Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Ejection 148: Tony Randazzo (2)

HP Umpire Tony Randazzo ejected Yankees Manager Joe Girardi for arguing a strike three call in the top of the 4th inning of the Yankees-Rays game. With two out and one on, Yankees batter Chris Dickerson attempted to request "Time" prior to taking a 1-2 fastball from Rays pitcher Alex Cobb for a called third strike. Replays indicate the pitch was located midpoint high and over the heart of home plate; Though pitch f/x determined the top of Dickerson's specific strike zone was associated with a sz_top value of 3.001 and the strike three pitch was associated with a pz (height) value of of 3.240, replays overwhelmingly suggest this computerized balls/strikes determination was inaccurate, the call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the Rays were leading, 3-2. The Rays ultimately won the contest, 5-2.

This is Tony Randazzo (11)'s second ejection of 2012.
Tony Randazzo now has 8 points in the UEFL (4 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 8).
Crew Chief Brian Gorman now has 7 points in the UEFL's Crew Division (6 Previous + 1 Correct = 7).

UEFL Standings Update

This is the 148th ejection of 2012.
This is the 71st Manager ejection of 2012.
This is the second consecutive NYY-TB game with an ejection.
This is the Yankees' 5th ejection of 2012, T-2nd in the AL East (BOS 10; NYY, TOR 5; BAL, TB 4).
This is Joe Girardi's first ejection since August 9 (Tim Welke; QOC = Correct).
This is Tony Randazzo's first ejection since June 23 (Coco Crisp; QOC = Correct).

Wrap: Yankees at Rays, 9/4/12
Video: Randazzo does not grant late "Time" request, rings up Dickerson on high strike

Pitch f/x plot courtesy Brooks Baseball, UEFL
The Pitch f/x conundrum, illustrated. Because individual strike zone plots measure location in actual (not normalized) feet, the plot automatically applies the estimation of an average player's strike zone of 1.5 to 3.5 feet, as opposed to the batter's individualized, or normalized strike zone, which in the case of Dickerson, topped out at a height of 3.001 feet, as opposed to the standard 3.5 feet.

47 comments :

UmpsRule said...

This should be the second time Randazzo has tossed Girardi this year.

Anonymous said...

@UmpsRule

I believe Randazzo's only other ejection this year was Coco Crisp

UmpsRule said...

That's right. I was saying that he ought to have two tosses of Girardi. They butted heads earlier this year.

Ray said...

@ UmpsRule thats right I remember that since I am a yankees fan. I was surprised that Joe was not ejected that day. Tigers fans Im sure remember that also and the fact that this is the first time Joe has been ejected vs a team not named the tigers

Anonymous said...

This call will be deemed correct eventually....

Anonymous said...

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120904&content_id=37880514&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

Red Sux Yucks said...

"This call will be deemed correct eventually.... "

Man, as both a Yankee fan AND an umpire, I hope not. It was not even close.

Cricket said...

From the side view, that pitch came in just above the belt, and below the midpoint. I challenge.

Russ said...

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/numlocation.php-pitchSel=502171&game=gid_2012_09_04_nyamlb_tbamlb_1&batterX=31&innings=yyyyyyyyy&sp_type=1&s_type=3.gif

I'm very surprised this was not ruled a strike originally. According to this plot, the pitch was a strike and it wasn't even close to being borederline. Watching the video, I also believed this was a strike.

Anonymous said...

Did he call time? oh he did did he? it was a strike, bob davidson will get an ejection tom hopefully, or gorman, or todd tichnor

Anonymous said...

Red Sux Yucks - just wait, if the pitch is within 5 feet of the zone, it will be deemed that it could have been called a strike. Then about a week later the same pitch will be called a ball and also be deemed correct....

Just sit back and enjoy the show, it's entertaining!

Russ said...

That's the point anon 8:16. Those pitches are considered borderline and when the pitch is borederline the site sides with the Umpire meaning whatever they rule it will be correct.

tmac said...

here is the video

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=24490411&c_id=mlb

UmpsRule said...

@ Anon 8:16

If you don't like it, feel free to leave. No one will miss you. This pitch was not all that high, so your comment has no merit.

Double Down for Donuts said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Russ said...

Double down for donuts, do umpires dever do anything correctly for you? Because it sure doesn't seem like it. It's a shame your precious Yankees didn't get this pitch, but please take a second look at pitch fx and see where this pitch was located. Not only was it a strike but the chart shoes it was easily a strike, it wasn't even borderline. Watching the replay, I agree with Randazzo that it was a strike. And I'm sure you can see the strike zone better from your seats than an Umpire standing right behind the plate. You were probably behind the plate in the 300 section based on your comments. You have become worse than Curt who we have not actually heard from in awhile.

