+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 46
Thread: A Paranoid man.
08-01-2014 08:37 AM #1
A Paranoid man.
"Safe. He never tagged him. I don't know what they're looking at. I think we lead the league in stands. A paranoid man would worry more about it, an alert man would wonder about it. I do. It's pretty obvious to us. I hope they didn't have the same look we had."
08-01-2014 08:49 AM #2
Seriously? Even the super slow replay was not definitive. It implies he was safe but it was not clear.
My paranoia questions why Jones was wandering aimlessly of the bag I that situation.
08-01-2014 09:05 AM #3
08-01-2014 09:24 AM #4
I thought that Jones was safe, but I also thought that there was not indisputable evidence that the call was wrong.
If Jones had been called safe, and Scoscia had challenged it, I would have expected the umpires to do the same thing (stay with their original call on the field.)
08-01-2014 09:36 AM #5
I guess it comes down to - what is definitive? If it means 100% certainty, then it was a correct decision to not change the call. If it means 90% certainty, they should have changed the call. As we've seen in football, the NFL does not use a 100% certainty standard.
08-01-2014 09:54 AM #6
I think MLB is looking for 100%. And that's fine with me. In fact I argue if not absolutely clear right away, it's not certain.
In baseball, bang bang plays have never been about certainty, if the ball arrives first and the defender is in position then they get the call. I don't need that standard changed.
Replay is about righting the obvious mistakes, such as that safe call at 1st base robbing Ubaldo of a perfect game a fees back in Colorado.
08-01-2014 10:27 AM #7
08-01-2014 10:31 AM #8
08-01-2014 10:51 AM #9
- Join Date
- May 2009
So was the issue that the angle that showed how late the tag was obscured the view of AJ's fingers? Because if you have any sense of object permanency, and know from the other angle how long it took him to touch the bag, there really wasn't a question.
I can see them talking about it in New York. "See Bob... right... there. You can't see his fingers or the top of his hand anymore, so they clearly phased of of existence. How are you supposed to touch a base without fingers, Bob? How?"
08-01-2014 10:55 AM #10
Oh for ****'s sake....
08-01-2014 11:01 AM #11
You know why I know he was safe? 'Cause I was looking at Jones and Kirby yuk it up with Pujols while the umps were staring at the replay. Their body language gave it away. All three of 'em made gestures on the forearm.
Blown call, didn't lose the game that inning. Moving on.
08-01-2014 11:02 AM #12GCL O's
- Join Date
- May 2012
He was safe, one angle was 100% definitive. The angle the umpire had he looked out. The angle from Kirby and the Orioles dugout he was without a doubt safe. So since we can't see behind the curtain to the inner workings of the wizard we are only left to assume MLB's definition of "definitive".
08-01-2014 11:33 AM #13
08-01-2014 11:40 AM #14
It's getting really frustrating to listen to Joe and Fred call these replays on the radio. I didn't see the play live but I heard it live and both Joe and Fred were 110% certain that he was absolutely safe beyond a shadow of a doubt. After they upheld the call, they said that NY should be ashamed and got the call wrong. When I looked at it this morning I saw that it was very close and inconclusive.
Joe and Fred (particularly Joe) have been so homer biased on these replay reviews all season. They seem to think every Orioles' challenge is clear as day and every opposing team's challenge is "inconclusive".
08-01-2014 11:46 AM #15