Friday, August 23, 2013

MLB Ejection 145: Greg Gibson (2; Robin Ventura)

3B Umpire Greg Gibson ejected White Sox Manager Robin Ventura for arguing a dead ball no-call (lodged/stuck) in the top of the 3rd inning of the Rangers-White Sox game. With one out and none on, Rangers batter Ian Kinsler hit a 1-0 changeup from White Sox pitcher Chris Sale for a line drive down the left
Gibson signals a fair ball as Viciedo retrieves it.
field line. After struggling to locate the baseball, White Sox left fielder Dayan Viciedo attempted to request "time," which was not granted by Gibson; Viciedo eventually retrieved the ball and fired home as Kinsler attempted to score, resulting in an inside-the-park home run. Replays indicate the fair bounding ball caromed off the base of the left field wall, appearing to follow a tract underneath the wall's padding as it remained loose; as the ball was not stuck pursuant to OBR Rule 6.09(f) and as suggested by the Universal Ground Rules, came to rest but was not lodged, the call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the Rangers were leading, 5-3. The Rangers ultimately won the contest, 11-5.

This is Greg Gibson (53)'s second ejection of 2013.
Greg Gibson now has 8 points in the UEFL (4 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 8).
Crew Chief Jerry Layne now has 9 points in the UEFL's Crew Division (8 + 1 Correct Call = 9).
*Rule 6.09(f) states, in part, that a batter becomes a runner and is entitled to two bases when "any fair ball...sticks in a fence or scoreboard."
*Rule 6.09(e) entitles a batter to two bases if a fair ball after touching the ground "passes under a fence."

This is the 145th ejection of the 2013 MLB season.
This is the 69th Manager ejection of 2013.
This is the White Sox's 4th ejection of 2013, 3rd in the AL Central (DET 8; CLE 6; CWS 4; KC 3; MIN 2).
This is Robin Ventura's 2nd ejection of 2013 and first since July 24, 2013 (Gary Darling; QOC = Correct).
This is Greg Gibson's first ejection since August 7, 2013 (Don Cooper; QOC = Correct).

Wrap: Texas Rangers vs. Chicago White Sox, 8/23/13
Video: After ball evades Viciedo's sight near the wall, Kinsler collects a HR; Ventura an ejection (TEX)
Video: Ventura tossed as Hawk admits, "Viciedo doesn't know the rules," calls for common sense (CWS)
Video: Kinsler able to score as confusion reigns along the left field fence line (MLB/Must C)

50 comments :

Gil Imber said...

heres the sox feed

http://wapc.mlb.com/cws/play/?content_id=29969713&topic_id=8879206&c_id=cws



I will say this, Hawk wasn't that bad in this video.

Gil Imber said...

WOW, I'm shocked that Hawk wasn't calling Gibson names and jumping out of the booth. I'm not sure, but I don't even think Stone has this right either. If the ground rules don't say as such, even if the LF puts his hands over his head that doesn't mean it's a ground rule double. I think Stone is reverting back to his days at Wrigley when that was the rule with the ivy in the outfield, but I'm not so sure that rule would apply here.

Gil Imber said...

So Viciedo can't find the ball and puts his hands up to cover for it. How is this the umpire's fault?


Also, if no one else starts the Announcers' Rule Knowledge Accuracy Fantasy League for next year, I will. I don't care if no one other than me is involved, I'm doing it.

Gil Imber said...

Has Hawk been reading CCS? He wasn't to bad on this one.

Gil Imber said...

For a moment I actually thought that I had clicked the wrong link and was watching the Texas feed instead somehow.

Gil Imber said...

This is what I tell the managers at the plate meeting before every game I umpire: "If it goes under the fence and the outfielders put up their hands, we will stop play and award bases as necessary. But if they dig for it, the ball is live no matter what." I never get arguments about it.

Viciedo started digging, then put up the hands, Gibson let play continue. Great call.

Gil Imber said...