Russ said...

I meant to say ever in the first sentence, not dever

BAPACop said...

@Double Down for Donuts: Where were you possibly sitting that you had such a perfect view of the plate? Anywhere you could have been sitting would either have been looking at the plate at an angle, or if you were directly behind the umpire (which isn't really possible as the stands behind home plate aren't at ground level) you would have had to see through the umpire.

Austin said...

For one, Dickerson doesn't even ask for time until the pitcher is coming out of his set position (which you can see pretty clearly right at the beginning of the video), and the pitch is just above the belt, as is CLEARLY shown on the side-view replay.

If you're going to go out and argue a call and get ejected for it, this is a pretty asinine one to do it on...this is the textbook definition of the "high strike" that doesn't get called as often as it should be.

Anonymous said...

Was he arguing the pitch, or him not giving the batter time? Seems like correctness should be based on him not giving time.

Gil Imber said...

Because of the finalized initial QOC review, the above appeal is discarded.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Brett said...

How many years has Dickerson been playing baseball? He must have been taught that only the umpire calls time. Be ready to hit if your request for time is not granted. As for the location of the pitch, Definitely in the upper part of the strike zone. Girardi is feeling the heat from the Orioles, trying to fire his team up. No reason to get ejected there.

Double Down for Donuts said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Double Down for Donuts said...

"If you're going to go out and argue a call and get ejected for it, this is a pretty asinine one to do it on...this is the textbook definition of the "high strike" that doesn't get called as often as it should be. "

That's the point. Either ALL umpires need to start calling it, or it should NOT be a strike anymore. I like to call higher strikes (belt level) and am repeatedly told that if I do that in college or varsity, I'll get hammered like Lindsay Lohan at a nightclub.

MiAngelo Moore said...

While this pitch looked like a borderline strike from all angles on the replay, umpires usually don't call a these on a batter whenever the catcher stands up or doesn't frame it properly.

So using that - the fact that Molina stood straight up to throw the runner out probably means Randazzo should've called this a "peace-making" ball, even though it was in the zone.

Not one player or coach would have argued this if he balled the pitch, in my opinion.

Double Down for Donuts said...

Well-said, Mi-Angelo.

Double Down for Donuts said...

"How many years has Dickerson been playing baseball? He must have been taught that only the umpire calls time. Be ready to hit if your request for time is not granted. As for the location of the pitch, Definitely in the upper part of the strike zone. Girardi is feeling the heat from the Orioles, trying to fire his team up. No reason to get ejected there. "

That I agree with. And he did not even put his hand up and ask for it, he just verbalized it. Might not be easy for Blue to hear with all of the crowd noise. I still think the pitch was high - the tracker is not as accurate as people would like to think. Technology is great, but it is not as malleable (when it comes to considerations) as a person is.

tmac said...

MLB umpires don't umpire to keep people from yelling at them.. They umpire to get the calls right... and that's exactly what you guys the ESPN 2,948 replays generation want... So when he gets a call right leave him alone....

YOU CAN NOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.... if you want to bitch when he misses a call fine.... But bitching when it's a corect call makes some posters look like they are more interested in flaming then giving a sound reason for being here.

As for the call.... There used to be a time when you wouldn't call a pitch when the catcher caught the ball outside his body. I remember being told to ball a pitch when a cather on 0-2 set up off the plate outside and the pitch was clearly on inner 1/3 of the plate but it was a strike. THOSE DAYS HAVE CHANGED... if you see the pitch as a strike you MUST call it. I am not Randazzo's eyes but considering how good he is i think we need to defer to him on his balls and strikes and his ability to see the pitch.

one last thing comparing MLB baseball to kids amatueur games is like comparing baseball to crickit....it is a different world. It's like when guy calls up a sports radio show and says he's qualified to talk about a managers' decision becasue he coaches his son's little league team.

Anonymous said...

Yyaaawwwwnnn....

BAPACop said...

@Double Down for Donuts: Going with the ad-hominem approach, I see.

Anonymous said...

tmac - isn't this pitch considered OUTSIDE of Dickerson's strike zone? Or am I misreading the chart above....

Anonymous said...

Blue? That puts things in perspective

Cricket said...

@Anon 11:29

Watch the video.


Per UEFL rules, the pitch f/x chart can be disregarded with clear and convincing video evidence.

tmac said...

