The McLouth foul Homerun Call

[zweem]

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

Besides the fact that most outdoor paints are anything but flat latex--and besides the fact that that the ball BARELY NICKED the pole----why in the hell would you expect paind on the ball??? Go throw a ball DIRECTLY INTO A FENCE OR POLE WITH ENAMEL PAINT-----YOU AIN'T SEE'N NO PAINT.

[Dannyboy]

Besides the fact that most outdoor paints are anything but flat latex--and besides the fact that that the ball BARELY NICKED the pole----why in the hell would you expect paind on the ball??? Go throw a ball DIRECTLY INTO A FENCE OR POLE WITH ENAMEL PAINT-----YOU AIN'T SEE'N NO PAINT.

The ball didn't hit the pole. Get over it

[Knife_Dixon]

The ball didn't hit the pole. Get over it

You need to pump the brakes there Dannyboy. There is evidence that the ball did hit the pole as shown earlier in this thread. If you don't believe it that's on you, but

let everyone else deal with it how they will.

[Dannyboy]

You need to pump the brakes there Dannyboy. There is evidence that the ball did hit the pole as shown earlier in this thread. If you don't believe it that's on you, but

let everyone else deal with it how they will.

There is evidence that the ball appears to hit the pole. IMO, its the shadow of the ball on the pole that gives the illusion of it hitting the pole. If you really want to see if the ball hit the pole you need to see it from above. Either way, this call had little to no effect on the out come of the game.

[SerenityNow]

There is evidence that the ball appears to hit the pole. IMO, its the shadow of the ball on the pole that gives the illusion of it hitting the pole. If you really want to see if the ball hit the pole you need to see it from above. Either way, this call had little to no effect on the out come of the game.

The call had no effect on the outcome of the game? You must have access to some alternate universe where you know what would have happened.

[Morgan423]

convincing? only if you see what you want to see. that gif only proves that there is no way they could overturn the ruling on the field

Revisiting this several days later, but just wondering how that gif shows people "what they want to see." Pretty clear that the ball was on a set, straight trajectory for quite a while, but changed its flight angle by about 30 degrees instantaneously within a split second at exactly the same time it was "passing" the foul pole. I know of nothing else that could cause that besides contact with the pole.

[lovetoaster]

I think it looked like it hit the pole, but I don't think it hit the pole. I think that view gives a little bit of an optical illusion, to be honest.

Either way, the call was far from obvious either way, and we are going to have to get over it.

[BrunoCherrytown]

There is evidence that the ball appears to hit the pole. IMO, its the shadow of the ball on the pole that gives the illusion of it hitting the pole. If you really want to see if the ball hit the pole you need to see it from above. Either way, this call had little to no effect on the out come of the game.

I'm still in the inconclusive camp on this even after having looked at that replay .gif in this thread a bunch of times.

But I think it definitely could've changed the outcome of the game. We wouldn't have just gotten that extra run, but also an extra out since McClouth struck out.

Now if you are one to believe in the emotional momentum of a home run like that its possible it would've caused the Os to get into a rally or the Yanks/CC to possibly get some of the wind knocked out of their sails. That's all speculative. But it does create a butterfly erect of sorts. Maybe we bumped CC's pitch count up high enough to yank him earlier with the extra batters that could've followed.

Or maybe it's a 3-2 game and we still lose.

But I think if it was overturned it may very well have been a gamechanger.

This is exactly why I'm glad I personally don't think the Umps robbed us, because even if they got the call wrong it was so close that it'd be hard to be angry about it.

[Babkins]

I was sitting in Section 205 Friday night, and from my perspective, it looked clearly foul. The replay made me (and many of the Yankees fans around me) wonder if it maybe had ever so slightly nicked the pole, but it was reviewed and I trusted the call.

Reading the ESPN recap on the train home was totally confusing to me--it was all about the call. I sort of thought the story of the game was the O's inability to get a few more across in the eighth when Fat Boy was on the ropes. That, to me, blissfully insulated as I was from the TV commentary, was why the Orioles lost this game.

I really don't think there's much of a controversy here. ESPN wants us to whine about this as if it Jeffrey Maier Part II. In my opinion, it's really not.

[blid]

I'm still in the inconclusive camp on this even after having looked at that replay .gif in this thread a bunch of times.

But I think it definitely could've changed the outcome of the game. We wouldn't have just gotten that extra run, but also an extra out since McClouth struck out.

Now if you are one to believe in the emotional momentum of a home run like that its possible it would've caused the Os to get into a rally or the Yanks/CC to possibly get some of the wind knocked out of their sails. That's all speculative. But it does create a butterfly erect of sorts. Maybe we bumped CC's pitch count up high enough to yank him earlier with the extra batters that could've followed.

Or maybe it's a 3-2 game and we still lose.

But I think if it was overturned it may very well have been a gamechanger.

This is exactly why I'm glad I personally don't think the Umps robbed us, because even if they got the call wrong it was so close that it'd be hard to be angry about it.

Maybe we bunt in a run in the 8th.

Now, I don't wanna burn the umps for this call or anything, because even now I'm not 100% that it hit the pole, more like 80%. But I think it did, and I think it would have impacted the game. If I had to blame this loss on something, I'd blame it on a lot of other things first, though.

[Rex Thunder]

You guys DO realize that the usher if that section admitted to Craig saber that the ball did hit the pole right? I find it hard to believe a Yankee usher would lie about it unless he Really believed it.

[Rex Thunder]

Maybe we bunt in a run in the 8th.

Now, I don't wanna burn the umps for this call or anything, because even now I'm not 100% that it hit the pole, more like 80%. But I think it did, and I think it would have impacted the game. If I had to blame this loss on something, I'd blame it on a lot of other things first, though.

It's ABSOLUTELY has a huge impact. It immediately steals momentum back and puts he pressure back on Yankee hitters. It forces CC to continue pitching, rather than one more pitch for the strikeout. (youd hope anyway)... That call was a major emotional swing, period.

That said, we still had our chance, and McLouth struck out with the bases loaded. You wonder if his confidence woul

D have been a little higher in that situation had he been coming off a HR in his last at bat, rather than a deflating strikeout. And does girardi possibly go to the bullpen for that same reason.

[zweem]

'nuff said.

[Ruzious]

I was listening on the radio at the time, and - fwiw - Angel said it was definitely foul after looking at the replay, and Manfra agreed with him.

[SeaBird]

You guys DO realize that the usher if that section admitted to Craig saber that the ball did hit the pole right? I find it hard to believe a Yankee usher would lie about it unless he Really believed it.

Yup. MLB will now rely on eyewitness testimomy from stadium ushers when attempting to resolve disputed calls. Too funny.