On a side note did anyone notice how late HW was getting into position? In in that rotation, he should have gotten there as Kinsler was rounding third, not as the play's happening.

Gil Imber said...

In order to make that league fun you'd have to award positive points for incorrect rulings. It would be really high scoring. I'm in.

Gil Imber said...

You should still check it though. Players lie all the time. Just because they put there hands up doesn't make it a dead ball. This is one ground rule I personally don't like.

Gil Imber said...

I was working a Pony game on the bases last year on your typical not-perfectly-maintained field. There's gaps under the outfield fence and all that. A ball is hit out to the wall in center field. The centerfielder goes back to the fence and puts his hands up. As soon as I go out to check the kid starts to scramble for the ball. I don't know if he just assumed the play was dead or if he was hoping I wouldn't come out to look, and I never will know because the guy doing the plate killed it before I could take three steps onto the outfield grass.

Gil Imber said...

I'm in on this league!

Gil Imber said...

At the moment I'm worried about one major thing: What is a point-awarding situation? I can't do ALL the games after all, so the only thing I have in mind is essentially piggy-backing off the UEFL and doing it for ejections only.

Gil Imber said...

If there's gonna be three people involved I'm gonna need a new name. ARKAFL doesn't quite roll of the tongue.

Gil Imber said...

I have no problem with this call. The ball never lodged and the fact that Viciedo looked in the wrong place is not Gibson's problem.

Gil Imber said...

Sounds like a government acronym.

Gil Imber said...

He didn't have enough time to bury the plate :(

Gil Imber said...

If they put their hands up then the umpire should go out and check, not immediately award bases.

Gil Imber said...

That's asking for trouble. Simply instruct the coaches to have the fielder raise his hands, but also instruct them to keep the runners going. Whether a fielder "digs" for the ball is irrelevant. If a ball is clearly lodged in a chain-link fence and a fielder repeatedly tries to pull it out, are you really going to allow all runners to advance more than two bases, just because?

Gil Imber said...

I think you misspelled "off".

Gil Imber said...

No its not This how we work if there two umpires on the field. and a player puts there hands up the base umpire will go out and see if it is under the fence or not. If it is the runner will be place according to the rules.

Gil Imber said...

Not your fault that your call not his he can't see that from plate angel.

Gil Imber said...

The ball isn't dead until we declare "time." And we're not going to declare "time" on the say-so of a fielder. That is why the runners are to keep going. You'll get no arguments when you have to send runners back. You will get arguments when you start playing with ghost runners.

Gil Imber said...

We tell the kids to run. So correct I got to say Most kids around here pretty honest and i think... we only had once were the ball went under the fence.

Gil Imber said...

Wrong.

Gil Imber said...

No softball. It is easier to put runners back then decide where to put them.

Gil Imber said...

I tell them at the plate meeting that if they go in after it it's "run rabbit run"!

Gil Imber said...

Nope I think you should have to watch every pitch of every game. Even include when the announcers disagree with balls and strikes lol.

Gil Imber said...

What shocks me about this is that the White Sox were playing at home. Dayan Viciedo should be well acclimated to the quirks of his home ballpark and should have been able to recognize what may have happened.

Gil Imber said...

This obviously is not on the umpiring crew, but the ground rules need to change for this ballpark if they don't do the right thing and eliminate that little ball-guzzling gap....Eliminate the potential for error.

Gil Imber said...

Perhaps not, regarding the Viciedo ball-hunting endeavor. However, the field layout in that spot sucks 3-legged yak nads. Maybe next season they should add some shrubbery at the wall in centerfield. Put me in Coach, I'm ready to play!

Gil Imber said...

ARKAFL? I believe that is a sniglet referring to an ark constructed from the hair of Art Garfunkel.



And the Grammar Gestapo lives on (I see). Zig heil, wachet auf!



The ghoti live in water...Red ghoti, blue ghoti, old ghoti, new ghoti...

Gil Imber said...

