The McLouth foul Homerun Call

[KLJ]

The trajectory of the ball was clearly altered.

people keep using this word. i don't think it means what you think it means.

[Can_of_corn]

people keep using this word. i don't think it means what you think it means.

Are you saying you do not think that trajectory was altered? The flight path is inconsistent with how physics work unless another force acted on the ball.

You stated earlier that you have seen photos that show the ball was "clearly foul" please share those pictures.

[KLJ]

You stated earlier that you have seen photos that show the ball was "clearly foul" please share those pictures.

http://stats.storify.com/record/click?sid=5078bfad07431b00332464d7&redirect=http://twitter.com/JPF87/status/256941451559174144

clearly foul

[LookitsPuck]

people keep using this word. i don't think it means what you think it means.

It's relative. And, to me, it clearly changed direction, so it was clearly fair.

[LookitsPuck]

http://stats.storify.com/record/click?sid=5078bfad07431b00332464d7&redirect=http://twitter.com/JPF87/status/256941451559174144

clearly foul

Why would you post something that contradicts your belief?

[sevastras]

What technology do you think you're going to put in a foul pole to detect impacts? The only one that pops up in my head is a seismic/vibration detection system; and I highly doubt there's enough sensitivity at a low price point to detect a ball impact over top of the normal vibration of the crowd/stadium. A laser reflection system might work, but that's not exactly something you go shooting up into the sky, especially around people.

I thought that they had microphones on the foul poles and a ding would be heard when hit. I swear I remember a game were that happened and they talked about it, but that was years ago.

[Can_of_corn]

Why would you post something that contradicts your belief?

Because they couldn't find a picture to support their claim?

Or to prove that they are just trolling.

Take your pick.

[Palmoripken]

Thought I clearly saw it nick it. Just frustrating. Maybe not as bad as the Maier call but I still thought it was pretty bad.

[BrunoCherrytown]

I can't for the life of me see the trajectory changing definitively. And I'm glad I can't because I don't feel like we got robbed by the umps because man it's just too close to call.

We lost because our guys looked like they'd strike out 3 times each in a tee ball game - not because of this.

It makes the loss more palatable to me at least.

[actorgersh]

I think it hit the pole and yeah I was pissed because it would have tied the game. But I am glad if the O's had to lose, they lost by more than 1 run because it would have stung more. I would assume they do like the NFL where they need conclusive evidence. It is not 100 percent clear it hit it, but I definitely saw a change in trajectory.

[SerenityNow]

There has to be a computer program that can easily tell if the trajectory changes. I'm not saying the call should have been changed I just want to know if it hit or not.

[TradeAngelos]

There has to be a computer program that can easily tell if the trajectory changes. I'm not saying the call should have been changed I just want to know if it hit or not.

The only computer program I need is my two eyeballs.

Maybe if we can point out the exact frame on the GIF some of the more hard headed folks can finally see it.

[zweem]

I think that the posters who really played a lot of baseball (including the neighborhood softball thing) can see the different spin on the ball after contact----you would have to have played some to recognize and appreciate spin.

[Dannyboy]

"However, the usher at the top of 207 said the ball did barely nick the foul pole." - Craig Sager. It obviously hit the foul pole.. would it have changed the out come of the game? Possibly but I'm not going to dwell on it.

Sager also had the ball in his hands and he said there wasn't any yellow paint on it.

[SteveO]

Sager also had the ball in his hands and he said there wasn't any yellow paint on it.

I am guessing that the paint was not wet so if it grazed the pole it would not be beyond the realm of possibility that the ball would show no paint.

That said if the call was wrong it was not egregious or clear cut like the Maier incident. It either barely hit or barely missed. Cant fault an ump for not seeing something that multiple replays, close ups and the such have only proved that it likely grazed the pole. Its horrible luck and another example of the famous horseshoe the Yanks have up their bumm.