20, 2011 (Bob Davidson; QOC = Incorrect).
These are the Brewers' second and third ejections of 2012.

Wrap: Brewers at Astros 7/7/12
Video: Greinke spikes ball after close play at first; Holbrook quickly shows Greinke and Roenicke the door
Video: Holbrook ejects Brewers duo, Roenicke and HP Umpire Joe West jaw as manager exits field


Was Holbrook right to eject Greinke for spiking the ball?

132 comments :

kickersrule said...

http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120707&content_id=34654470&vkey=news_mil&c_id=mil

video

Russ said...

This is an absolute joke of an ejection. Greinke is mad at himself. He did not say one word to Holbrook and Sam decides to show him who's boss and throw him out. Can you get an equipment fine for spiking a ball? I know the ball is not equipment but that just seems like it would be much more appropriate here because while he should not have spiked the baseball, he was not arguing the call.

Anonymous said...

Greinke had only thrown 4 pitches before he was ejected. The announcers said the record is 2 pitches, but I couldn't catch the name of the pitcher - fairly recent.

Lots of "tie goes to the runner" comments. Although it is a matter of religious fervor for umpires to say at moments such as this that there is no such thing as a tie. As was explained in the OP, the defense has to get there BEFORE the runner, per rule. It is like the old number lines in grade school math that illustrated "less than" and "less than or equal to". If the defense gets there AT THE SAME TIME ("a tie") it is not BEFORE and the runner is safe by rule. There is no higher horse am umpire can mount from which to prattle on about the myth of the tie, but technically that it certainly what the rule implies.

Russ said...

BTW, those are Astros announcers on the video who are saying bad Umpiring so they are not even being homers.

Anonymous said...

That's what the Astros broadcasters were saying. They didnt think and I dont think that warrents an ejection. Ive seen a lot worse. But yes, that was an absolute joke. Yes, he shouldnt have spiked it but that in no way caused any harm and dont think it showed Holbrook up.

Anonymous said...

West told Roenicke "Go f*** yoruself" at the end of the video. So uncalled for.

Anonymous said...

^ He did? i cant read lips. I doubt west thinks holbrook is best man now that hernandez is gone haha

Anonymous said...

It was John Lackey who got thrown out after two pitches I think in May 2009

WillPalmer said...

^^ Correct, he got tossed after throwing behind Ian Kinsler's dome. And guess who tossed him, the one and only Bob Davidson

Anonymous said...

It was Bob Davidson making the right call, too.

Anonymous said...

Looks like roenicke said something very uncalled for to west. West double checked and said ” excuse me!?”.

Russ said...

I completely agreed with Davidson throwing out Lackey in that situation. Out of the first two pitches, one was way inside and the other was behind Kinsler so it looked intentional. I am not a big Davidson fan, but he was right back then.

Anonymous said...

If Altuve had spiked his helmet out of frustration - batting average just now dipped below .300, nine game losing streak, the Astros haven't caught a break in a month, etc,etc - he still would have gotten tossed for equipment abuse. It is hard to tell when players throw tantrums exactly whom they are angry at.

But if the Astros announcers (Bill Brown and Jimmy Deshaies) said it was an unwarranted ejection, I'd have to take their word for it. They are two of the best in the game and rarely if ever act like "homers"

WillPalmer said...

@Russ: Agreed. Dont really like the guy but he got it right.

Anonymous said...

Everyone lets not forget grienke only threw 4 pitches, then got ejected by Holbrook. He could possibly pitch tom before the all star break. Oh yea, Holbrook is tomorrow's home plate umpire.

Anonymous said...

Spiking the baseball because you disagree with a call is automatic. See ya later.

But go ahead and defend the player who acted like a 9 year old child who did not get his way. Doesn't matter if he threw 4 pitches or 100. Act like a spoiled brat and a disgrace to the game, get out of here.

Anonymous said...

That ump needs to miss a few games and relearn his job.

Anonymous said...

It's the equivalent of a ballhandler, called for a violation, spiking the basketball. Some officials will call a T everytime. But in my experience, the great majority of the time the player is frustrated, mad at himself, and it has nothing to do with the official. Unless Greinke made some comment, I would assume that his spike was his frustration with two misplays in a row - one of which was his late reaction in covering the bag. Too quick a trigger, most likely.

Anonymous said...

I'm challenging this.

It looks to me like Greinke's foot downs the bag before Altuve's foot does.

Anonymous said...

I do not see how anybody can defend this. This is no different than a hitter drawing a line or spiking his helmet after striking out looking. Automatic EJ. If you put it on me to decide if you are upset at my call or upset at yourself, you will not like the result. Had to watch the video again to catch West's parting shot. Classic.

Anonymous said...

Can't argue the call. In real time that's a tough one. On the video it appears Greinke's foot is there a split second before the BR's. The ejection, however, was a gross miss. Absolutely BRUTAL!!!

Zac said...

Standard anonymous fan at 4:13 who thinks the players should be able to do and say what they please with no consequences. This is the standard fanboy line when an umpire even dares make a call that impacts the game, whether right or wrong. Idiot.

Anonymous said...

Great job Sam send him to the showers You never show up an Umpire

Jeremy Dircks said...

This ruling has been challenged and is under review by the UEFL Appeals Board.

Jeremy Dircks said...

Disagreeing with the call and ejection is perfectly fine, however these name callings will absolutely not be tolerated. If they were directed at a player, they'd be deleted too. Vulgarity directed at anybody (including umpires) will be deleted, as will threats made toward anybody.

Stop with the threats and the vulgar name calling because I'll delete it every time.

