Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Ejection 132: Fieldin Culbreth (1)

3B Umpire Fieldin Culbreth ejected Mets Manager Terry Collins for arguing an out (reversed) call in the bottom of the 5th inning of the Rockies-Mets game. With one out and one on, Rockies pitcher Jhoulys Chacin attempted to pick off baserunner R2 Andres Torres. Replays indicate that during the rundown that ensued between shortstop Jonathan Herrera and third baseman Jordan Pacheco, 2B Umpire Lance Barksdale erroneously ruled Torres safewhile Culbreth's out call was proper, the call was correct.* At the time of the ejection, the Mets were leading, 1-0. The Rockies ultimately won the contest, 6-2.

This is Fieldin Culbreth (25)'s first ejection of 2012.
Fieldin Culbreth now has 4 points in the UEFL (0 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 4).
Crew Chief Gary Cederstrom now has 2 points in the UEFL's Crew Division (1 Previous + 1 Correct = 2).
*Quality of Correctness was challenged and affirmed by the UEFL Appeals Board (5-0).

UEFL Standings Update

This is the 132nd ejection of 2012.
This is the 63rd Manager ejection of 2012.
This is the Mets' 8th ejection of 2012, 1st in the NL East (NYM 8; ATL 4; PHI 3; MIA 2; WSH 0).
This is Terry Collins' first ejection since July 14 (Dale Scott; QOC = Correct).
This is Fieldin Culbreth's first ejection since June 27, 2010 (Jim Leyland; QOC = Incorrect).

25 comments :

Anonymous said...

Gil/Jeremy (whoever posted this)- Barksdale ruled Torres safe while Culbreth walked over from 3rd and called him out

Anonymous said...

A culbreth ejection don't see many of those- 2010 Jim Leyland was the last

UmpsRule said...

Well, Culbreth did unofficially heave Eric Wedge last year. Still, the Cubby dump is rare.

Anonymous said...

Terry was frustrated, nothing more, nothing less.

Dan said...

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=24092257&c_id=mlb

Anonymous said...

I just don't see the clear and convincing evidence that Torres was tagged. Usually a tag is signified by a ripple in the uniform where the tag took place, and I just don't see it in this video. My gut says that Culbreth was right, but does anyone have a definite angle which shows the tag?

JeremyJ said...

They never show the angle that Culbreth had from third, however, in all of the angles that they did show, I never see any conclusive evidence that he was tagged. There's a maybe, kinda sorta, tag. But I don't see anything that says, absolutely he got him, and in that case, I'm going to give him the bag. If Culbreth had a good angle on a tag, which is possible from where he's at, that's a different story, and the out call was good, but the video doesn't show that conclusively...

Either way this call goes, they're tossing somebody, safe, and they're going to toss Tracy. Could Barksdale have been in a better position, maybe, but he wasn't and he called what he saw.

Turducken said...

I challenge. I don't see a conclusive tag.

Arik said...

MLB Tonight did their 360 view. Barksdale got blocked out but Culbreth had a great view.

Gil Imber said...

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

Josh7377 said...

whoever challenged this isn't watching closely. I'm probably the biggest Mets fan in the universe bitch all the time when I think umps mess up (I still don't think Dale Scott was right on Collins' last ejection, regardless of the long back and forth I had on this board)and honestly, I thought Torres was tagged twice on the way back.

Talk about a challenge for the sake of wasting people's time.

Jim R said...

Screw these rats who are all about "get it right" when it benefits them, but get run when it goes the other way. You can't have it both ways.

Why Barksdale didn't move closer to second to improve his angle bothers me.

Anonymous said...

Just with a little umpire intuition, I don't see any clothing wrinkled, I don't see the glove collapse, etc. ... I think it's worth the challenge here.

Anonymous said...

The runner was tagged on the upper calf - see slow mo replay at 1:14 mark

tmac said...

@ Jim R: Barksdale actually needed to be further away NOT closer to the runner. Being closer allows him to only see the tag in the back and would never allow him to see when the tag actually took place. Think of it as where to be on possible plays in this case there are two possible plays on the same runner: the tag about 25 feet from the bag or a tag on a slide.... Barksdale got sucked into the 1st one and missed the 2nd one.

This isn't a tough play with right distance and angle but it's nearly impossible without it

Anonymous said...

He was tagged right on the ass. Even the mets annoucers said so. I cant believe this is being challenged. If I was Gil I would start to tell people off. Once again someone not in the league is probably challenging it.

Anonymous said...

Can this website add in a filter that won't allow the word ``rat'' ? Enough already. Simply on the grounds of creativity!

Anonymous said...

Hind sight is 20/20 but if he would have just "sold" an out call (i.e. pointed emphatically)on the original play, he probably would NOT have gotten a visit, saved himself an EJ, and we would NOT even be talking about this.

The offense erred on this and I really don't think the manager would have come out to defend his player who just got picked off. Just my opinion...

Anonymous said...

F the team that F'd up! The runner was caught dead, so an out should be the first thought!

Anonymous said...

ANON - August 22, 2012 10:10 AM: I agree with your line of thinking if you're working amatuer baseball that's not on TV. It's a whole different mindset when you're working MLB games that are televised with MULTIPLE camera angles. You can't base your calls on who screwed up or who beat who when every questionable calls is replayed in slow motion and shown on SC for the next 24 hours - as well as "monday morning quarterbacked" by internet umpires over & over again

Cricket said...

On the super zoom angle, it really appears the glove is bending as the tag is applied.

Anonymous said...

Actually, shouldn't the correct call on this play be balk? I missed this the first 20 times I watched this video because I wasn't looking for it, but while in contact with the rubber, I see a leg flinch by Chacin, which is the same leg flinch he makes while starting his wind up.

Anonymous said...

Angel Campos just ejected Ozzie Guillen. Wonder how how angry Ozzie was.

Anonymous said...

There is a photo of the tag on page B13 in Wednesday's New York Times. You'd have to be as blind as an umpire to not see the tag. These challenges are ridiculous.

Gil Imber said...

After review, the Original Ruling has affirmed in a 5-0 decision by the UEFL Appeals Board. Four Appeals Board members voted to Confirm Quality of Correctness while one voted to Uphold it.

Per Curiam Opinion:
After review, it is apparent this call was properly ruled upon; the fielder successfully applied his tag prior to the runner returning to second base.

Concurring Opinion, tmac:
There is a tag in the leg before R2 touches 2nd... I confirm the call.

Concurring Opinion, RichMSN:
Everything about this play tells me that there was a tag on the play, but I do not see the glove compress or the uniform blouse AT ALL when the tag attempt was made.

A tough, tough one. I upheld the call.

Therefore, the Board affirms the Original Ruling.

Confirmed: tmac, Albertaumpire, BillMueller, yawetag
Upheld: RichMSN
Overturned: None
Deferred: None
Abstained: Gil (Posted Original Ruilng), Jeremy (Owns -cc Cederstrom)

Quality of Correctness has been affirmed, 5-0.

Post a Comment