@ anon 11:29: I leave the scientific portion and the math to Gil and Jeremy.... I usually judge by the eye test. In looking at randazzo's head height based on where dicerson's top of the strike zone is and i believe the pitch was a strike.... It does appear based on Gil's chart that the pitch is high.... Now where the top of the strike zone is.. that's another business entirely!!

Anonymous said...

tmac,

I like to leave the math alone, too, and use the "eye" test.

To my naked eye, it looked like a ball, but I'll accept the word of some more seasoned umpires than myself (I call mostly HS ball).

That said, could Gil or Jeremy explain the chart a bit? Is the point that the chart says it's a ball, but we're overruling the chart? Apologies if this is an over-elementary question.

Double Down for Donuts said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Double Down for Donuts said...

"THOSE DAYS HAVE CHANGED... if you see the pitch as a strike you MUST call it. I am not Randazzo's eyes but considering how good he is i think we need to defer to him on his balls and strikes and his ability to see the pitch."

Well-said. I try to call what I see, but sometimes the influence of a partner or something else can shade how you do things. Anyway, I'm not worried too much about it (as long as I do my best) because I have a "day job", and officiate simply because I enjoy it and it helps keep me in shape!

Double Down for Donuts said...

"To my naked eye, it looked like a ball, but I'll accept the word of some more seasoned umpires than myself (I call mostly HS ball)."

We're in the same boat on two counts. The level of officiating and also the reliance on seasoned umpires for sagacious input, etc. Anyway, even though these guys are the best of the best, they aren't always correct (as we know). Of course, given the level of competition....

I am more interested to see how the first week of NFL officiating goes with the replacement officials!

BAPACop said...

Wow. All I did was point out that you can't really see the strike zone from the stands. Not sure why you feel the need to insult me and my family.

Spence 1222 said...

One thing I have learned in fourty plus years of umpiring, is that if you do not call the borderline pitches strikes, youre gonna be out there for an awful long time! When Abner conceived the strike zone, I beleive his reasoning was a strike was a hittable pitch. The likes of a Mantle, Maris or Mays would drool over that pitch. Hittable yes! Strike yes!

Double Down for Donuts said...

""One thing I have learned in fourty plus years of umpiring, is that if you do not call the borderline pitches strikes, youre gonna be out there for an awful long time! When Abner conceived the strike zone, I beleive his reasoning was a strike was a hittable pitch. The likes of a Mantle, Maris or Mays would drool over that pitch. Hittable yes! Strike yes!""

Yeah, I am doing an 180 on this now. After seeing it a couple more times I would have called this a strike as well. *sigh*, perhaps getting older is inspiring more acquiescing.

BAPACop, seriously man, I have read some of your other comments and don't like how you and some others get contentious with people. I don't tolerate that and attack it with vehemence. That being said, I reread what you posted originally and it was not as harsh as I thought AND OWE YOU AN APOLOGY. So, here it is:

I am sorry for insulting you, it could have been handled better.

BAPACop said...

Apology accepted. I actually understand what you're coming from now that you say it, I do have a tendency to get a little aggressive with my comments towards others.

If I do it again go ahead and call me out on it. I often do it without noticing and if you let me know I'll probably figure it out. All I ask it that when you do call me out on it, feel free to insult me but remember my mother has nothing to do with it.

Double Down for Donuts said...

"Apology accepted. I actually understand what you're coming from now that you say it, I do have a tendency to get a little aggressive with my comments towards others.

If I do it again go ahead and call me out on it. I often do it without noticing and if you let me know I'll probably figure it out. All I ask it that when you do call me out on it, feel free to insult me but remember my mother has nothing to do with it. "

I write professionally for a living. I have the tendency to throw words around like ... baseballs, I guess. Speaking first and thinking later has gotten me into a myriad of hot situations. You'd think I would learn. (Words just never seem to phase me, and I end up tossing them like weapons, LOL.)

I was umpiring this year, and a couple of bench coaches were riding me for about half an inning about a bang-bang play I made at first. I lost it and called time and told them to shut their mouths. Of course, I immediately regretted it.

So, as above I should not even have opened my mouth, and hope the admin's simply delete!

Double Down for Donuts said...

Rather BANG-BANG call....Sorry.

Gil Imber said...

Correct. Pitch f/x suggests the pitch was located above the calculated upper bound of the individual hitter's strike zone, while overwhelming visual evidence indicates this pitch was correctly ruled a strike.

Anonymous said...

I tell my college guys and when I did hs, "don't put your hand up. just ask for it with your voice I can't hear your hand."

Post a Comment