Anonymous said...

A player spiking a ball or bat or helmet or anything after a bang-bang call -- the ejection is as close to automatic as they come.

Though I have still yet to see one, I still maintain that "TIE GOES TO THE UMPIRE!"

Bob Loblaw said...

Lmao at all you armchair commissioners out for blood. In the real world, it's standard practice to disallow the spiking of the baseball in protest of a call. --Anyone who thinks Greinke didn't say anything to Holbrook is a raving idiot-- Apparently you didn't notice but there were FOUR SECONDS between the act and the ejection. FOUR SECONDS!!! Obviously he said something.

So let me get this straight, morons. You really, like honestly believe that Sam Holbrook, 16 year MLB veteran, longer than most of you have been alive, is out there making shit up and running people whenever he feels like it?? All because Greinke put on a little show for you and played innocent??? Really??!! Im dying lauging over here! What did you guys expect him to do? Admit to what he said and apologize kindly before jogging off the field???

Seriously! I want an answer! I wanna know just what it is (or isn't) a person could have going through their head to buy into this crap. Do you also think pro wrestling is real? How about the tooth fairy? Bigfoot?

UmpsRule said...

I think the Greinke ejection was rather quick, meaning that the Roenicke ejection would be almost inevitable. That's about as close a play as there is, and I can understand Greinke's frustration. Spiking the ball was still a dumb move, but I'm not sure it warranted an ejection. However, it isn't as blatantly bad as a large contingent of the clueless media would want you to believe. As for West, he appears to have regained back some of the weight he lost last season.

UmpsRule said...

As for the remark by the Houston announcer that if Holbrook had his way, he would eject the whole club, that demolishes all of the broadcaster's credibility regarding the incident.

With regards to the Milwaukee announcer asking what happens when a batter does that, how often does a batter throw the baseball to the ground? And if you want to say he was talking about the batter equivalent of throwing the ball, which I guess would be spiking the helmet, just listen to the remarks by the same announcer in this clip: http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=15162413&c_id=mlb

BAPACop said...

The timing of Greinke's ejection leads me to believe he was not tossed for spiking the ball. If he was tossed for that, I think the ejection would have been quicker. Instead it takes a second or so, which leads me to believe Greinke said something to Holbrook.

As for Roenicke's ejection, I'm not certain what he was doing out there. He can't be defending Greinke as Greinke's already out of the game. So he must be arguing the call. Now, that wasn't even a "bang-bang" play, that was more of just a "bang" play. That's probably as close to a tie as you are ever going to see. So there is no way Roenicke could see that play from sitting in the dugout better than Holbrook could see from where he was standing.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how much money Sam Holbrook made today for denying so many clubs a chance at looking at a soon to be free agent Cy Young winner before the trade deadline. I'd imagine some bigwig Yankee exec shelled out a cool hundred Gs.

Anonymous said...

Little League

Anonymous said...

Should Greinke have been tossed by Holbrook?

Yes.


9.5%



No.


90.5%

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1250631-zack-greinke-spiking-points-to-thin-skinned-mlb-umpires

Anonymous said...

@UmpsRule- the Houston Announcer was Jimmy Deshaies - a former pitcher for the Astros circa 1986. He is one of the best in the game - the complete antithesis of a "homer". He is very objective and has the utmost credibility since his opinions are well founded. Th basis of his opinion is that fans don't pay admission to see the umpire perform and gesticulate. He himself probably wanted to see a quality pitcher pitch and from his viewpoint it was obvious Greinke was mad at himself. It was the functional equivalent of a batter slamming his bat down after popping up with the bases loaded or slamming his helmet down after crossing first with a GIDP. The spiking occurred completely behind the umpire's back and the "context" of the outburst was not seen/

UmpsRule said...

@ Anon 6:39

I know he is a good announcer. I never called him a homer. His opinion that Holbrook wanted to eject the entire Milwaukee team is still utterly ridiculous. The Greinke ejection was questionable, but I don't doubt that Roenicke deserved to go.

UmpsRule said...

Also @ Anon 6:39

There is precedent for a player being ejected for throwing a helmet after being called out at one of the bases.

Ryan Braun, twice (http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=15162413&c_id=mil) and (http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=6258065&c_id=mil)

Chris Johnson, see embedded video (http://www.closecallsports.com/2012/05/ejection-043-tim-tschida-1.html)

Gerardo Parra, (http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=10413199&c_id=mlb)

Michael Bourn, (http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=5873835&c_id=mlb)

Jacoby Ellsbury, (http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=5519155&c_id=mlb)

Nyjer Morgan, although I'm not as sure about this one (http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=4838991&c_id=mlb)

Ian Desmond, (http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=8689215&c_id=mlb)

Anonymous said...

Edited to add: the Bleacher Report article makes mention of Greinke having a social anxiety disorder that I was not previously aware of. With that in mind, I have absolutely no doubt that he was venting frustration with himself (didn't get over quick enough to cover first) as opposed to "showing up the umpire". He definitely should have had a reprieve.

Also with that in mind, Greinke is not a limelight pitcher. He can thrive in a small market media backwater. Anything more intense than KC or Milwaukee would be too intense for his psyche.

Anonymous said...

This reminded me of oswalts ejection a couple years ago by Hohn. Both players are mad at themselves and the ump ejects them

UmpsRule said...

@ Anon 7:12

That's a very fair point and deserves to be mentioned. However, I don't really think Sam Holbrook can be reasonably expected to take that into account.

Anonymous said...

