UEFL Invokes Injury Rule for Owners of Ump Scott

It is now two months since umpire Dale Scott suffered a game-ending foul ball head injury in Toronto, and he has not returned to the Major League field since. With no further status update from the League, we continue to wish him the best. His presence on the field is truly missed.

Dale Scott has not umpired since April 14.

At this time, the UEFL is invoking League Rules 1-2-b and 1-5-a for any team owner who has drafted Dale Scott and wishes to replace him on their crew. The membership voted during last year's Rules Summit to allow owners to replace an umpire who becomes injured or bereaved during the season. This is the first implementation of that rule.

Because Scott is a crew chief, two separate injury clauses have been invoked: one for Crew Chiefs and one for Crew Chiefs/Primary/Secondary umpires.

As mentioned in last month's A Look at the Dale Scott Crew Without Their Crew Chief, Scott's regular season crew consists of Jim Reynolds, Brian Knight, and Lance Barrett.

Reynolds, as the number two umpire on the crew, has served as acting crew chief in Scott's absence and has remained the senior-most umpire on the unit, with limited exception (e.g., Joe West joined the crew from May 16-21 to replace Brian Knight).

Meanwhile, Triple-A call-up umpire Stu Scheurwater has remained with Scott/Reynolds' crew ever since the day after West returned to captain his own crew on May 22.

UEFL Midseason Replacement Procedure
If your Crew Chief is Dale Scott and you wish to make a replacement, pursuant to UEFL Rule 1-2-b, you may select Jim Reynolds as your crew chief; OR,

If you own Scott in any capacity (Crew Chief, Primary, or Secondary), and you wish to make a replacement, pursuant to UEFL Rule 1-5-a, you may select any umpire who has fewer points than Scott for that classification.

Scott has two points in Primary and Secondary classifications, and -2 points in Crew Division.
Reynolds has 10 points in Crew Division. Pursuant to UEFL Rule 1-2-b, if you drafted Scott as your Crew Chief, you may replace him with Reynolds. If you wish to replace Crew Chief Scott with a Crew Chief other than Reynolds—or wish to replace Primary/Secondary Umpire Scott with any other umpire (other than those you already own)—you may do so, provided this alternate replacement has fewer than -2 points in Crew Division, or +2 points as a Primary/Secondary Umpire, as applicable.

List of Legal Replacements (as of June 14, 2017; Subject to Change After This Date)
Crew Division - Eligible Replacement Crew Chiefs (ranked by UEFL points, in parentheses):
Reynolds, Jim (10) [Rule 1-2-b replacement]
Nelson, Jeff (-3) [Rule 1-5-a replacement]
Cederstrom, Gary (-4) [1-5-a]
Meals, Jerry (-6) [1-5-a]
Davis, Gerry (-8) [1-5-a]

Primaries & Secondaries - Refer to UEFL Standings (umpires must have less than 2 UEFL points)

To effect a midseason replacement, post a comment to this announcement indicating your username, classification to be changed (Crew Chief, Primary, or Secondary), and proposed replacement name.

NCAA Rule - Reversing a Catch Call's Runner Placement

NCAA's "Getting the Call Right" rule regarding runner placement on a reversed no catch call may have incidentally put the offensive team at a disadvantage during the Gainesville Super Regional, as a Florida baserunner was forced to return to a base he likely would have advanced from if not for an NCAA-specific rule specifically prohibiting such advancement.

Wake Forest requests a replay reversal.

The Play: With none out and two on (R1, R2), the batter flies to right field, whereupon the outfielder drops the ball in the process of catching and transferring the ball to his throwing hand, ruled "no catch" (safe) by the first base umpire. The baserunner from second successfully advances to third base, while runner R1 fails to vacate first base (forced to do so due to the batter becoming an unretired runner), and the defense tags second base for the force out: score it a fielder's choice to make the situation one out, R1, R3.

Replay Review: The defensive (Wake Forest) coach argues that the right fielder caught the ball and dropped it during the transfer process, alleging the proper call should have been a fly out. After video review, the umpires reverse the on-field ruling, declare the batter out, and send the two base runners back to the bases they occupied at the beginning of the play: One out, R1, R2.

Florida questions the runner placement rule.

Logical Argument: The offensive (Florida) coach in turn argues that R2 successfully ran to third base during the play, and would have ended up on third base no matter the call in the outfield: he would have either advanced due to his being forced to do so, or as a result of tagging up with a play that deep into right field.

