Cubs Win Even Though Bellinger Knocked Ball Out of Bart's Hand During Tag Attempt - A Rules Review

Подписаться 38 тыс.

Просмотров 69 тыс.

50% 1

Saturday's Pirates-Cubs game ended on a walk-off slide by Cody Bellinger into home plate despite Pittsburgh catcher Joey Bart appearing to tag the runner...only to drop the ball when Bellinger knocked the ball out of Bart's hand. Replay Review confirmed HP Umpire Chris Conroy's safe call. Let's review baseball's interference rule... Report: www.closecallsports.com/2024/...
Buy Me a Coffee: www.buymeacoffee.com/closecal...
Discord: / discord
Facebook: / closecallsports
Twitter: / closecallsports
You're not going to find common sense in the Official Baseball Rules. IT'S NOT THERE! I TRIED TO FIND IT! SO MANY TIMES! IT DOESN'T EXIST!
The standard for non-batted balls regarding offensive interference is that the act must be intentional or "willful and deliberate" (there are a few exemptions surrounding things like runner's lane, batter's interference, bona fide slide rule, and home plate collision, but this is the standard for garden variety tag plays).
We go over the definition of what a tag is (firm and secure possession, complete control, other requirements, etc.), and find out that this portion of the play...simply isn't reviewable so the Replay Official had no choice but to CONFIRM Conroy's safe call because....after all, the ball was dropped and rolling on the ground before the catcher completed the entire process of the tag.
This was one questionable Cubs catcher caper (confirmed).

Спорт

Опубликовано:

17 май 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 248

@edibleapeman 14 дней назад

I want you in every booth in the League.

@iamthebum 13 дней назад

They need to be calling Lindsay for the explanations rather than the retired umpires.

@patientallison 11 дней назад

I definitely would love to see a broadcast reference a CCS video at some point like they've done to Jomboy.

@donaldthomas7070 11 дней назад

@edibleapeman, exactly right. Now, to get Lin cloned . . .

@FUGP72 14 дней назад

I don't even get the confusion over this. It was clearly not intentional. So even if not reviewable, that safe call stands. I also don't see the anger over the rule. I think that is a GOOD rule. You can't just have "Any time the runner causes the ball to be dropped, it is an out." or else you would have fielders who barely have control of the ball dropping it on a normal tag play getting an out call that is clearly not deserved.

@closethockeyfan5284 14 дней назад

Transfer is the confusion

@FUGP72 14 дней назад

@@closethockeyfan5284 But as she says...this is not a transfer case. He has the ball in his bare hand the entire time. And impact of the slide caused his arms to swing around. And the legal unintentional contact caused it to come out.

@bhamsoxfan72 14 дней назад

@@closethockeyfan5284 Transfer is only in the acct of making a subsequent throw. Transfer is not a consideration here.

@bmxbobby1 14 дней назад

Coach is just trying to WIN

@ottoandhanzblack2175 13 дней назад

The infield fly rule comes to mind...

@horhay1981 13 дней назад

Common sense says shows the runner did not intentionally knock the ball out of the catchers hand. Good call by the umpire

@robertbluestein7800 14 дней назад

Any time I see a Pirate catcher excellently receiving a throw that is a little wide to the first-base side and diving to make that tag, it reminds me of the play where Spanky LaValliere took the throw from Bonds and Sid Bream just barely made it to the plate. Look at those two plays side-by-side, and it both are text-book examples of how good catchers do what they can with errant throws. Taylor's throw beat Cody, but the accuracy was inches off. That's how close the game can be at times.

@KazeShikamaru 13 дней назад

Wonderful breakdown.

@25mdarchi 14 дней назад

All the catcher had to do was wait a little longer before trying to show he had the ball. It looks like he rushes it into his hand to try to show the ump he has it. Probably just excitement from making a big play. Additionally, I like the explanation of having to be blind to non-reviewable portions of the replay. Judgment of intention is never going to be reviewable because slow motion makes everything look intentional.

@richpaul6806 14 дней назад

He didnt try to show he had the ball. He was holding it with his right hand inside the glove and his hands came apart as he rolled over.

@Sicaughtik 14 дней назад

@@richpaul6806 Then he shoulda left it in his glove. If that ball is gloved it doesn't pop out. Which is better at retaining a baseball? Your giant ass catcher's glove designed for exactly that purpose or your bare hand?

@gaspara9817 14 дней назад

@@Sicaughtik Both together. This has long been the proper way for the catcher to make a tag. Catcher just aren't usually doing a barrel roll when they are making the tag.

@frankrestly6884 13 дней назад

When the tag out at the plate is done with less than two outs and other runners on base, the catcher shows the ball to the umpire to establish an immediate safe / out call. Reason being, the fielders then know how to position themselves regarding the remaining base runners.