Having listened to Deshaies for many years, his point was that Holbrook was so full of himself that he would eject the entire team if he could find the opportunity and find nothing wrong with that. Watching the replay, Deshaies was more vociferous in his objection to Greinke's ejection than were the Milwaukee announcers. He demonstrates a sense of "fair play" with his commentary. Fans come to see the players play and the umpires need to go the extra yard to stay in the background. Deshaies has nothing but disdain for those umpires who insist on wearing their egos on their sleeves for all to see.

kickersrule said...

If this play gets ruled as incorrect I want to be taken out of this league. I am a huge brewer fan and I still think he was safe. I want my 8 points and be put into 1st place.

kickersrule said...

http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/index.jsp?gid=2012_07_07_milmlb_houmlb_1&highlight_content_id=22921149&c_id=mil

here is the brewers feed.
Brian Anderson is a good annoucer. however bill schroder who was a horrible back up catcher for the brewers in the 80's is a perfect example of how players should not be annoucers. Just taken jobs away from people that actually go to school for broadcasting.

Big Marc said...

Ok, the pitcher is mad at himself. I'll go with that. About what exactly? The runner was faster and plain beat the pitcher. Why is the pitcher mad at himself? About his own speed? Mad about the safe? If he was safe, why would he be mad? So if he gets mad, he's mad why? Why?

He thinks the umpire missed the call, that's what made him mad. It could be nothing else. The pitcher did nothing wrong fundamentally on this play, he cannot be mad at himself, no way.
Good call.
Sam waited because he didnt' want to eject on this play, but he quickly thought about it, and he knew he HAD to eject.
If Sam doesn't eject on this play, he has no leg to stand on the rest of the year. He just cannot let 1 player do it, bad precedent.

The line has been drawn, this is a clear message to the players, throwing anything after a close call for any reason is not allowed.

Anonymous said...

Those fans paid good money to see Sam Holbrook umpire and they got their money's worth!!!

Pete said...

I'm going to agree with Big Marc on this one. Four pitches into the game, the pitcher can be frustrated. sure. Knuckle down and throw the 70-80 more pitches for your night's work. Don't spike a ball or mouth off to give any reason for the ump to throw you out. Eight more innings to go, and your team is not out of the game. Keep yourself in the game.

This ejection is right on the borderline of what is acceptable, but it is correct. As Sam, you have to set the precedent that this behavior is not going to be tolerated.

UmpAtty said...

Tie goes to the runner - Greinke didn't get there before Altuve - And the ejection for tossing equipment is, as someone said previously, pretty close to automatic.

Turducken said...

Anyone else notice how Ron Roenicke is generally demonstrative towards umpires? I can recant on at least two situations, more notably the Ryan Braun/Campos ejection last year [the Davidson ejection on the Morgan HBP was bad, too.]?

Anonymous said...

And the fans don't go to a game to see the highest payed player and 8 year veteran on the team at $13.5m who hesitates going to first on a ball hit to the right side (and as a right handed pitcher who falls off to the first base side to start with) who cannot beat a right handed batter by a mile to the base.
Then, they perform and gesticulate their error or the call by throwing the ball on the ground and getting ejected for showing up the game itself, and the umpire, like a whining baby.
They hesitated in the first place. Play the game right. Should be taken out of the game by themselves or the manager for these boneheaded plays that fans do not come to see. And a manager who supports a player who makes this basic fundamental error show no credibility whatsoever. They have been doing this play to 1st base from day 1 in the pro system and there is no excuse for even coming close to being beaten to 1st base.

Curt Crowley said...

Holbrook's decision to eject was close enough that it's hard to argue with. Even if the spiking was caused by self-frustration and not the call, there is just no way for Holbrook to know that.

Joe West, on the other hand, looked like crap chasing behind Roenicke with his jowls in full-flop mode.

Just get back there and umpire, Joe.

jovan b. said...

Wrong. The record is 0 pitches thrown. The Rays had someone ejected (that person was subsequently suspended 8 games) for having a foreign substance on the glove.

I don't know about starting pitchers, but that is for all pitchers (starting and relief).

Anonymous said...

And they made 2 throwing errors in this game. Even the Astros made 2 errors. Fans don't go to games to see errors.

Anonymous said...

AT THE MINIMUM, THIS CALL SHOULD BE RULED INCONCLUSIVE. INCONCLUSIVE. INCONCLUSIVE. THERE IS NO PROOF THAT ALTUVE'S FOOT TOUCHED BE4 GRINGE'S FOOT.

Anonymous said...

PBUC ejection standards: "Throwing equipment in disgust over an umpire’s call may be grounds for ejection. If the umpire deems the action severe, the umpire may eject the offender. If league regulations permit, the umpire may instead warn the offender by issuing an equipment violation. If issued, the offender is to be notified immediately."

I don't believe MLB has an equipment violation for throwing the game baseball; hence, it can possibly be an ejection "if the umpire deems the action severe."

Jett said...

Okay, for the sake of umpire argument, assume the pitcher is angry at himself and spikes the ball. In basketball, we've been instructed to call the technical foul for a spiked ball that flies unarrested, generally neck-level or higher. Frustrated players acceptably control their "spikes" by catching the ball on its way up, around waist-high. There is no call to make if a spike is controlled.

In football, celebratory spikes are most common; all others may be deemed unsportsmanlike and directed at an official, especially if a referee or judge has just had a close call. Such out-of-place spikes draw flags.

In baseball, the spiked ball is not generally addressed; in lieu, the spiked helmet may be an ejection, throwing a bat may be one too. It all depends how severely the umpire judges the offense. As for a spiked baseball, chest-high suggests a strong throw into the ground, and in the atmosphere of a close or controversial call, the action can be misconstrued.