The Rule: NCAA Appendix E-1-C-10 (Getting the Call Right) states that if the umpires reverse the call of "no catch" to that of "catch," then:

a) The ball is dead;

b) All action prior to the ball becoming dead shall be disallowed;

c) The batter shall be declared out;

d) All base runners shall be returned to the base they occupied at the time of the pitch.

Analysis: Accordingly, college baseball's Getting the Call Right rule requires that on a reversed no catch-to-catch call, the runners be returned to the bases occupied at time of pitch (TOP). This is a mandatory provision of the rule and not subject to further interpretation, negotiation, or crew chief discretion. Therefore, R1 was correctly returned to first base and R2 was correctly returned to second base.

Commentary: The intent of the Getting the Call Right rule in regards to no catch/catch is to declare the play dead immediately upon the incorrect call being made, so as not to put any team in jeopardy by having the offense run into an unnecessary out (failing to tag up, trying to take an extra base, passing a preceding runner, etc.) or the defense into committing an unnecessary play (errors or throws to bases) that could further confuse or complicate the situation (and then having to adjudicate such contingencies). By killing play immediately, the rule effectively takes discretion away from the umpires, who have erred during the original play, so as to take all potential arguments away from impacted teams. Batter out, runners returned to their bases at TOP, end of discussion. Naturally, this unique play—wherein the situation would likely have ended up as one out, R1, R3 no matter what the first base umpire's catch/no catch call was—pigeonholed the crew into (correctly) applying a rule that likely was not intended to address this precise all-else-equal type of play (or, if it was designed to govern the identical-outcome play, then perhaps the rule should be changed).

MLB and NFHS codes do not have this rule.

MLB Difference: In Major League Baseball, Replay Regulation IV.A tasks the Replay Official with runner placement responsibility, with the following standard: "the Replay Official shall place the base runners on the bases he believes they would have reached had the reviewed call been made correctly."

Under the Official Baseball Rules, there is no requirement to return runners to their TOP bases in the event of a reversed no catch call; thus, had this play occurred at the professional level, the runners likely would have been placed at first and third base if the Replay Official deemed that the runners would have ended up at those bases had the correct call been made in real-time.

This discretionary authority also applies to the minor leagues and non-Replay plays, pursuant to OBR 8.02(c), which states, "If the umpires consult after a play and change a call that had been made, then they have the authority to take all steps that they may deem necessary, in their discretion, to eliminate the results and consequences of the earlier call that they are reversing, including placing runners where they think those runners would have been after the play, had the ultimate call been made as the initial call."

NFHS Rule: In high school, there is similarly no return-of-runners rule for reversed no catch calls. Instead, discretionary authority is delegated to the umpire-in-chief, who shall "Rectify any situation in which an umpire’s decision that was reversed has placed either team at a disadvantage" (Rule 10-2-3-l).

Thus, the return-of-runners to TOP on a no catch-to-catch reversal is, for now, an NCAA exclusive.

Video via "Read More"

NCAA Super Regional - Play at the Plate Obstruction?

A home plate obstruction no-call during the Florida-Wake Forest NCAA Super Regional's Game 2 action on Monday plagued Wake Forest as baserunner Keegan Maronpot was thrown out attempting to score to end the bottom of the 5th inning of what was, at the time, a one-run ballgame.

Is this play at the plate an out or obstruction?

The situation occurred during a single to center field with two out and two on (R1, R2), as R2 Maronpot attempted to slide around Florida catcher JJ Schwarz. Initially ruled an out, the call was affirmed via video replay review, keeping Wake Forest's lead at one.

The question before us is not whether the baserunner successfully reached out and touched home plate with the tips of his fingers—the touch vs no touch issue is the simple out/safe question that doesn't require any rules analysis to determine—it is whether catcher Schwarz obstructed baserunner Maronpot during this play.

Rules Review: The definition of obstruction at the college (NCAA) and professional level (OBR) is, essentially, the same: NCAA Rule 2-55 defines obstruction as, "the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of or in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner," while OBR holds that, "OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner."

NCAA Rule 2-55 Note 6 states, "The catcher, without the ball in his possession, has no right to block the pathway of the runner attempting to score. The base line belongs to the runner and the catcher should be there only when he is fielding the ball or when he already has the ball in his hand. If a fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and if the ball is in flight toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the ball, he may be considered 'in the act of fielding' a ball. It is entirely up to the judgment of the umpire as to whether the fielder is in the act of fielding a ball."

