Can announcers just be consistent either love and die by the pitch track or be iffy on it. We consistently hear oh that’s not a strike followed by well remember it’s not 100% accurate in a different situation.
1:53-4:35 BOS vs. TOR/SD vs. STL 6:21-11:02 SF vs. WSH/STL vs. CHC (Yaider Molina needed to get a grip and focus on the ballgame instead of beefing with the home plate umpire and letting an inside-the-park home run occur during his argument) 15:03-20:16 STL vs. PIT/TOR vs. KC 29:35-30:27 CWS vs. BOS
The Vogelsong one was hilarious. I mean, I freely admit that there must have been some questionable calls earlier in the game, but Cuzzi's call of ball on that pitch was correct. It looked low in full speed...it looked low on the slo-mo replay....and it was low on the tracker. Add to that Vogelsong's reaction after the pitch, then after he got told not to walk in after the initial discussion, he deserved to be tossed one hundred percent.
Love that you can often hear the cursing. Was watching a Tribe game awhile back, after return from commercial, cam cut to Trevor Bauer in dugout after being pulled, just in time to catch him slam down his glove and clearly shout 'Fuckin SHIT!'. I lol'd for real.
With respect to the Boston/Toronto game that starts at 1:54, the commentators are saying that Gibby's "owed" an explanation as to why New York made the call they did. *I* think that is a valid argument. While I understand that you can't argue the call after the review has been completed, I *do* think that some plays *do* merit some more detailed explanation. Here's the problem with that, though... the call is being made IN. NEW. YORK. CITY. and being RELAYED to the umps in the game in which the play is being reviewed. There's no way you *CAN* get an explanation, unless you - as manager - put on a headset, yourself, and talk to the people in NYC - and we all know *THAT'S* not gonna happen.
At that point, the umps are just the messengers...and yet, the on-field personnel *still* lose it on the umps (classic case of "shooting the messenger").
The manager may have been out there to "talk to the pitcher"...but his real intent was to go off about the officiating. Another clip in a different video shows a manager yelling at "his team" when he's actually yelling about calls that didn't go their way...the ump walked out, listened, then hooked the manager (who then fired off *at* the ump). It's all an attempt to argue calls without visibly arguing calls...but it's just as asinine, all things considered (and it's kind of a dick move to stall the game like that, too).
it is and tbh it was properly called... if the 1b wants to cheat in on a bunt thats fine but if he does it and then its a pick off its an attempt (even inadvertently) to confuse the runner. good call, bad circumstances for Rizzo
@@topdawgrhodes243, that was my thought. Rizzo moving just before the play started was a definite attempt to deceive...had he done so earlier (playing in on a poor hitter/probable bunt) or as the pitcher started the wind-up, it wouldn't have been called.
Arguably, the players and managers are bigger babies...can't handle someone making mistakes, can't handle making mistakes themselves, can't follow (or don't know) the rules.
On the pitch prior (count of one ball and two strikes), Reynolds swung at the pitch and completely missed it (should be strike three and out); the home plate umpire called it a foul, though, which left Reynolds at bat (fouls are strikes up to strike two and are not counted against the batter afterwards...you can keep going as long as you keep making contact, in most situations)...his extra chance (based on the incorrect call) yielded a home run.
That solarte ejection was rediculous. Are you not allowed to be frustrated that you struck out on a check swing? The home plate umpire ejects him when he did nothing to him at all
He slammed his equipment to the ground which is a violation and technically an ejectable offense. Add umpire Bob Davidson into the equation and boom, he's gone. Bob Davidson is by far my least favorite umpire I ever watched because he always came off as grumpy old bastard with a quick trigger....ESPECIALLY with younger players.
But by rule, it's correct. Firing off equipment is enough to get ejected. Considering he could've kept his helmet on and not thrown it, I say he deserved that one.
"Pathetic" or not, it's still considered "abuse of official" and is thereby grounds for ejection. The alternative is basing it on intent and leaving it up to the player's word vs. the umpire's word...and it'd be argued vehemently *every single time*. Easier for all involved for it to be considered abuse of official and equally penalized.