@MichaelRighi 13 дней назад

But he had another play he needed to quickly make with another runner on the bases.

@TheCpadron19 14 дней назад

Not even a questionable call. It was unintentional, it's not like he did an A-Rod and punched it out of his glove.

@anthonywaschow9409 13 дней назад

A-Rod's was so obviously intentional that they overturned the call without even having the ability to replay it back then.

@Dommy_B 13 дней назад

That’s not the argument. He had the ball secured with both hands. Made the tag. Tried to show the ball and get the out call so he can relay it to 3rd to prevent the runner from advancing.

@Alboalt 13 дней назад

Agree. The runner's not even looking at where the ball is when it hits his hand

@Alboalt 13 дней назад

@@Dommy_B You're assuming and mind-reading in your last sentence, I believe

@Dommy_B 13 дней назад

@@Alboalt I mean it’s a pretty safe assumption he is a professional and knew the situation.

@hammerhiem75 13 дней назад

I don't think it's definitive the tag was in time anyway.

@christinyoung5082 13 дней назад

We were at the game yesterday and even in real time it was hard to tell. Thank you for this great explanation!

@Dad-vice 14 дней назад

They should have you on the broadcasts like Mike Pereira for the NFL to explain the rules

@Desirsar 14 дней назад

One of my favorite seasons of NFL commentary was Dennis Miller in the booth. When some obscure rule was applied for a penalty, the regular team knew the rule and wouldn't bring it up. Miller would be confused and ask, and they'd explain it in pretty good detail. Lindsay would be the opposite, of course, adding a person to the booth that knows the rules, and then has to tell them anyway even when they think they don't need to ask...

@HKim0072 14 дней назад

She would need to cut down her explanation to 30 seconds. Which would be a "challenge".

@kinkaid7477 13 дней назад

You couldn't be more correct.

@saw2135 13 дней назад

So she can incorrectly explain things, and miss very obvious things people can see? So yeah, just like the NFL.

@johncaccamo 10 дней назад

Cant deny that, although i will say that football’s rules are far less esoteric, bizarre, and irrational than baseball’s. Most of the officiating controversy in football comes down to missed or blown call which cant be reviewed or calls made correctly on rules people don’t like (whats a catch or sacking a QB). Much of the time in baseball, nobody really knows or understands the rules, including the players, managers, announcers, and even the umps, or have conflicting rules where one has to decide which rule applies in which circumstance. Thats where Lindsay does such a great job.

@derksforeal7960 14 дней назад

Nice breakdown, as always. I was watching live, instantly wanted clarification glad you could inform

@bigpoppa1234 14 дней назад

At 1:50 the left hand touches the toe of the boot, but the ball is in the right hand, so I'm not entirely sure this should count as a tag. Can you only ever tag a player with one hand ("or with their hand or glove holding the ball)? Or can you bring your other hand over the hand with the ball (ie, bring your bare hand over the ball in the glove) and then count that as well?

@gaspara9817 14 дней назад

A ball in the throwing hand touching the inside of the glove makes the entire glove a taggable surface. It was the proper way for a catcher to make a tag if possible for a long time because its the best way to prevent it getting knock out in a collision.

@roberthudson4440 13 дней назад

And yet it was knocked out due to collision...😮

@RyanRobbins007 14 дней назад

I don't get the controversy here. I don't see any evidence that the runner deliberately knocked the ball out of the catcher's hand.

@milanv69 14 дней назад

You, my friend, seem to have both functioning eyes and a functioning brain. It seems a lot of Pirates fans can't say the same for themselves.

@MrGgffggffggff 14 дней назад

@@milanv69we root for the Pirates man. Of course there is no functioning brain cells if we support a team owned by one of the worst owners in professional sports.

@bhamsoxfan72 14 дней назад

@@MrGgffggffggff TOM Excuse me, everybody, this is Jake Taylor. Jake is a professional baseball player. JACK What team do you play for, Jake? TAYLOR The [Pirates]. CLAIRE Here in [Pittsburgh]? I didn't know they still had a team. TAYLOR Yeh, we have uniforms and everything. It's really great.

@mbdg6810 13 дней назад

The controversy is sparked by not knowing the rules and thinking common sense is the standard.

@isaacclark9825 4 дня назад

The controversy is because folks are not aware that knowing out must be intentional. I was not aware until I saw this video.

@garygemmell3488 14 дней назад

It should also be noted that catcher's are taught, whenever possible, to grab the ball with his bare hand after fielding the ball and then wrap his glove around his bare hand. When the tag was made the ball was in his bare hand. There was no transfer.