Is the catcher's path occupancy legal?

NCAA Rule 8-7-c Note provides further clarity: "A catcher shall not be deemed to have hindered or impeded the progress of the runner if, in the judgment of the umpire, the runner would have been called out notwithstanding the catcher having blocked the plate."

OBR is similar: "Unless the catcher is in possession of the ball, the catcher cannot block the pathway of the runner as he is attempting to score...it shall not be considered a violation of this Rule 6.01(i)(2) (Rule 7.13(2)) if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in a legitimate attempt to field the throw...A catcher shall not be deemed to have hindered or impeded the progress of the runner if, in the judgment of the umpire, the runner would have been called out notwithstanding the catcher having blocked the plate." (6.01(i)).

As for college's video replay, Appendix E-2-f states, "Following plays will be reviewable: Deciding scoring plays at home plate inclusive of collisions (illegal and/or malicious slides) or time plays."

NCAA's standard for changing a call is "indisputable video evidence to reverse the call" (E-2-a). The MLB standard is "clear and convincing evidence" (Replay Review Regulation III).

The catcher's position as the runner slides past.

Analysis: At the time the bouncing throw first makes contact with the catcher's glove directly over the baseline, the runner has already begun his slide, and is physically past the catcher's position. The catcher's left leg appears to block the runner's pathway deep in the right-handed batter's box.

From the plate umpire's mechanics (no signal given after the play at the plate), it is apparent that the runner missed home plate.

As the runner slides past him, the catcher is clearly blocking the runner's access to home plate, but recall that if certain criteria are fulfilled ("act of fielding," "must occupy his position"), he is legally allowed to do so.

If, in the umpire's judgment, the runner was unable to touch home plate due to the catcher's leg (or other body) positioning prior to his receipt of the ball, and, if the umpire deems the catcher did not need to occupy the right-handed batter's box with his right leg/foot in order to receive the throw, then this is obstruction and the runner shall be awarded home plate. If the umpire deemed that the runner would have been out notwithstanding the catcher's conduct, or if the umpire deemed that the catcher legally occupied his position in the right-handed batter's box in order to receive the throw, this is not obstruction. If F2 is legitimately in the act of fielding, then he has legally blocked home plate.

Unfortunately, at this time only the one high-first angle exists online, so we are unable to determine to an "indisputable video evidence" standard whether the catcher afforded the runner the opportunity to score on the inside of the third base line prior to fielding the ball (since the catcher was already in the "act of fielding" prior to the video coming into frame; the ball comes onto the infield well in advance of our first look at the catcher's positioning; by then, it is too late to discern whether or not he arrived there legally/timely), or whether the catcher needed to occupy his position in the right-handed batter's box in order to field the ball.

To review:
> If the catcher left a pathway for the runner to score to his side (the runner's left), then the catcher has complied with the plate-blocking rule and is not guilty of obstruction.
> If the catcher, in the umpire's judgment, blocked the runner's path by occupying his position because he needed to do so in order to field the throw, this is not obstruction.
> If the runner would have been out whether or not the catcher blocked him, this is not obstruction.
> If the catcher assumed "act of fielding" status prior to the runner's final few steps, this is not OBS.
> If any of these aforementioned criteria are not fulfilled, then this is obstruction.

One final note (NCAA vs OBR): In college, the catcher may only legally block the runner's access to home plate if "he must occupy his position to receive the ball." In professional baseball, the catcher may legally block the runner if he is otherwise making "a legitimate attempt to field the throw." Thus, the legality standard is higher in NCAA than in OBR, for in NCAA, the catcher is only legal if he must occupy his position whereas in OBR, the catcher is legal as long as he makes a "legitimate attempt" to field the throw.

Where's NFHS? High school is simple. NFHS Rule 2-22-3 states it is obstruction if, "The fielder without possession of the ball denies access to the base the runner is attempting to achieve." Thus, under NFHS, the catcher would be guilty of obstruction because he denied access to home plate prior to gaining possession of the ball. There is no "act of fielding" exemption at this level of play.

