Anyone see the blown replay call in Clev and A's game

[EddieO'sSC]

Rather than start a new Mark Reynolds' thread, since that seems to be eschewed around these parts. If you were watching yesterday(5/9) Mark hit a bomb out to center field. The Cleveland announcers were funny. They said listen to the sound of the ball off of his bat. It is very distinctive to every other player. They proceeded to replay that at bat about five times with sound.

Then they proceeded to say we thought this guy was a pull hitter that struck out a lot on sliders out of the zone. They were amazed how smart of a hitter Mark is. They said he goes all ways and can hit the ball out of any part of the park; further, he is a smart hitter and does not swing at pitches out of the zone.

I thought it was interesting to see them see what Mark brings to the table, something the baseball savvy posters on this board already knew.

While I was apposed to letting mark walk, I understand the reasons that this happened. It was a gamble on the part of DD that has not paid off to this point. I have not read all of the Mark Reynolds thread below. Don't know why it was locked. This post was not meant to create controversy. Marks gone, darn you DD, darn you(JK).

[bdlj0887]

"Full HD" is one of those things that drives me crazy, because it's a moving target

[Can_of_corn]

Rather than start a new Mark Reynolds' thread' date=' since that seems to be eschewed around these parts. If you were watching yesterday(5/9) Mark hit a bomb out to center field. The Cleveland announcers were funny. They said listen to the sound of the ball off of his bat. It is very distinctive to every other player. They proceeded to replay that at bat about five times with sound.

Then they proceeded to say we thought this guy was a pull hitter that struck out a lot on sliders out of the zone. They were amazed how smart of a hitter Mark is. They said he goes all ways and can hit the ball out of any part of the park; further, he is a smart hitter and does not swing at pitches out of the zone.

I thought it was interesting to see them see what Mark brings to the table, something the baseball savvy posters on this board already knew.

While I was apposed to letting mark walk, I understand the reasons that this happened. It was a gamble on the part of DD that has not paid off to this point. I have not read all of the Mark Reynolds thread below. Don't know why it was locked. This post was not meant to create controversy. Marks gone, darn you DD, darn you(JK).[/quote']

So I have these spiders living in my screened-in enclosure around the pool in the backyard. I have taken to feeding them any Horseflies that have the audacity to land on me, as well a tick we got off the dog.

[EddieO'sSC]

So I have these spiders living in my screened-in enclosure around the pool in the backyard. I have taken to feeding them any Horseflies that have the audacity to land on me, as well a tick we got off the dog.

You are making a cogent choice. Respect those spiders, and treat them well. My advice do not trade these spiders, they serve you well. One caveat is, if the spiders have an option for 11million ticks and spiders, offer about 6million ticks and spiders. Let me know how it turns out. I am pulling for you.

As an aside, if one of the spiders that you feed is black with a red spot on the belly, be careful when you feed, lest the sound that you will make will be as distinct as Mark Reynolds bat.

[jtschrei]

The fix was in! I will not be surprised in 3 years if a huge gambling ring is uncovered with none other than Angel Hernandez on the take. There is no other explanation for that call. Seriously. What is the explanation?

Oh yeah, they don't have to give one. The fix was in.

[EddieO'sSC]

The fix was in! I will not be surprised in 3 years if a huge gambling ring is uncovered with none other than Angel Hernandez on the take. There is no other explanation for that call. Seriously. What is the explanation?

Oh yeah, they don't have to give one. The fix was in.

Gosh, you are really confusing me. I thought me and CoC were talking about the pros and cons of hungry spiders at a pool party. This info is more important than any gambling ring you speak of.

However if you follow our conversation you can make a pot. Just be sure to give me and CoC a split of 20%.

[SeaBird]

Pretty bad, but I couldn't tell until they showed the zoomed-in view, and we don't know if the umpires had that camera angle available.

Also, even with the better view, the announcers still got it wrong, saying that it bounced off the top of the wall, hit the railing, and came back - instead, it just bounced down off the rail.

It's a bad call, especially with replay and considering the situation, but I think the failure may possibly be systematic (why didn't the umps have the best camera angle?) instead of judgmental.

The umps have every available camera angle at their disposal including home and away TV feeds.

[SeaBird]

I find it incredible that during the video reviews none of the 4 umpires were able to see that the ball was clearly a HR. I see that as indicative that MLB umpires don't want to admit they are fallible. Sort of like saying, "We don't need no stinkin' replay!"

[Can_of_corn]

I find it incredible that during the video reviews none of the 4 umpires were able to see that the ball was clearly a HR. I see that as indicative that MLB umpires don't want to admit they are fallible. Sort of like saying, "We don't need no stinkin' replay!"

Couple mistakes here.

Only three umpires reviewed the call, one stays on the field.

It is the crew chief's call, the other two reviewing umps can give their input but the crew chief get the final say.

From what I have been reading the other two umps thought the call should be overturned and Angel disagreed.

[SeaBird]

Couple mistakes here.

Only three umpires reviewed the call, one stays on the field.

It is the crew chief's call, the other two reviewing umps can give their input but the crew chief get the final say.

From what I have been reading the other two umps thought the call should be overturned and Angel disagreed.

Thanks for clarifying on the 3 umps. Hernandez must be a very small man if 2 umps thought the call should be overturned and he disagreed. It seems like he didn't want to admit his mistake. Maybe the way the review is conducted needs to be changed. Majority rule, for example.

[Can_of_corn]

Thanks for clarifying on the 3 umps. Hernandez must be a very small man if 2 umps thought the call should be overturned and he disagreed. It seems like he didn't want to admit his mistake. Maybe the way the review is conducted needs to be changed. Majority rule, for example.

I read that today. That doesn't mean that the other two umps are on the record saying it. It is possible that the source I read was mislead.

(I don't think so tho, it seems like something Angel would do.)

[OriolesFaithful]

Thanks for clarifying on the 3 umps. Hernandez must be a very small man if 2 umps thought the call should be overturned and he disagreed. It seems like he didn't want to admit his mistake. Maybe the way the review is conducted needs to be changed. Majority rule, for example.

Or just get rid of the one highly incompetent umpire. Problem solved right there.

[oriolesmagic9]

Or just get rid of the one highly incompetent umpire. Problem solved right there.

Quite right. Companies in America are in almost universal agreement that incompetence is a valid reason for dismissal. How can blatant incompetence go undeterred? Oh that's right, unions. I almost forgot.