@OfficiatingBornVideos 13 дней назад

I swear, she explains things so well and does not give random opinions to verify what she is saying. This is done so well.

@noah509 14 дней назад

I'm happy I actually knew this ruling! Generally when I see the ball on the ground I'm assuming it's safe.

@circumventreality3770 7 дней назад

to me it looks like he tagged him out with the ball in the mitt with both hands before he reached the plate, and successfully controlled it, but took the ball out of the glove too soon while the runner was still sliding to show he had the ball, and then it got knocked out. He should have waited til the slide was over to move his hand. I would like to hear if the catcher spoke to the press after the game.

@joen8529 11 дней назад

He’s allowed incidental contact. Always has been with plays at the plate… except you used to even be able to hit the catcher like a freight train. Safe was the correct call.

@78tag 11 дней назад

The best part of this description - ??? - She said " there's no common sense in baseball" - I love it.

@Rowgue51 8 дней назад

He never tagged him to begin with. He took the ball out of his glove immediately after catching it and before he ever lunged toward the runner. He tagged the runner with his glove but the ball was not in his glove at that point, it was in his throwing hand. He did eventually make contact with the runner with the ball in his throwing hand, but that was well after the runner touched the plate.

@stuff_n_thanngs7552 13 дней назад

Bart rolled his arm into Bellinger. It was the perfect storm of unintentional

@harty3113 13 дней назад

2 things make this an easy safe for me. 1. Not interference he's not even looking at the ball or doing any swiping motion. It's incidental. 2. The catcher did a poor job of keeping the ball in possession to begin with. The tag knocked his hand holding the ball out of his glove and he probably already started losing possession there. The hand hitting the ball finished it off.

@OldManSurvival 14 дней назад

This is a very clear example of the limits on what can be reviewed should be eliminated! Anything that happens in an MLB game should be reviewable! Right now balls and strikes are not reviewable but they are reviewable in the Minor Leagues. Soon, if not next year, that system will be in the MLB! If the rules committee can change that “hard and fast” rule, then other changes should be made as well! Great video and thank you for covering this play and explaining it so well and in-depth!

@Kevin_Aus 14 дней назад

I think mlb have made increasing the pace of play a priority and will fight against anything that could potentially slow down the game. I think they will go to balls and strikes being 100% called by the computer before they let them be reviewable.

@FUGP72 14 дней назад

Yeah...that's all we need. Let's grind the game to a halt on EVERY close play! THAT'LL get fans back watching! They love sitting around for several minutes watching players standing around for several minutes watching umpires standing around for several minutes And for what? This would still have been safe. And SHOULD be safe. IT is idiotic to suggest that any time a ball is dropped due to the tag being applied it should be still out. The catcher clearly didn't have good control of the ball. The runner did not even remotely intentionally do it. That is safe by the rules all day and should be safe by the rules all day.

@25mdarchi 14 дней назад

Reviewing balls and strikes makes sense because it's an objective standard (did the ball hit the strike zone). Judgment calls, especially those that require intent, are always going to be more difficult to get reviewable status. This play is a perfect example. Was it intentional? Maybe, but you could also argue the catcher moved the ball into the sliding player path. Judgment calls can also look different to different observers. 1B umpire sees a balk but replay official disagrees, who is right (provided there was some type of motion to instigate the balk call)? The purpose of replay is to confirm or overturn the decision on the field based on the evidence available, not necessarily to reofficiate the play correctly.

@rickysampson8759 14 дней назад

I would definitely challenge everything to stop the pitcher. I called time and you didn’t grant it? Challenge. The clock wasn’t fast enough for me. Challenge. The sky is too cloudy challenge. Each at bat would be 10 hours long

@milanv69 14 дней назад

Even if the interference call was reviewable, it wouldn't have made a difference because the contact was NOT willful or deliberate. Now, do you also want to change the rule that all interference should result in an out? Because that would be a horrible rule change and would only be reverted once fielders start to 'claim' interference in order to get a free out. Also slowing the game down to a crawl by making every play reviewable would be agonizing and would directly counter the entire idea of the pitch clock.

@mrwelch6482 13 дней назад

Amazing breakdown! be sure to tag all you Pittsburgh friends.

@Lige 13 дней назад

That was awesome, what you just did.

@saw2135 13 дней назад

Awful breakdown, she misses the tag in the toe, which invalidates everything else she said.

@Zippy994 13 дней назад

Straight up judgment call. Could have gone either way. The ump determined the ball drop contact was unintentional, and the catcher didn't hold on long enough to complete the tag. I think he did, regardless of why the ball was subsequently dropped. Review ump deferred to the judgment of the field ump and declined to overrule.