Video via "Read More"

MLB Ejection 063 - Marvin Hudson (1; Carlos Gonzalez)

HP Umpire Marvin Hudson ejected Rockies RF Carlos Gonzalez (strike three call) in the top of the 5th inning of the Rockies-Cubs game. With none out and the bases loaded, Gonzalez took a 1-2 sinker from Cubs pitcher Jake Arrieta for a called third strike. Replays indicate the pitch was located over the inside edge of home plate and thigh-high (px .822, pz 2.143 [sz_bot 1.627]) and that all pitches during the at-bat were properly officiated, the call was correct.* At the time of the ejection, the Cubs were leading, 4-1. The Cubs ultimately won the contest, 7-5.

This is Marvin Hudson (51)'s first ejection of the 2017 MLB regular season.
Marvin Hudson now has 7 points in the UEFL Standings (3 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 7).
Crew Chief Jerry Layne now has -1 points in Crew Division (-2 Previous + 1 Correct Call = -1).
*UEFL Rule 6-2-b-1 (Kulpa Rule): |0| < STRIKE < |.748| < BORDERLINE < |.914| < BALL.

This is the 63rd ejection report of 2017.
This is the 26th player ejection of 2017. Prior to ejection, Gonzalez was 0-3 (SO) in the contest.
This is Colorado's 2nd ejection of 2017, 2nd in the NL West (LAD 5; COL 2; SD, SF 1; ARI 0).
This is Carlos Gonzalez's first ejection since Sept 9, 2011 (Mark Carlson; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Marvin Hudson's first ejection since September 14, 2016 (Jose Ramirez; QOC = U [Throwing At]).

Wrap: Colorado Rockies vs. Chicago Cubs, 6/11/17 | Video via "Read More"

MLB Ejection 062 - Phil Cuzzi (4; Matt Kemp)

HP Umpire Phil Cuzzi ejected Braves LF Matt Kemp (strike two call) in the bottom of the 8th inning of the Mets-Braves game. With two out and one on (R1), Kemp took consecutive 3-0 and 3-1 pitches from Mets pitcher Neil Ramirez for called strikes before grounding out on the ensuing 3-2 curveball. Replays indicate that both the debated pitches were located off the outer edge of home plate and thigh high (STRIKE 1 CALL: px 1.084, pz 1.684 [sz_bot 1.565]); (STRIKE 2 CALL: px 1.439, pz 1.711), the call was incorrect.* At the time of the ejection, the Mets were leading, 6-1. The Mets ultimately won the contest, 8-1.

This is Phil Cuzzi (10)'s fourth ejection of the 2017 MLB regular season.
Phil Cuzzi now has 2 points in the UEFL Standings (4 Previous + 2 MLB - 4 Incorrect Call = 2).
Crew Chief Phil Cuzzi now has 0 points in Crew Division (0 Previous + 0 Incorrect Call = 0).
*This is Matt Kemp's 7th consecutive season with at least one ejection, the longest such active streak.

This is the 62nd ejection report of 2017.
This is the 25th player ejection of 2017. Prior to ejection, Kemp was 0-4 in the contest.
This is Atlanta's 2nd ejection of 2017, T-2nd in the NL East (MIA 5; ATL, NYM, WAS 2; PHI 1).
This is Matt Kemp's first ejection since September 23, 2016 (Adam Hamari; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Phil Cuzzi's 4th ejection of 2017, 1st since May 22 (Clint Hurdle; QOC = N [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap: New York Mets vs. Atlanta Braves, 6/10/17 | Video via "Read More"

Regional Roundup - Runner, Declined Catcher Interference

Friday's college baseball action featured a runner's and declined catcher's interference call as the NCAA Super Regional round saw its fair share of illegal hinderance in College Station and Louisville. The two plays illustrate that not all interference is committed by the offense (at least, not at the pro level).

Runner's interference is called at third base.

Runner's Interference: We begin with a crucial runner's interference play in the bottom of the 12th inning of Friday's Davidson-Texas A&M game. With one out and one on (R2), the batter hits a ground ball near third base. As the third baseman attempts to field the ball, he collides with the advancing baserunner in the baseline. Although the baserunner did not appear to have intended to interfere, his collision with the third baseman prevented the fielder from fielding the batted ball, and is a violation of the interference rule at all levels of play.

NCAA Rule 2-51 defines this brand of interference as "The act of an offensive player, umpire or nongame person who interferes with; physically or verbally hinders; confuses; or impedes any fielder attempting to make a play."

By contrast, the Official Baseball Rules used at the professional level states, "Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play."