Anonymous said...

Fantasy team = screwed. Greinke's line is 1 ER in 0.0 IP? ERA of INFINITY? :(

Ben said...

Was the play still live when Grienke spiked the ball? The fact that this particular play involved a ball instead of a helmet makes it an even stranger play. What happens if Grienke's spike winds up in right field? This alone might explain Holbrook's delay in giving him the hook.

Anonymous said...

If you disagree with the ejection, go back to coaching and leave the umpiring to us. If you throw something in disapproval,(why else would he be throwing the ball into the ground?)it should be automatic as it was in this case. This was and always should be an ejection. Simple ejection. I dont care what his issues or possible problems may be. Quit throwing stuff and i'll let you stay in my game.

As for the rule the RUNNER must beat the DEFENSE, not the other way around. So if this was a TIE, the runner should have been called out, not safe. Blown call.

From MLB website:

7.01 A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it BEFORE he is out.
7.01 shows that the runner MUST beat the defense in order to be ruled safe. If it is a tie, then he did NOT beat the defense so he should be ruled out.

FGF

Anonymous said...

What is the record for fastest ejected manager at the beginning of a game. I know someone (bobby cox?) was ejected at the conference at home plate, but what is the soonest after the game actually starts

Anonymous said...

anonymous at 4:41 above

"As for the rule the RUNNER must beat the DEFENSE, not the other way around. So if this was a TIE, the runner should have been called out, not safe. Blown call.

From MLB website:

7.01 A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it BEFORE he is out.
7.01 shows that the runner MUST beat the defense in order to be ruled safe. If it is a tie, then he did NOT beat the defense so he should be ruled out."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From MLB website

What about 6:05j concerning the batter and then batter runner when they hit the ball.

6.05j "After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged "BEFORE" he touches first base.

6.05j shows that the fielder MUST beat the offense in order to be ruled out. If it is a tie, then he did NOT beat the offense so he should be ruled safe."

Why was 6.05j conveniently left out from the original posting.

So, which official interpretation has MLB decided to side with on a perfect .aka. "tie" play and where is that in the rulebook? This would be an extremely rare occurrance statistically speaking. How many races are there all over and how many perfect "aka ties" are there using all the video technology available.

Anonymous said...

The problem I have with this ejection is that you don't see every batter/runner who slams his helmut down after being called out at first ejected.

Too many quick ejections the last several years.

Anonymous said...

[Then, they perform and gesticulate their error or the call by throwing the ball on the ground and getting ejected for showing up the game itself, and the umpire]

Yep, only umpires are allowed to show up players, managers and the game. These players should know this by now!

Just get back there and umpire!

Anonymous said...

anon 6:48

If you were an umpire, you wouldnt have to have this explained to you. Get out.

FGF

Anonymous said...

FGF???

Anonymous said...

not going to explain. You should know.

UmpsRule said...

Seems more than a little classless to blast someone for asking a rules-related question.

UmpsRule said...

Interestingly enough, Greinke is starting again today, with Holbrook behind the plate.

Zac said...

Some of you need to leave the umpiring to those of us who have a clue. The "Get back there and umpire" and "No one came to see you" stuff is what inexperienced coaches and fans spout off about.

With that said, after finally watching the video, I am not 100 percent sure Greinke spiked the ball because he was mad at Holbrook. The problem is that by spiking it (And that was a hell of a spike), he leaves himself open to being tossed. Don't lose your composure in the first inning over a whacker at first that he got right, and you don't have to worry about hitting the showers early.

Anonymous said...

Zac, I love the double standard. If a coach or player tells an umpire to "get back there and umpire" they are spouting off. But when an umpire tells a pitcher or manager to just "play the game" or whatever it's gospel.

I also love the whole "don't show up an umpire" mentality but then you see plenty of umpires showing up players and managers all the time.

Players play, coaches coach, umpires umpire.

Anonymous said...

Indeed, I stand corrected. I thought to OP had it right. In addition there is rule 7.08 (e) which says that a runner is out if he does not reach the base he is forced to BEFORE he or the base is tagged. Thus I had it precisely wrong. By rule and logical extension, a tie goes to the DEFENSE. The replay clearly shows Altuve did NOT reach the bag BEFORE Greinke did.

Anonymous said...

To qualify this post, I'll just point out that I've umped baseball and reffed basketball for about 10 years now. You can't prove that, since I'm anon, but it's true.

Several people have pointed out that in basketball, a ball spike is an auto T. Yep, that's true. But only if he doesn't control it and/or is demonstrative about it. And it's usually not a T for the argument--it's a T for *delay of game*. And it's never an ejection.

In terms of baseball, the announcer made an excellent point: Nothing happens to the batter if he makes a similar demonstration after striking out. He SPIKES the helmet, yes. But if he throws his bat and helmet toward the dugout...nothing.

Did Greinke leave himself open for the ejection here, I'm not going to argue that. But he did about every possible thing he could have to avoid it. He turned away from the umpire, he didn't open his mouth (I think. Replay is inconclusive. He might just be a fantastic ventriloquist). He didn't delay the game, because the ball was still in play--he was actually putting his team at risk.

More often than not, you can tell whether the frustration is directed at you, the official. Sometimes it's blatant (I got shoved reffing basketball after I made the call), sometimes it's less blatant (Kid turning away to talk to the coach but directing everything at you). Are there gray areas? Yes. Was this one of them? I don't think so. I think Holbrook had a quick hook, but the fault here does lie a large part with Greinke.

UmpAtty said...