@garrettwebster201 12 дней назад

The momentum of the play was nowhere near over (which yes i understand isn't the rule book language, but is essentially how it is judged).The only way you can have an out here is if you think it was in the transfer, and I don't think there's any reasonable argument to say this was a transfer.

@Zippy994 12 дней назад

I hear ya, but if the drop did occur during transfer and the runner would have been deemed out, then that would be acknowledgment that the tag had been completed and the play was over prior to the ball coming loose. But because it was contact with the runner dislogging the ball after the tag, that same tag was not considered completed. The catcher had made the tag and disengaged initial contact with control of the ball. Seeing it in slow motion makes that clear. But in real time, it would be much harder to make that distinction. So it's understandable why the call on the field was that Bellinger was safe.

@garrettwebster201 11 дней назад

@@Zippy994 I get what you're saying, and it's something I've thought about before. It's kinda a hole in the rules. However, it is there. If he's not attempting to make a throw, he's gotta survive the tag. If he's trying to take it out to make a throw, he doesn't. I wouldn't mind the rule being changed to make it make sense, but as it's written this is not an out

@Michael-gu5kl 12 дней назад

Great job and it looks to me like Shelton accepted the result after talking to the umpires!

@a_badali 14 дней назад

Who tags out with ball in throwing hand? Bellinger couldn't haven't known the ball was palmed. Inadvertent contact at best

@kevwwong 13 дней назад

Thank you for this. I can't say I'm surprised that the replay parameters could do something like supersede common sense and what one can see with the naked eye.

@haiironezumi 14 дней назад

Oooh, that intentional/unintentional requirement for interference kind of speaks to a play that happened to me recently in an adult rec game. Runners on 3rd & 1st, 1 out. Ball put in play softly to shortstop (I think? Not too relevant). Runner from 3rd comes home, throw to the catcher hits him in the feet *after* he has crossed home, on a throw that came from behind his back. Call on the field was interference, runner from 3rd was called out, runner from 1st placed at second and BR at 1st - but that's where they were and neither was attempting to advance.

@tomn4993 13 дней назад

Cannot "unscore" R3. And unless R3 intentionally kicked the ball (which sounds impossible from your writeup), he cannot be called out for INT.

@haiironezumi 13 дней назад

@@tomn4993 That was my thought too - run counts, if there was a legitimate interference call it would be an out called on the runner where a play was possible (e.g. if the kick was intentional and R2 broke for 3B, then there's a call and R2 would be out)

@samueldrazkowski2908 13 дней назад

Looks unintentional, so I actually agree with the out call because dropping on transfer doesn't apply here, if it did, then we can question

@jeffreybrookner9251 12 дней назад

I'm not sure I agree with this. "Long enough to prove that they have complete control" doesn't require any particular length of time. In the small fraction of a second between when the tag was applied and when the ball was knocked out, it was 100% clear that Bart had complete control of the ball. That was "long enough to prove..."

@garrettwebster201 12 дней назад

I don't agree. Surviving the tag is a part of the play. You can't have control until the play is over.

@ThomasBaxter 14 дней назад

"There's no common sense in baseball!" - Tom Hanks

@ThomasBaxter 14 дней назад

Also "There's no Patreon link in the description!" - Me

@Thanatos2k 14 дней назад

I'm not entirely confident the tag was before the toe hit the plate anyways. The ball wasn't in the glove, it was in his other hand which touches his leg later.

@stevebabiak6997 13 дней назад

Exactly, tagging with the glove that doesn’t have the ball in it doesn’t count as a tag. And that’s what I initially thought happened.

@yunak9665 13 дней назад

Thanks for confirming my suspicion. As I watched it initially I thought "why does it matter when he tagged with an empty glove?"

@-SkyCat- 14 дней назад

Safe! hold the ball

@fifiwoof1969 14 дней назад

BEAUTIFULLY explained - thanks Lindsay.

@GTR3x 13 дней назад

Absolutely safe! Had that been the runner’s elbow, face, or any other part of his body without an opposable thumb, nobody would argue “but he knocked it out” or that he was in any other way responsible. The fact that the incidental contact happened below the wrist changes nothing. The catcher failed to hold the ball after the tag. Period. Safe!

@andrewtraver1879 13 дней назад

It still looks to me like Bellinger got his toe on the back of the plate just before being tagged on the leg. How the heck did the catcher transfer the ball so quickly on a bang bang play?

@saw2135 13 дней назад

Bellinger was tagged on his toe first though.

@kyleraymer5581 13 дней назад

@@saw2135 It doesn't look like he actually got the toe. It looks like the first tag for sure was on the leg. The Toe does catch the dirt so that might have fooled the announcers. If the Toe did actually make contact with the catcher it appears it was on his wrist/arm so it still wouldn't be an out. Either way not sure there is enough evidence on that side to overturn the call had they ruled the ball was held.