And high school's NFHS Rule 2-21-1 states, "Offensive interference is an act (physical or verbal) by the team at bat—a) which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play; or b) when a runner creates malicious contact with any fielder, with or without the ball, in or out of the baseline; or c) a coach physically assists a runner during playing action."

The only significant takeaway from this comparison is that offensive interference may be physical or verbal in high school and college, but must be physical in the pros. NFHS also includes malicious contact in its definition of offensive interference. Other than that, the same basic terminology (interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders, or confuses) is essentially identical for all levels.

NCAA Rule 8-5-d: "A runner is out when—[the runner] interferes with a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball."

OBR 6.01(a)(10): "A runner is out when—he fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball."

NFHS 8-4-2-g: "Any runner is out when—he hinders a fielder on his initial attempt to field a batted ball."

Again, the three rulesets are fairly identical. One fielder is protected per batted ball (umpire shall decide which one is entitled to field the ball), and only until he either successfully fields it or errs, wherein the ball bounds away and is no longer in the fielder's immediate reach (NCAA/OBR) or he must vacate his original position (NFHS) to field it.

In College Station, the runner interfered with the fielder as the ball was arriving. Textbook interference.

Catcher's interference is called at home plate.

Catcher's Interference: With one out and two on (R2, R3) in the bottom of the 1st inning of the Kentucky-Louisville game, the Kentucky catcher's glove made contact with the Louisville batter's bat as the batter swung at the pitch, hitting a ground ball to the shortstop, who threw to first base for an out as the batter campaigned for interference at the plate.

NCAA Rule 8-2-e states, "the batter becomes a base runner—if any defensive player interferes with the batter’s swing or prevents the individual from striking at a pitched ball. If a play follows the interference, the offensive team may elect to ignore the interference and accept the play. However, if the batter reaches first base and all other runners advance at least one base, the interference is ignored."

OBR: "Defensive interference is an act by a fielder that hinders or prevents a batter from hitting a pitch"..."The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when—The catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference." (5.05(b)(3)).

NFHS 5-1-2-b: "It is a delayed dead ball when—a catcher or any fielder obstructs a batter or runner; or obstructs the ball through use of detached player equipment." 8-1-1-e: "A batter becomes a runner [when]...the catcher or any other defensive player obstructs him. The coach or captain of the team at bat, after being informed by the umpire-in-chief of the obstruction, shall indicate whether or not he elects to decline the obstruction penalty and accept the resulting play. Such election shall be made before the next pitch (legal or illegal), before the award of an intentional base on balls, or before the infielders leave the diamond. Obstruction of the batter is ignored if the batter-runner reaches first and all other runners advance at least one base. (1) Any runner attempting to advance (i.e., steal or squeeze) on a catcher’s obstruction of the batter shall be awarded the base he is attempting."

Though OBR is the only code to specifically define "defensive interference," while NFHS insists on the term "catcher's obstruction," and NCAA calls the play "obstruction" in Rule 2-55, but "catcher's interference" in 8-2-e (in other words, the NCAA book contradicts itself in verbiage, but not in administration of the penalty), the plays and penalties are similar at all levels: in addition to giving the offense a choice of outcomes and disregarding the interference (OBR, half of NCAA)/obstruction (NFHS, the other half of NCAA) if the batter and all runners advance at least one base safely, all codes additionally award runners bases on this interference/obstruction if they are otherwise attempting to advance, and charge the pitcher a balk only if a runner is attempting to steal home at the time of the illegal catcher-batter/bat contact.

Hypothetical: Combine both plays and assume the interfered-with batter grounds to third base, where the baserunner collides with the fielder. The proper call would be to enforce the catcher's interference/obstruction penalty, since this occurred first and supersedes the later runner's interference (for instance, because the catcher's conduct contributed to the ball being hit to third base in the first place). If there is malicious contact between runner and fielder (NFHS), any applicable ejection penalties would stand (if the runner were to be ejected for MC, that player would be disqualified and a substitute runner placed at second base).

Videos available via johnnyg08 & "Read More"

Major League Debut of Umpire Shane Livensparger (43)

Umpire Shane Livensparger makes his MLB debut during Saturday's Athletics-Rays game in Tampa Bay, joining Jeff Nelson's crew for two games of the OAK-TB doubleheader, serving as first base umpire alongside HP Umpire Laz Diaz, 2B Umpire Cory Blaser, and 3B Umpire Jeff Nelson for Game 1, and as third base umpire alongside HP Umpire Doug Eddings, 1B Umpire Blaser, and 2B Umpire Nelson for Game 2.

