2019 World Series (ASTROS vs. NATIONALS)

[backwardsk]

8 hours ago, Frobby said:

I hate to break this to you, but the entire base is in fair territory.    

Hate to break it to you, Frobby, but half the bag is in fair territory...and so is the other half.

I used to do drugs.  I still do.  But I used to too.  — Mitch Hedberg

[backwardsk]

That’s a good picture of the play.   If Gurriel has his right foot on the bag and stretches out to meet the ball, the throw beats him.

 

[survivedc]

1 hour ago, backwardsk said:

That’s a good picture of the play.   If Gurriel has his right foot on the bag and stretches out to meet the ball, the throw beats him.

 

The ball is past his glove in this picture and contact has already been made. The picture is pretty misleading.

[Can_of_corn]

I know Max is a tough guy but I'm doubting that a guy that couldn't lift his throwing arm on Sunday is going to be able to throw 94-95 with solid command.

I don't think he makes it out of the third.  I also think Cole is going to come in out of the pen if the Astros have a lead.

[Number5]

3 hours ago, ledzepp8 said:

But he's out of the runners lane the entire time.  He never sets foot in it.  I get your point but like I said, if he's in the runners lane the entire 45 feet, I guarantee interference isn't called even with knocking off Gurriel's glove.

 

I know the rule is confusing.  You are not alone in thinking that a runner is out merely for running out of the runners lane.  He isn't.  He really isn't.  There has to be an interference for an out to be called.  From what I've seen, there was no interference on this play.  The runner beat the throw and at the time of the issue he was legally touching first base, with every right to be where he is.  I look at the picture and see that the runner is on the base with the ball and glove behind him. 

Hey, I've made this call myself.  And there is virtually always an argument from one coach or the other, depending on whether interference was called or not.  Few coaches understand the rule.  I've had runners running on the infield grass get hit in the back by the throw and the coach will still argue the interference call.  I've had throws 10 feet wide of the base go into the outfield and the defensive coach wants interference called.  I've even had a coach want a second out on the play if the runner was outside the lane and the throw beat the runner for the out with no issue.

The thing is, there must actually be an interference and there had to have been a potential play to get the runner out.  From what I've seen, this runner was safe, regardless of the first baseman not catching the ball after the runner touched the base.  Had the catch been made, the runner was still safe, as I see it in the picture. 

[Chavez Ravine]

1 hour ago, Number5 said:

I know the rule is confusing.  You are not alone in thinking that a runner is out merely for running out of the runners lane.  He isn't.  He really isn't.  There has to be an interference for an out to be called.  From what I've seen, there was no interference on this play.  The runner beat the throw and at the time of the issue he was legally touching first base, with every right to be where he is.  I look at the picture and see that the runner is on the base with the ball and glove behind him. 

Hey, I've made this call myself.  And there is virtually always an argument from one coach or the other, depending on whether interference was called or not.  Few coaches understand the rule.  I've had runners running on the infield grass get hit in the back by the throw and the coach will still argue the interference call.  I've had throws 10 feet wide of the base go into the outfield and the defensive coach wants interference called.  I've even had a coach want a second out on the play if the runner was outside the lane and the throw beat the runner for the out with no issue.

The thing is, there must actually be an interference and there had to have been a potential play to get the runner out.  From what I've seen, this runner was safe, regardless of the first baseman not catching the ball after the runner touched the base.  Had the catch been made, the runner was still safe, as I see it in the picture. 

This was the second instance that I saw this year (in a MLB game) where the umpire called the batter out simply for being out of the runners lane when there was no actual interference. A memo should be sent around.

[eddie83]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I know Max is a tough guy but I'm doubting that a guy that couldn't lift his throwing arm on Sunday is going to be able to throw 94-95 with solid command.

I don't think he makes it out of the third.  I also think Cole is going to come in out of the pen if the Astros have a lead.

I know someone who thinks Davey orchestrated this whole thing several days ago in order to have Max in Game 7. It’s all a ruse. 

He also has talked more Nats in the last month than the last dozen years combined. 

[TonySoprano]

There was a real possibility that the Series wouldn't go to 7.  Orchestrated?  Not a chance.   You win game 5 at home with Scherzer and have Strasburg close it out.  No way do you bet on trying to win 2 final games in Houston.

[Chavez Ravine]

The last game of the season. Boo. In mourning, I have already had a beer...too quickly.

[eddie83]

1 minute ago, Chavez Ravine said:

The last game of the season. Boo. In mourning, I have already had a beer...too quickly.

115 days until spring games. 

[Chavez Ravine]

Scherzer’s arm looked good for one inning  at least. Whatever anti-inflammatories he is on also don’t seem to have altered his energy drink demeanor.

[Il BuonO]

Max looks good.

[survivedc]

2 hours ago, Number5 said:

I know the rule is confusing.  You are not alone in thinking that a runner is out merely for running out of the runners lane.  He isn't.  He really isn't.  There has to be an interference for an out to be called.  From what I've seen, there was no interference on this play.  The runner beat the throw and at the time of the issue he was legally touching first base, with every right to be where he is.  I look at the picture and see that the runner is on the base with the ball and glove behind him. 

Hey, I've made this call myself.  And there is virtually always an argument from one coach or the other, depending on whether interference was called or not.  Few coaches understand the rule.  I've had runners running on the infield grass get hit in the back by the throw and the coach will still argue the interference call.  I've had throws 10 feet wide of the base go into the outfield and the defensive coach wants interference called.  I've even had a coach want a second out on the play if the runner was outside the lane and the throw beat the runner for the out with no issue.

The thing is, there must actually be an interference and there had to have been a potential play to get the runner out.  From what I've seen, this runner was safe, regardless of the first baseman not catching the ball after the runner touched the base.  Had the catch been made, the runner was still safe, as I see it in the picture. 

The ball is past the glove in the picture, the contact has already been made.

[Chavez Ravine]

Average sliders aren’t what they used to be.

[Chavez Ravine]

LOL. Bunting is an idea that won’t die.