"How many races are there all over and how many perfect "aka ties" are there using all the video technology available."

ESPN did a semi-scientific study a few years back and found that, on average, in 1 out of every 6 MLB games played there is a play that is so close it cannot be resolved even with the aid of slow motion replay.

Technically, 6.05(j) applies to plays at first base only; 7.08(e) applies to force plays at any other base. Ties at 1st base (only) go to the runner.

Anonymous said...

@UmpAtty - I finally figured out why I haven't been able to remember to whom the technical tie goes to since the rule book is not internally consistent between rule 7.08 (e) and 6.05 (j).
I wonder if this is one of the 256 some odd mistakes in the rule book. It is hard to see why a distinction was intended. The problem is, the rules define when a RUNNER is safe in obtaining the next base versus when a BATTER-RUNNER is put out at first base. The structure of the phrasing is very similar, but the yin/yang of defense/offense technically changes to whom the tie goes.

Anonymous said...

DJ Reyburn just tossed Robin Ventura for arguing balls and strikes in the 9th inning of the Jays at Whitesox game

jdbr78 said...

I wish mlb would do something about Hawk. He is a mouthy, ignorant, worthless pos & a huge black eye to the game of baseball. He has spent the last three innings blatantly accusing DJ Reyburn of purposely cheating the White Sox. I mean to the point he bitches about a pitch, they put up KZone it shows the pitch as a strike, he keeps bitching. Unreal classless pos.

I would like to see Reyburns plot when the game is over.

Anonymous said...

Not a lot of ejections this year in my opinion pretty low for a first half. Though we might get another 100 or more ejections 2nd half

Curt Crowley said...

jdbr78, that "mouthy, ignorant, worthless pos" accomplished more in his first year in the league than you will in a lifetime.

Among the things Hawk has achieved that you never will, is actually participating in a major league baseball game on the field.

Not a white sox fan, but your comments about Hawk Haralson are outrageous.

Sean said...

Kudos to Greinke for not losing his cool after being ejected. Its a tough call to make to eject a guy for spiking a ball when there's a possibility he was mad at himself. The second time I watched it, I believe he was mad at himself. Especially after his reaction to the ejection.

tmac said...

here is the DJ reyburn plot.. looks friggin awesome to me!!

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/zoneplot.php-pitchSel=all&game=gid_2012_07_08_tormlb_chamlb_1&sp_type=1&s_type=7.gif

Zac said...

Anon @ 12:49: I don't recall ever telling a player or coach to "Play the game". That is a new one on me. Too bad for you, but the rules give the umpire latitude to eject for unsportsmanlike behavior. When umpires tell coaches or players to cut the bullsh*t, that is a warning, but to you, that is the umpire "showing up" a player. Then you're one of these fanboy clowns who say the umpire had a short fuse and didn't warn the player. Which is it? You can't have it both ways.

Please show some examples of umpires "showing up" players. If it happens so often I'm sure you won't have any trouble with it.

When players and coaches keep their mouths shut, umpires don't have to respond and everyone can play the game like it was intended.

Zac said...

The fanboys will tell us that Reyburn's plot doesn't matter, he is still terrible. Then they'll tell us they want to use the computer to call balls and strikes. They can't make up their minds.

Anonymous said...

Joe West Laz Diaz, Alfonso Marquez, Chris Guccione

Anonymous said...

Tim McClelland, Wally Bell Sam Holbrook Adrian Johnson

Anonymous said...

Change the crews!!!!

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 7:42, 7:44 and 7:45 -- can't you just go away!

Anonymous said...

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=21959223&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=21456561&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=21281083&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=19673317&c_id=mlb

This call brought to you by AT&T... http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=18217807&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=17774407&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=16656437&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=16492409&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=16111651&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=15095195&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=14523967&c_id=mlb

The umpiring crew to ever call a balk...
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11937109&c_id=mlb

Nice little wave...
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11838637&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=8644359&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=8366649&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=6527577&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=6014957&c_id=mlb

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=4551735&c_id=mlb

But Zac, you're right. Umpires never show anybody up..

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 8:44


NOPE

Tim Welke, Bill Miller, Paul Emmel, Chad Fairchild

Anonymous said...

Joe West, Bill Hohn, Angel Campos, Rob Drake= ejections galore

Anonymous said...

Bad Santa, Sam Holbrook, Bruce Froemming, harry potter

Anonymous said...

^ LOL

Anonymous said...

Harry potter to clint hurdle , expameromis = ejected

Anonymous said...

Ron Weasly, AAA fill in, Mr. Bean, AAA fill in. HAHAHa

Anonymous said...

Great videos posted by Anon. Joe Wests' crew should be given 25 to life.

Anonymous said...

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17rwut8rogd6jjpg/original.jpg

^ go get em boys your outta there

Anonymous said...

http://deadspin.com/better-know-an-umpire/

nice site

Anonymous said...

Keep it up Hawk!!! WHat are you doing WEGNER HAHA !!!

Anonymous said...

^ good site

Anonymous said...

If you check the site though, its say's that all umpires are hated in different ball parks?

Anonymous said...

Leyland to schreiber don't touch magglio!!!!!! May 2009

Anonymous said...

http://www.seattlepi.com/sports/baseball/article/Mariners-find-a-new-way-to-lose-1151136.php

Wish we had video of this. It happend 8 years ago. Younger joe west

Big Marc said...

Are umpire mistakes really part of the game? Or are these men in blue just a bunch of no talent assholes who are way out of control?

If umpire mistakes are part of the game, why doesn't the rule book have a rule?
After all, if it's part of the game, the rule book should say so.