Umpire Shane Livensparger
Photo - OfficialsHelpingWarriors.org

Livensparger is on the International League roster for the 2017 season, which is his third season in the IL and third overall in Triple-A. He has also worked the Arizona, New York-Penn, Florida Instructional, South Atlantic, Florida State, Arizona Instructional, Southern, and Arizona Fall Leagues, in addition to MLB Spring Training.

Jim Evans Academy of Professional Umpiring alum Livensparger wears the uniform number 43 at the Major League level, which was last worn by Paul Schrieber, and makes his MLB debut at the age of 33. He resides in Jacksonville Beach, Florida, is President of Officials Helping Warriors, and is the third new fill-in umpire to make his debut during the 2017 regular season (Ryan Additon, 5/21/17 and John Libka, 5/27/17).

Additon, Libka, and Livensparger all worked the 2016 AFL Fall Stars Game. The last remaining umpire to work that game yet to make his MLB debut is Nick Mahrley.

Livensparger most recently worked the plate for Thursday's IL matchup between the Charlotte Knights and Gwinnett Braves in Lawrenceville, Georgia.

Tmac's Teachable Moments - Picking Up a Crew Mate

Friday's Tmac's Teachable Moment concerns filling in for a crew mate to avoid an uncovered play.

Sometimes when you take a baseball field at any level, a partner makes a positioning mistake. Now here's the question: Are you the kind of person who can recognize this mistake and pick him up or do you let him burn? Today's teachable moment is about crewmanship and how to pick up your brothers on the field.

We have an unattended play at third base.

Take a look at this play from Wednesday's Cleveland-Colorado game at Coors Field. Watch the first 11 seconds of the attached video. Notice anything unusual?

You may notice there is no umpire at third base to make this call. While I don't expect most of you to know the intricacies of 4-man mechanics, the play begins with one out and a runner at 2nd base. The batter hits a fly ball to left field, and a tag-up situation will ensue. The 3B Umpire is Greg Gibson, 2B has Sam Holbrook, 1B is DJ Reyburn, and Jim Wolf has the plate.

In this situation when U3 (Greg Gibson) goes out, U2 (Holbrook) has responsibility for the play at 3rd, while the out umpire (U3) is to stay in the outfield for the remainder of the play; the plate umpire (Wolf) will remain at the dish for a potential overthrow/scoring play. Wait a minute; where did heck did Reyburn come from at :14 seconds of the video? Was he in the stands in uniform waiting for a play just like this? Did he drop out of the sky?

Reyburn recognizes the lack of coverage.

Or did he recognize a potential disaster at third base and pick up his crew mate? In the modern era of expanded instant replay, the missed call doesn't matter, but it's the instincts to realize potential disaster is looming that separates the wheat from the chaff.

You'll notice that, like Reyburn, Gibson also picked up the mistake on the video at :51 seconds and attempts to sprint back get a decent look at the tag into 3rd (the best look is at 1:17 when you see DJ sprinting across the infield).

U3 Gibson also saw the vacancy at third base.

There's another takeaway here. It's always good to keep your head on a swivel and know when a partner goes out. Picking up your partner can save you potential disasters. In four-man, someone goes out on nearly every play to the outfield, but there are advanced mechanics to keep an umpire ahead of the play, so it would have been permissible for the 1st base umpire to go out on this play for some CCs (this is a crew-dependent policy and deviates from the "standard" MLBUM mechanic).

In summary, be a good teammate. Nobody wants to work with a guy who hangs others out to dry.  Stay focused. If this play happens to you, there's no replay to save you. Also, if you make a mistake out on the field and someone picks you up, be grateful. Say thank you. And above all else, HAVE FUN out there!!!!  Until Next time, Happy Umpiring!

Video via "Read More"

2017 Instant Replay - Status Report at Review No. 500

500 Replay Reviews into the 2017 regular season, here is a status report of how baseball's video review system has fared this year, including a list of Replay Reviews which Assistant Commissioner tmac has identified as erroneous in outcome (e.g., upheld or reversed in contravention of video evidence):

Replay Review Decisions: 500 (6/7/17).
Total Upheld: 250 (50.0%).
Total Overturned: 250 (50.0%).