@briansaeger5580 12 дней назад

Look closely at the attempted tag. The tag was with the hand holding the ball, not the glove. The ball in hand and glove are separating during the tag process. So, this is not a transfer. I believe that if the tag was applied with the glove with the right hand holding the ball in the glove, the result would be an out because the ball would be better protected.

@jonathonmedia8751 14 дней назад

great vid!

@Youngstomata 14 дней назад

Hey Chicago what do you say the cubs are going to win today!

@btperkins 12 дней назад

There are so many things going on with this play! There is one thing that I was wondering about: At the end of the play, the ball is in his bare hand. Did he tag Bellinger with a mitt + bare hand combination, or was it mitt only (with the ball being only in his bare hand). If it's the latter, he's safe no matter what else happens, and we have slightly less controversy. But since this was never brought up anywhere that I can see, I have to assume it was mitt + bare hand (holding the ball), which would have been a legal tag if the ball hadn't been dropped. I just can't actually see that anywhere in the replay.

@nathe1171 12 дней назад

Based on the rules. If the catcher had made a throwing motion to second base when he dropped the ball instead of nothing would the ruling change then? Just always pretend you were going to throw the ball so the tag would be adjudged to have been made.

@anthonylombardo1261 13 дней назад

Cody better be doing slide drills till the all star break. What was that garbage, he’s out by a mile his foot doesn’t even slide on the plate, he whiffed and had to tap it with his foot late. I’m a cubs fan and we got lucky this was extras and everyone wanted to enjoy their weekend

@Goomlahexpress 14 дней назад

@closecallsports My question is why does the HP ump move to his left when he was in perfect position to make a call? And Interference should be reviewable but that will never happen.

@milanv69 14 дней назад

While I do think interference should be reviewed, it wouldn't matter because the interference was unintentional so it would still be safe. You can tell when you watch the play at normal game speed.

@photodave219 14 дней назад

Yeahhhhhhhhhh I have no problem with this. Don’t hold the ball in your bare hand, you’re risking it getting knocked out.

@RobInNJ03 12 дней назад

And, as a broadcaster myself, that analysis was embarrassing. In the immortal words of Warner Wolf, KNOW THE RULES!

@TheCharlesJLee1000 14 дней назад

This rule book from MLB reminds me of the ALCS of 2004 between NYY and Boston Red Sox, when the Yankees R1 A-Rod knocking out the baseball of Red Sox pitcher Bronson Arroyo at first base, and umps ruled he was out.

@george1urban 14 дней назад

Correct, that play was willful and deliberate and met the criteria for being ruled interference.

@fifiwoof1969 14 дней назад

That was CLEARLY wilful and deliberate.

@calebrowe2004 14 дней назад

@@fifiwoof1969 how was that deliberate he is sliding and has his arm up like most slides do the catcher moves the ball into his path and drops the ball if you can explain how its willful i will take this back

@garygemmell3488 14 дней назад

Because it was intentional.

@kyleward1650 14 дней назад

@@calebrowe2004 Clearly talking about the Arod play dude

@cumac44 13 дней назад

Good thing replay wasn’t a thing when Kit Keller knocked the ball away from Dottie Hinson. Penny Marshall would need to rewrite the entire end of A League of Their Own.

@chocolatecoveredgummybears 14 дней назад

what a terrible throw to the plate too

@milanv69 14 дней назад

Agreed lol I didn't even notice it until you pointed it out. He wasn't even deep when he caught it, he was nearly at the cusp of the infield. If it was a good throw, Bellinger would have been out by a country mile.

@chocolatecoveredgummybears 14 дней назад

haha. yeah no kidding@@milanv69

@chocolatecoveredgummybears 14 дней назад

lol yeah, no kidding.@@milanv69

@rilgin 13 дней назад

Even before the ball comes out it was a bang bang play at the plate so the ump could honestly have called him safe or out. Of course he called him safe because in real time he saw the ball come out and roll away. I just don’t think there was enough to overturn the original safe call so it should stand as called. There was no irrefutable evidence to overturn it.

@byronhorde5892 10 дней назад

Basically, the catcher should not have taken the ball out of the glove so early. If he holds onto it longer, the runner is out. Bart, you messed up.