Rule 9.05-
"You no doubt are going to make mistakes, but never attempt to “even up” after having made one.
Make all decisions as you see them and forget which is the home or visiting club".

Hmmm.......

Anonymous said...

Would just like to reiterate this video


http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=16111651&c_id=mlb


Bob.West.

Anonymous said...

^ Awful call Bob Davidson @ ANON 10:30

Scott Stevenson said...

"I know someone (bobby cox?) was ejected at the conference at home plate..."

Might well have happened to Cox, and I know Earl Weaver got dumped at the home plate conference before the second game of a double-header (in which he'd also gotten tossed in the first game). Also happened to Don Newcombe in 1960 during pre-game warmups.

Not sure about fastest manager ejections after the start of the game (I've heard, but can't confirm, that Casey Stengel got run after the first pitch when he was managing the Mets), but I know Jimmy Piersall got dumped after the first pitch in 1962.

Anonymous said...

Seriously?

Anonymous said...

Unsportsmanlike Conduct warrants an immediate ejection at the discretion of the umpire in nearly every sport.

Is anyone seriously going to try to argue that spiking the ball to the ground is "not" unsportsmanlike conduct? I doubt it.

So the only argument left is the discretion of the umpire. MLB doesn't evaluate anyone's discretion--player or ump--on a single play; so that's not a valid measurement either.

Dumb player reation; stupid child-like behavior; he got a time out. How many people on this forum are the same people who criticize parents for spoiling their children? Good for Holbrook for not spoiling this child for throwing a tantrum!

UmpsRule said...

Is it true that umpires sometimes show up players and coaches? Yes. Is it wrong? Yes. Why do they do it? Because they were shown up first. If you do not want to be shown up by the ump, don't show him up first.

Anonymous said...

UmpsRule, are you telling me that not a single video there the umpire didn't start any of them? Can you really say that with a straight face? I just showed you nearly 20 videos of umpires showing players and managers up! And all you can say is "well he started it"

Wow...

UmpsRule said...

What I am trying to say is that as a general principle, the umpire is not going to start something. Sure, there may be cases where Bob Davidson will go renegade and look for trouble with somebody, but the majority of the time the problem likely stems from actions by the player or manager. What do I mean by that? The player or manager likely made some kind of inappropriate comment or gesture that led to the umpire responding in kind. That does not excuse the response, I am just stating that an umpire is likely not going to unload on someone for no reason.

Gil Imber said...

After review, the Original Ruling has been affirmed in a 4-0-1 decision by the UEFL Appeals Board. Four Appeals Board members elected to Uphold the Original Ruling and one voted to Defer it.

Majority Opinion, Gil:
See Appendix

Concurring Opinion, Albertaumpire:
Based on what I can see in slow motion replay, it looks to me there is pressure on the bag by Altuve's foot before Greinke's.

Dissenting Opinion, RichMSN:
While the visual evidence with the technology available suggests that the call is correct as good as the camera (and most certainly the human eye) can decipher, the fact remains that this play and no other play is really a tie. We could keep adding decimal places until, theoretically, with good enough technology, one would clearly happen before the other. The runner either beat the ball or vice versa. But we accept that technology is limited -- it's why we have dead heats in races.

This could be the perfect call for the "defer" option. if the technology can't detect what came first, it's impossible to really know (absent better cameras) if the call is truly right or wrong. In the case where the visual evidence provides no clear call, the umpire's call must stand as correct. It's, as I said, the perfect use of the defer when the initial call is correct. If this call had been ruled incorrect, I wouldn't hesitate to vote to overturn it.

Therefore, the Board affirms the Original Ruling.

Confirmed: None
Upheld: Gil, tmac, Albertaumpire, BillMueller
Overturned: None
Deferred: RichMSN
Abstained: Jeremy (Posted Original Ruling), yawetag (owns West as -cc)

The Original Ruling has been affirmed, 4-0-1.

Gil Imber said...

Appendix

Majority Opinion, Gil:
This appeal challenges the UEFL Appeals Board to review the Original Ruling: Quality of Correctness of "Correct," in regards to an umpire's call of "safe" after a close play at first base between batter-runner and fielder.

However, such consideration requires a thorough analysis of the Official Baseball Rules in regards to OUT, SAFE and how both a batter and runner are retired.

Rule 2.00 defines OUT by referencing the forthcoming code of rules, while defining SAFE as "a declaration by the umpire that a runner is entitled to a base for which he was trying."

Rule Six pertains to the batter and Rule 6.05(j) pertains to the batter's retirement: "After he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base."

Rule Seven pertains to the runner and Rule 7.01 specifies entitlement: "A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out." Because Rule 2.00 has defined OUT as a retirement as specified by subsequent rule, Rule 7.01 cross-references, in part and as pertains to this play, Rules 2.00, Rule 6.05(j) and Rule 7.08(e).

Rule 7.08(e) specifies how a runner may be retired: "He or the next base is tagged before he touches the next base, after he has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner." Rule 6.09(a) furthermore states that a batter becomes a runner when he hits a fair ball. Therefore, the relevant critereon to consider in judging the status of the batter-runner is whether or not "the next base is tagged before [BR] touches the next base."

As such, all Rules agree: The batter-runner is out if his person or first base is tagged before the batter-runner himself has touched first base. Rule 7.01 additionally specifies that a runner is SAFE if he touches first base before he is OUT, which, transitively and by cross-reference of Rule 2.00, as pertains to this particular play, is equivalent to: "The batter-runner is safe when he touches [first base] before he has been retired by F1 tagging first base before B1 has touched it."