Leaderboard - Top 10 Umpires*

RAP	Umpire	Rank
100.0%	Carapazza, Vic (4/4)	1
90.9%	Marquez, Alfonso (10/11)	2
87.5%	West, Joe (7/8)	3
85.7%	Guccione, Chris (6/7)	4
83.3%	Foster, Marty (5/6)	5
80.0%	Everitt, Mike (4/5)	6
77.8%	Porter, Alan (7/9)	7
75.0%	Cuzzi, Phil (6/8)	8
75.0%	Hoye, James (3/4)	8
75.0%	Baker, Jordan (3/4)	8

By Reason of Review / Type of Play

RAP	Type	Rank
.857	Fair/Foul	1
.833	Slide Interference	2
.681	HR/In Play	3
.667	Runner Placement	4
.598	Out/Safe (Tag - into Base)	5
.553	Out/Safe (Pulled Foot)	6
.529	Out/Safe (Force - Second)	7
.500	HBP/No HBP	8
.500	Out/Safe (Appeal)	8
.500	Foul Ball/Fan INT	8
.500	Appeal Play (Missed Base)	8

Leaderboard - Team

RAP	Type	Rank
.786	KC	1
.714	SF	2
.692	BAL	3
.688	NYM	4
.688	NYY	4
.643	PIT	6
.632	LAD	7
.600	LAA	8
.593	TEX	9
.588	CHC	10
.583	CWS	11
.563	ARI	12
.556	CLE	13
.500	CIN	14
.500	HOU	14
.500	MIN	14
.471	COL	17
.462	PHI	18
.455	WAS	19
.429	SEA	20
.409	ATL	21
.400	TB	22
.381	STL	23
.368	BOS	24
.364	TOR	25
.357	DET	26
.357	MIA	26
.333	MIL	28
.308	OAK	29
.286	SD	30

Tmac's Replays-in-Error (Upheld or Overturned despite conflicting video evidence)

#	On-Field Umpire	Dispo
001	Hudson	Upheld
024	Bellino	Upheld
100	Iassogna	Upheld
102	Hamari	Upheld
179	Culbreth	Upheld
183	Cederstrom	Upheld
198	West	Upheld
199	Fagan	Upheld
203	Nelson	Upheld
216	Eddings	Upheld
232	Scheurwater	Upheld
238	Emmel	Upheld
302	Timmons	Upheld
345	Hickox	Overturned
377	Welke	Upheld
386	West	Upheld
396	Cuzzi	Upheld
467	Foster	Upheld

All except #216 and #396 were Out/Safe replays. #216 was a Foul Tip/HBP play. #396 was a HBP/No HBP play.

*Minimum number of Replay Reviews to qualify for the leaderboard was n=3. Other "Perfect Replay" Umpires under the minimum included Dale Scott, Chad Fairchild, and Ryan Blakney (all n=2), and Ramon De Jesus (n=1).

MLB Ejection 061 - Dan Iassogna (1; Danny Valencia)

HP Umpire Dan Iassogna ejected Mariners 1B Danny Valencia (strike two call) in the bottom of the 8th inning of the Twins-Mariners game.* With two out and none on, Valencia took a 1-1 curveball from Twins pitcher Taylor Rogers for a called second strike before grounding out on the following pitch. Replays indicate the pitch was located over the heart of home plate and below the midpoint (px -.168, pz 3.349 [sz_top 3.467]), the call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the Twins were leading, 5-4. The Mariners ultimately won the contest, 6-5.

This is Dan Iassogna (58)'s first ejection of the 2017 MLB regular season.
Dan Iassogna now has 1 point in the UEFL Standings (-3 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 1).
Crew Chief Brian Gorman now has 0 points in Crew Division (-1 Previous + 1 Correct Call = 0).
*This ejection was gleaned from UEFL Rule 7-2, which holds that if the official box score is erroneous, "clear and convincing" evidence may override this. In this situation, video evidence of an ejection was used to override a box score that failed to list the ejection.

This is the 61st ejection report of 2017.
This is the 24th player ejection of 2017. Prior to ejection, Valencia was 0-4 (2 SO) in the contest.
This is Seattle's 3rd ejection of 2017, 2nd in the AL West (OAK 4; SEA 3; TEX 2; HOU, LAA 0).
This is Danny Valencia's first ejection since Sept 20, 2016 (Marty Foster; QOC = N [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Dan Iassogna's first ejection since Sept 25, 2016 (Cameron Maybin; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap: Minnesota Twins vs. Seattle Mariners, 6/7/17 | Video via "Read More"