@jaybingham3711 10 дней назад

The slow mo definitively shows there's no question that Bart completed his catch cleanly with two hands and was in the process of lifting the ball from his mitt to show the ump he had maintained control from A) the catch and B) throughout the tag. That much is undeniable. And you'd have to be a homer hack to assert otherwise. Sure, Bart could have just happened to have had a seizure at the moment of the tag that caused him to remove the ball and lift it skywards. Or some other nonsensical claim. Bart is clearly in the process of presenting the ball to the ump as controlled...just like every fielder does on a bang-bang play. It's just bad luck on the timing. He's of course under no obligation to display control of the ball immediately. Had he just waited half a second longer, this aspect is moot (but other aspects remain). But thems the breaks.

@darinlegore284 13 дней назад

catcher removed caught ball from glove, then runner unintentionally made some contact. Does book imply "intentionally knocks ball out of glove?)

@Gigitygoo55 14 дней назад

I understand announcers pulling for their team but man try not to be so biased! I think the reds announcers do a great job at calling what they see but sadly they aren’t watchable right now! 😢

@kevwwong 13 дней назад

I don't know how the Pirates announcers are normally, but I sort of get it when it's a game ender like this.

@gregmatyas4272 13 дней назад

Reds announcers might be now but when old man Brennaman was there he was the biggest homer/whiner in the league!!

@bloodlos 14 дней назад

Holy alliteration Batgirl!

@equinoxproject2284 14 дней назад

This play is no different than of the fielder loses the ball after taging the runner anywhere else on their body.

@dylan456 13 дней назад

Catcher needs to keep it in the glove! And CF needs a better throw

@CommonTing 5 дней назад

The baseball rulebook does not say he is safe. It’s just written in a way that the call can’t definitively be wrong. Holding onto the ball long enough seems to be a complete judgment call. A catcher taking the ball out of his glove and showing it to the umpire not being long enough seems silly to me but hey I guess they aren’t technically wrong.

@zachansen8293 13 дней назад

The rule should require possession of the ball for a 'moment' *EITHER* before or after the play. But if you are holding the ball solidly well before the play, the out should be instantaneous on contact. Only if it's a bang-bang catch-tag should there be a requirement after the play to have possession of the ball.

@The_triple_fool 13 дней назад

It's the same as the debated reception rule in NFL, I can see the need to clarify the rule. In this case, there was a replay angle that seemed to show the first tag landing on Bellinger's knee after he was safe. It looked pretty clear to me at the time that Bart didn't get the tag on his toe, so it probably didn't matter.

@zachansen8293 13 дней назад

@@The_triple_fool baseball refs also need to explain the call over the PA so we know. But the rule as explained in the video is dumb regardless of what happened in this specific case.

@grife3000 13 дней назад

I guess the teaching point for all MLB players is to not show the umpire the ball, just let him assume you have it if he doesn't see it on the ground. This feels like an invitation to try and dislodge the ball with a home plate collision, something they were working to remove from the game. I can't find the wording in the rule books that made that play illegal, but surely this is the exact same thing? And with replay, we can call a runner out if he comes off for the bag for frame of the video, but we can't call a runner out after seeing a tag and seeing the ball held firmly in the tagger's hand for a few frames? Such a dumb rule. But no one will see that, and no changes will be made.

@jimyeats 4 дня назад

Seems pretty clear cut. Painfully obvious it wasn’t intentional, catcher had only a brief moment of control after the tag before the ball came out, and it wasn’t even really clear if the catcher tagged him before he touched the plate.

@phatpat44 12 дней назад

One of the few times i disagree Lindsay. I think common sense is telling me safe. You have to make the play to get the out.

@Christoph5782 10 дней назад

Youre likely coming at this from a pure baseball perspective, in a land where the drop third strike rule makes complete sense and isn’t just a rule seemingly left in the game for no real reason. In most sports, this act would not go in favor or the slider. It would be treated such as a goalie making the save, then being ran over by the attacking player. Sure the puck is in the net, but that’s because the attacking player hit the goalie causing the puck to be loose.

@robertbrown7470 12 дней назад

I think if the catcher is showing the umpire the ball, then he is out. I don't think it was intentional interference by the runner.

@gerry7446 13 дней назад

Common sense tells me the runner is safe. The "willful and deliberate" standard in these cases is subjective but reasonable. A-Rod was guilty of interference in the 2004 playoff game against the Red Sox; Bellinger was not in this case. I don’t want changes to the rule book to make Bellinger guilty of interference. I also think the “willful and deliberate” call needs to be made on the field and not in the booth. The rule is basically requiring one to get in the head of the player and, being closest, the ump is in the best position to do that. In 1978, Raiders QB Kenny Stabler was guilty of deliberately fumbling the ball - an illegal act then and now -- and allowing the ball to be advanced by other Raiders for a game-winning touchdown over the Chargers. The refs were wrong in not calling the intentional fumble but the NFL overreacted by adding a new rule, restricted to the last two minutes of each half, that prohibits a fumbled ball - intentional or not-- to be advanced by any offensive player other than the person who fumbled it. The Holy Roller Rule later resulted in calls that would lead to the Packers (2014) and Chargers (2020; poor Chargers, victims of the Holy Roller and Holy Roller Rule!) losing games they likely would have won, even though the fumbles that were advanced were, unlike Stabler’s, clearly not deliberate.