Succinctly, if B1 is out, then F1 has tagged first base before B1 has touched it; By contraposition, if F1 does not tag first base before B1 touches it, then B1 is not out—Because the original statement is true, the contrapositive must likewise be true. Per Rule 7.08(e), these two possibilities may be described as "out" or "not out," in contrast to "out" or "safe."

The Original Ruling describes this play as, "Replays indicate that Greinke's foot did not touch first base prior to Altuve's foot touching first base, the call was correct." This portrayal is correct—Replays indicate F1's foot did not touch first base prior to B1's foot touching first base. Had Rule 7.08(e) instead required, by contrast and with the postulation of "safe" instead of "out," "[BR] touches the next base before the next base is tagged," replays would have still indicated that B1's foot did not touch first base prior to F1's foot touching first base.

In regards to adjudicating a tie, the Rules are overtly silent, specifying only that a fielder must beat a runner to a base to record an out, while a runner is to be declared safe if he is not out. Without a thorough analysis of the Rules Book, this supposition may be misinterpreted.

In essense, frame rate replay analysis suggests a visual deadlock, whereas physical properties suggest the probability of such a tie is significantly low. However, with lack of conclusive evidence to suggest the Original Ruling of F1's foot not touching first base prior to B1's foot is erroneous and, of most importance, with conclusive evidence to suggest the Original Ruling narrative of F1!>B1, where "!>" represents "did not touch prior to," is correct, the Original Ruling must be upheld.

Jon Terry said...

The runner must beat the ball. Period. This is the accepted and taught interpretation at every level of the game. "Tie goes to the runner" is a wives' tale. The runner must beat the ball.

The ejection was warranted. Don't want to get tossed, find another way to vent.

Boozie said...

I don't know, but I can't wait to vote AlbertaUmpire out of the Appeals Board. First with the horrible call over on the check swing of Buck, and this crocked response?

HE'S OUT.

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

Regardless of what others teach, the rules regarding ball beating runner or runner beating ball contradict one another in the rule book. In the rule covering first base, it indeed says that the ball must beat the runner. In the rules covering force plays (which plays at first base are not, by rule), it's just the opposite.

Again, I've always been of the belief that there are plays so close that the umpire should be considered correct no matter which way he calls the play. This is one of them. Hence my vote to defer (which defaults to correct eventually).

Zac said...

Anonymous @ 9:07:

I found two, maybe three examples of umpires showing someone up in that list of clips. It is laughable that you posted things like managers getting ejected for step balks, which are not arguable at the MLB level. Most of the videos are garden variety ejections. There are a few situations that aren't handled ideally, but that doesn't mean someone is shown up.

I think what we've learned is that you think players and managers should be given free reign to say what they want, and umpires should only be able to eject when physically assaulted. Please tell us: What should be grounds for an ejection? Where do you draw the line?

Like most other fans, you don't have a clue.

Anonymous said...

Well Zac you don't seem to have a problem with an umpire physically assaulting a player or manager. And you seem fine with verbal assault as long as it's an umpire doing it.

Balking Bob's nice little wave as he repeats it over and over and over again with his smirk is "showing up." As is his buddy Cowboy Joe's wave.

And I showed you AT LEAST three clips of umpires coming around the catcher. But it's nearly instant if a catcher even thinks about turning around to argue with an umpire.

You just keep your double standard... GET A CLUE; NOBODY is there to watch you!

UmpsRule said...

How often does an umpire physically assault a player or manager? Seriously, when was the last time that happened? And don't give me the Joe West/Terry Francona incident last year, that was NOT an assault. I don't consider an ump putting his hands on someone as an assault. An assault would be something like when Yorvit Torrealba shoved that ump in the face during Winter Ball.

Zac said...

Anon 3:48:

First off, the "Nobody is there to watch you" line is tired and worn out. It is used by fans and rats who don't like it when a call goes against them. It is often used in response to umpires who will actually step up and call something controversial, even if it is right.

Second, there were ZERO examples of umpires physically assaulting anyone in those clips. Francona accidentally ran into West in the Hernandez balk clip when he turned around and West was standing behind him. West getting in front of him and putting his hands out is not a physical assault, and if MLB had a problem with it, why wasn't West suspended? Schreiber putting his hand on Ordonez's back after the strikeout was not a good way to handle a situation, but it is not physical assault. The fact that you're too dense to know the difference is your own fault.

Two of the clips where umpires came in front of the catcher are the ones I agree where you could say the umpire might have shown the player up. You don't know what was said though, as you just assume the catcher is innocent and the big mean umpire is out to get him. In the Campos clip, he ejects from behind the catcher after warning him in front, which is standard. Nothing wrong with that one.

If you think a "smirk" is showing someone up, I don't know what to tell you. I don't care for Bob's wave he does, but I don't consider that showing someone up.

You still haven't answered the question: What is grounds for an ejection? Should they be able to say whatever they want?

Anonymous said...

To the folks who said "nobody is there to watch you umpire," you're wrong. When there's a close play, who does everyone turn to look at? ME.

Troy said...

Umpires should not have to take unceasing verbal abuse. If a player or manager is going to act like a petulant child, then don't be surprised if an umpire treats them like one.

It really is an absurdity of baseball that participants are allowed to carry on like they do. If baseball really wanted to solve the umpire "problem," as it has frequently been referred in the blogosphere, then they should make a EJ automatic not just for balls & strikes, but for arguing any call that is not a rules interpretation. Any player or manager who does does not leave the field immediately after getting ejected should get fined or suspended. You wouldn't see umpires misbehave if the participants didn't misbehave.