I thought this is usually discussed at the plate meeting for ground rules. Sometimes you have to take the player on his or her word. Even if you run out there, your vision can be obscured by any number of things from sun to player to, shit, even an asteroid. But seriously, this is why I like fields that don't look like something Edward Scissorhands concocted. No real gaps, etc.

Gil Imber said...

That's why this is covered at a pre-game plate meeting. No one runs all of the way out there to see if it is indeed "lost", at least not 100% of the time - most cases are easy to see for chain link fences. It is when you get into the opaque-colored walls that seeing that becomes more difficult. Most of the games I do are with younger kids, and luckily at that level it is much easier to see then if you're dealing with adults, etc.

Gil Imber said...

What roles does your tounge take?

Gil Imber said...

Working with someone it should be. that means if you are on the bases and a player put there hands up you signal that your going out. than that home plate umpire is now following the runner

Gil Imber said...

no softball? explain more joe if you don't mind. correct Joe it is easier to put runners were they should be if the ball is out of play. once it was in play.

Gil Imber said...

That was my thought too. Next thing you know, are we going to be calling "ground rule doubles" for pop flies that fielders lose in the sun? I mean, really that's what happened-- he lost the ball but the video shows it was never "trapped" or anything...

Gil Imber said...

Apparently the 7 voters who chose 'incorrect call' should attend a MLB rules refresher course with Hawk Harrelson. The ball was playable and no call is the correct call here.

Gil Imber said...

I think you should get new glasses.

Gil Imber said...

If you're going to try to correct me, at least find a real error instead of making stuff up.

Gil Imber said...

I'm just trying to say let them ru. At the end of play you can put runners back'

Gil Imber said...

Two questions here....and this might warrant an official challenge of the ruling - is 6.09(e) meant to cover a ball leaving the playing field (such as on a Little League field where the chain-link fence isn't flush with the ground), or does it also cover a ball rolling along the ground under the padding that is clearly a part of the fence? Clearly, the ball "passes under a fence" here, but obviously never leaves the playing field itself.


And what the heck is that thing that it got lodged against? Almost looks like a hose of some sort....I can remember hearing about when the foul lines at old Comiskey Park were simply flattened garden hoses painted white, but a hose in that situation takes this whole conversation to a new level.

Gil Imber said...

Way to edit your post after getting called out. Hilarious, yet sad at the same time. I think you should get tougher skin.

Gil Imber said...

I'm done feeding the trolls. You just keep making stuff up, okay?

Gil Imber said...

This is starting to feel like reverse trolling. Or maybe you really are that sensitive (and in denial). Either way, thanks for the comedy (and the hilarious irony).



Let me know if you need any further assistance with the proper spelling of three-letter words. It seems as though you already have the Disqus post editing figured out, at least.

Gil Imber said...

The funniest thing is that the girl in the first row is trying to tell Viciedo where the ball is. She knew exactly where is was but Viciedo didn't?

Gil Imber said...

The proper protocol actually is for the covering umpire (Whoever is responsible for the ball), usually the base umpire, to go out and check if a player puts his hands up. This obviously wouldn't be the case on a ball bouncing over the fence, but if it's supposedly stuck, someone should go out and check it before killing it.

Gil Imber said...

Have you seen Bart? He looks different.
New glasses?
No, he looks upset.
Maybe he misses his old glasses.

Gil Imber said...

I'm in...If for no other reason than to provide some empirical data on how bad they actually are (and how far above his peers Scully actually is).

Gil Imber said...

I know this is late. Sorry.


I was explaining to some friends (who believe announcers too often to really be credible) that this situation is exactly like the times when a catcher cannot locate a WP/PB and is looking away from his feet when he is inches from stepping on it or when he goes to the 3B side of the plate when it rolled to the 1B side of the plate.


The ball being lost from the player is not a cause for killing the ball. It has to be stuck or the ball has to be lost from the game (through the fence, lost in ivy, etc).

Post a Comment