@nickblum1016 13 дней назад

Not only is it not intentional, his foot crossed home plate before his hand hit the ball...he's safe..plays dead...game over

@Quidproxo 13 дней назад

THIS is why you rage with ball in glove and not with ball in hand.

@Phil007QOS 13 дней назад

The one thing I hate seeing in this video is Pirates manager holding up his hand and waiting to see if he should challenge. Game is over if you don’t, so why are u waiting to hear if you should. Just challenge immediately.

@Tom-hc5iv 13 дней назад

Cub fan here....didn't even realize that was the controversy. To me me got his foot in before the tag...just barely but the foot came up shortly after. So if the ruling would have been there...I think the call stands...not confirmed. Interesting rule to say the least. I think they got this call right ...just not for the right purpose

@The_triple_fool 13 дней назад

As a Cub fan, I saw the same thing. One replay angle seemed to definitively show the tag missing Bellinger's toe, landing on his knee after he's safe. Could have been confirmed on that basis in my opinion.

@MatthewK863 14 дней назад

Can easily find half a dozen videos of runners knocking the ball out of the first baseman's glove, not an uncommon thing.

@andymiller6474 14 дней назад

exactly, there's been numerous plays at first where a throw puts the glove in the path of the base runner and the ball beats the base runner however, the first basemen could not complete the catch as the runner also hit the glove. i dont see how this play at home is any different

@milanv69 14 дней назад

@@andymiller6474 Because it's not at first base, it's at the plate. There are rules for a reason, you can choose to not like them but they are there for the purpose of adding a level of decency to the game. This play is a safe call, has been a safe call, and should always be a safe call.

@gregmatyas4272 13 дней назад

@@milanv69and u sir are completely wrong….learn the rules

@user-yg7jw4vt9r 14 дней назад

Othet lop hole rule book clean out call call out . Should let challenge everything till do get problems like this .

@jesuscage 14 дней назад

I don't think bellinger knocked it out on purpose, but if he did, good for him he got his team a W....Go Cubs go!!!

@davidpausche8420 12 дней назад

Common sense says the runner is safe. It's the catchers job to hold onto the ball, the runner didn't intentionally hit it out of the possession of the catcher, hence...the tag wasn't made as the ball was dropped...run scores. It's a very simple call.

@rj7411 14 дней назад

No surprise here. Its Joey Effing Bart!! One darn thing after another with him.

@user-wp5rx8ig5l 13 дней назад

There is no difference if the runner hit the catcher's glove or in this case his hand during the collision must have control of the ball.

@Dommy_B 13 дней назад

Also, we know for a FACT that Belli was the sole reason the ball was knocked out, a little earlier in the game, Bart dolphin dove at Ian Happ in a rundown with the ball solely in his barehand fell on it and the ball never moved. Barts grip strength is insane.

@gregmatyas4272 13 дней назад

Apparently it isn’t all that strong after all.

@xxagainsthegrainxxxxagains5994 11 дней назад

As you can see his foot was safe prior to any tag..

@hanke2588 13 дней назад

Safe

@gator1dl 14 дней назад

Hot out of the oven video! I still don't think the call is overturned even if the ball isn't knocked out. Was there clear evidence his foot didn't touch?

@gaspara9817 14 дней назад

Well the umpire calling safe then pointing to the ball indicates the safe call is the result of the ball being knocked out. It appears the umpire was about to call out until he saw the ball was no longer in the catchers possession.

@milanv69 14 дней назад

I highly doubt there was clear and conclusive evidence. Cubs fans saying he got in before the tag, Pirates fans saying the catcher tagged him on the foot, it's not clear or conclusive either way. The call on the field would have stood.

@johnemiller 12 дней назад

I think he tapped the plate with his toe prior to the tag.

@totallykoolyeah 13 дней назад

High fiving the opposing team

@SteveHartz 13 дней назад

This is not only a silly ruling but also a silly rule. You can clearly see in the replay that the catcher had complete control of the ball at the time of the tag AND after, as his hand is fully visible with control of the ball as he is pulling it out to show the umpire (again, AFTER the tag was made). How long does one have to maintain control of the ball after the tag is put on AND REMOVED while still having control? Assuming the tag was made in time, Bellinger should be out as soon as the tag is made and the ball is clearly seen in the bare hand with complete control. Nothing after that should matter. This is all moot if the tag was made after he touched the plate and would therefore be safe. Absolute silliness. She is right, there is no common sense in baseball.