But of course that will never happen.

Zac said...

Troy, they don't want to hear that. It doesn't fit their agenda. The umpires should just sit back, not call anything controversial, and when a team gets upset they should be able to say whatever they want with no consequences.

You are right though: If you don't want the mean umpire hurting your feelings, shut up and play the game.

Anonymous said...

So, there is no tie-ing in baseball, huh?

Elementary number line algebra gets trumped by integral calculus of the infinitesimally small. The argument that there can be "no ties" on the bases is a restatement of Zeno's paradox. That paradox says that if Achilles gives a tortoise a 10 yard lead in a race, he can never catch the tortoise because there are an infinite number of points between himself and the tortoise.

If you clap your hands together, can they meet at the same place at the same time? If you swing a bat at a ball, can they meet at the same place at the same time? If you blink your eyes, can both of your upper lids meet your lower lids at the same time? Granted, the confluence of THREE objects at the same point in the space-time continuum is a bit more elaborate, but not impossible. Recall that time is slower at the top of a tall building tan in its basement. Thus, time was slower for Altuve's head than Greinke's. Furthermore, time slows with increased velocity - Altuve was running faster than Greinke so time was slower for him. The problem is that the time for a neurosynaptic reflex to complete its arc by the chemical reactions that takes place (in the course of TIME) introduces a limit as how small a difference in time can be measured by the human brain - or even the one inside of Bob Davidson's or Joe West's cranium. Recall also that according to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, the very act of observation changes either the velocity or the location of what is being observed. CONCLUSION - within the confines of the ability of the human brain to discriminate such things, there CAN be ties on the bases in baseball. And the rules are specifically and distinctly worded to indicate that "the tie goes to the runner".

Curt Crowley said...

Let me save ya'll some time here. Zac is one of those umpires who operates under 2 rules:

Rule 1: The umpire can never be wrong or behave badly because he is the umpire.

Rule 2: If the umpire was wrong or acted badly, see Rule 1 (and you're gone for even suggesting such a thing).

Bearded Beast said...

Doesn't the rulebook say that throwing any equipment (bats, helmets, BASEBALLS, etc.) results in an ejection?!

If its written in black and white, whats the argument??!

Do you expect Sam to be a mind reader and to "know" that Greinke was mad at "himself"?!?! He makes a call, turns around and witnesses the pitcher throwing a temper tantrum!!

IF anyone is to blame..its Greinke for not keeping his emotions in check!

Big Marc said...

I disagree with curt 100%.

You add nothing to these disussions.

Curt, I do not need to hear your opinions of other posters, I'll read their posts and decide for myself.

The only god dam way you can save me some time, or as you say..."save Y'all some time"
is to never post again.

Screw it, you won't understand my point here, so let me go at this another way......

Right back at you......

Let me save Y'all some time.

Newcommers and old,
skip any post by curt crowley.

Do not skip posts written by:
Bapacop, jonterry, tmac, umpsrule

Big Marc said...

also @ July 10, 2012 12:12 PM Anon-

Hey, hey, facts and well thought out arguements have no place here....

Questioning posters agenda's is acceptable,
but to post philosphy as if we dumb umpires are suppose to understand? C'mon!

My tounge has now been removed...........

Great post, you put us all in a box.

Double Down for Donuts said...

Zack is a great young talent and is a wonderful kid. I actually joined his "fan club" (through his father, Don) when he first came up as a Royal. 10 autographed cards and a couple pics - well worth it. Anyway, I watched this and was not surprised he got tossed. I can see why Sam (although incorrectly) presumed the anger was aimed at him. For shame!

And I DISAGREE WITH THE CALL being "correct". Both players arrived there at the same time. If that is the case, unless I misunderstand the rules about BEATING A THROW, the batter-runner was out.

Double Down for Donuts said...

"And the rules are specifically and distinctly worded to indicate that "the tie goes to the runner". "

Hey, you want to show me those new rules? Because that is an OLD WIVES TALE (and not even a good one at that). THE RUNNER HAS TO BEAT THE THROW. Since by definition "tie" does not mean" beat", a tie is an out.

Double Down for Donuts said...

Rule 7.01 - "A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out." BEFORE is not A TIE or AFTER!

Anonymous said...

@ DD for Donuts from the same Anon
The thread has gotten long and tangled. In summary, there used to be a difference between rules in 6.xx and 7.xx where the Batter/Runner was OUT if the defense tagged him or first base BEFORE. The wording for the runner was that he attained the next base if he touched it BEFORE he or the base was tagged in a force situation. A poster above commented that the wording has been changed so they both read the same as the B/R version. Since "a tie" is not "before", the B/R or R should be "safe/not out". Hence "the tie goes to the runner" is a succinct way to rephrase what the rule says. "The hands are part of the bat" and "The ball bounced off the plate - it's foul" are MYTHS. "A tie goes to the runner" is consistent with the rules.

Zac said...

Curt: I'm sorry that you get your little feelings hurt when umpires handle business when players and coaches act like toddlers. I never said umpires are wrong. You on the other hand don't believe players or managers should ever be ejected unless they physically assault an umpire. Thankfully every rule book (That pesky thing it is) disagrees with you and gives umpires the latitude to eject when they need to. You just want to have a pity party because you don't like it that umpires have authority over the game. Too bad for you, fanboy.

Anonymous said...

can someone explain how you can be so obtuse? im just trying to not spend a night in the box. In order for any of you to carry my jock, your gonna need a bigger boat.
All of you are stupid and should give up umpiring because you suck.

over 130 posts for a play that has happened once in 130 years

dumbasses

Post a Comment