@RobInNJ03 12 дней назад

There's no circumstance where I thought this runner was out. Take away the home plate collision rule, I.E. a catcher catches a ball, and the runner trucks him, old school....and the ball pops out. Runner is safe. Slide into 2nd, where the foot hits the ball and glove, as the tag is applied.. .runner is safe. This is the same thing. There's no question.

@davidsorensen2116 12 дней назад

It's not exactly the same thing, because in those instances the tag is what knocks the ball loose. The same contact between the ball-in-hand and the runner that would put the runner out knocks the ball loose. That's a clear cut example of the simultaneously dropped ball rule. Here, it's secondary contact after the tag contact is completed. The ball was still clearly in control of the catcher between the tag and the secondary contact. You can still fit it in to the immediately following part of the rule, but in my opinion the long enough to show complete control over the ball portion of the rule is satisfied here. But the pros clearly disagree with me

@StephenMintz 13 дней назад

What an excellent and thorough explanation! Thanks Linds, yet again you’ve proven yourself the rules guru.

@nazfrde 14 дней назад

A case can be made that the catcher actually reached out to his right to tag Bellinger on the wrist, and so HE caused the collision that resulted in the ball being dropped.

@saw2135 13 дней назад

In what would could you make that case?

@adamwatkins1150 14 дней назад

I disagree. Common sense to me says if you can't even hang onto the ball, absent a deliberate attempt by the runner to dislodge it, then you don't get the out. Hang onto the ball. How hard is this?

@milanv69 14 дней назад

That's a very good point and is precisely the reason for the safe call and confirmation of it by the replay team.

@jtrjtr5393 14 дней назад

Now that was a Close Call...sports!

@danielcastiglione5328 14 дней назад

I 100% believed and said the runner was safe when I saw this. Slide hard on purpose to get that ball to come out.

@michaelbraun246 14 дней назад

Could one make the argument that the catcher did have the ball firmly and securely in his hand long enough for the umpire to see it? It looked like he had control well after the tag was made.

@milanv69 14 дней назад

That is 100% a no. He showed the ball for a fraction of a second before it was unintentionally knocked out. The call is safe every day of the week.

@louiecomedian 14 дней назад

This is the problem with slow motion. When things happen in a fraction of a second, they look far more “intentional” when slowed down. The ump got this one right

@chiwawa130 10 дней назад

It was a close play. Could have gone either way. The call was made and we move on.

@joewg3 13 дней назад

Either everything is reviewable or nothing is reviewable. Not sure there is a point in having a review if you're going to omit half of the scenarios where it is useful.

@robertmatthews4285 13 дней назад

I don’t understand why you think this isn’t common sense. It’s common sense that the catcher has to maintain control of the ball thru the entire tag/collision. Common sense to me anyway. I don’t see any intentional act by the baserunner here, so he’s safe and it certainly makes sense to me. And I could care less about either of these teams, so I’m not biased.

@Christoph5782 10 дней назад

Catcher clearly held the ball after the tag was applied. It was knocked out later, after the tag is complete. In a different sport, this would be equivalent to a goalie making a save, then getting his glove slashed by the attacking player. Sure the puck is in the net, but the puck was frozen. That act would be goalie interference and a goal would not be awarded

@scotts7453 14 дней назад

This is an exact replica of that play between the Peaches and the Belles when Kit Henson scored because her sister Dottie dropped the ball after applying the tag at home. "Henson dropped the ball! Henson dropped the ball!" =)

@Call_me_E_C 14 дней назад

I had the same thought! And side note: was I the only one that felt really bad for Dottie? The camera angle and the way she dropped the ball made it look like she got knocked clean out cold, but I was pretty young when I watched that movie.

@mskolnik2 13 дней назад

This was definitely not intentional, you are right about that. The runner doesn't even look at the catcher, doesn't look at the catcher's arm, doesn't know the ball is in the hand instead of the glove. Never looks that way and you can clearly see his eyes. Clearly unintentional. He even sat there dejected for a half second until he saw the ball roll away instead of standing up immediately tracking the ball knowing he hit it

@GregMcNeish 13 дней назад

I see every indication that this wasn't willful & deliberate interference (no deviation of the hand from his slide motion, and doesn't appear to be an unnatural hand position like the Judge example). Doesn't look questionable at all to me.

@johnthomas1422 13 дней назад

Interference not being reviewable is not ok. There is no possible reason on earth an interference play should not be subject to review. Just another example of how umpires are ruining a perfectly good sport by making things arbitrarily unreviewable. Fire the umps and fire anybody associated with putting the pitch clock in place.