Mancini ejection?

[Can_of_corn]

27 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The call was beyond nonsense.  He didn't move towards second at all.  The only tiny shred of logic the ump has to hold onto here is that Mancini turned counter-clockwise instead of clockwise, but he barely stepped on the foul line, much less moved towards second! 

Looking at the rules this is up to the ump's judgment if he moved towards second base, but I can't imagine an objective neutral party saying he moved towards second.  This is like an ump calling a checked swing a swing when the bat barely left the batter's shoulder.  It's his judgement, so he can call whatever he wants, no matter how ridiculous.

I probably would have been thrown out there, too. 

Weird how the first base coach was imploring him to get back to the bag if it was so obvious.

 

The runner is supposed to immediately go back to the bag. 

Trey turned, he looked back and he didn't hustle back to the bag.

Why do I have this feeling that if it had been say Machado this had had happened to at least some folks would have a different take?

[RZNJ]

The coach is hardly imploring him to get back to 1B.   The coach is actually pointing to 1B before Mancini even turns in the 2B direction.   He's just pointing for him to stay at 1B and not attempt to go to 2B.   Yes, he continues to point at 1B for Mancini to be on the bag and Mancini, probably should have played it 100% safe and gotten back to the bag ASAP, but he never took a step towards 2B and a reasonable interpretation is that he never made any move to advance to 2B.   That would be reasonable.   I can't help people who insist on being unreasonable and have their own little theories on why people are being reasonable.

[Jammer7]

This was a questionable call, and really comes down to “intent.” The application of it is generally if the runner makes any aggressive movement in the direction of 2B. That did not actually happen, but I can see how the umpire thought so, in the moment. Trey made a quick movement in a straight line, along the foul line. He sort of hop-skipped quickly, but it was straight along the line. He turned to his left, did not advance toward 2B, and walked back to the base. That quick movement, I think, was what the umpire saw.

I think the fundamental thing of simply “turning right” would have made this a non-factor. I was yelling “back” at the tv when he did it. Because why even leave it to interpretation by the umpire. It’s pro ball, yeah, but a really nice play by the catcher, Murphy. 

The “free speech” argument, umm, he didn’t get arrested or fined by the government. He was thrown out of a game in a discipline action by a MLB representative, who has the authority, granted by the rules from Trey’s employer, to do so. There are consequences in private entities to free speech. Kinda like the consequences the guy on the airplane received when he was intentionally heckling Mike Tyson. lol

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

The coach is hardly imploring him to get back to 1B.   The coach is actually pointing to 1B before Mancini even turns in the 2B direction.   He's just pointing for him to stay at 1B and not attempt to go to 2B.   Yes, he continues to point at 1B for Mancini to be on the bag and Mancini, probably should have played it 100% safe and gotten back to the bag ASAP, but he never took a step towards 2B and a reasonable interpretation is that he never made any move to advance to 2B.   That would be reasonable.   I can't help people who insist on being unreasonable and have their own little theories on why people are being reasonable.

Yes, both interpretations are reasonable.  That frequently happens outside of message boards.

[DrungoHazewood]

16 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Weird how the first base coach was imploring him to get back to the bag if it was so obvious.

 

The runner is supposed to immediately go back to the bag. 

The turned, he looked back and he didn't hustle back to the bag.

Why do I have this feeling that if it had been say Machado this had had happened to at least some folks would have a different take?

Because you like to play devil's advocate?  You're arguing that $500 reckless driving fines for 45.001 mph in a 45 are fine because that's the law, it's the cop's judgement.  No reason to use common sense when there's some convoluted logical gymnastics you can perform to sorta-kinda justify the ump's call.

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes, both interpretations are reasonable.  That frequently happens outside of message boards.

So you believe he made a move to advance to 2B or that any movement he did make could be interpreted as trying to advance to 2B?

[webbrick2010]

Lazy play by Trey. Obviously the catcher realized that the ump had not called time, or declared the runner safe.

All Trey had to do was hustle back to first. A bad look for a guy who is in  a major funk.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

So you believe he made a move to advance to 2B or that any movement he did make could be interpreted as trying to advance to 2B?

I've already stated that I don't agree with the call.

I do think the video shows him taking a little hop toward second while checking how the play was developing behind him.

If he had simply immediately moved back to the bag it would have been a nonissue.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

Just watch the video.  As the ball goes by the first baseman Mancini looks at it, sees it's 10 or 15 feet away, unambigously there's no way on earth he can advance to second, so he calmly, immediately walks back to the bag.  He clearly had zero intent of trying to go second base.  The call was obviously blown by the first base ump.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

I've already stated that I don't agree with the call.

I do think the video shows him taking a little hop toward second while checking how the play was developing behind him.

If he had simply immediately moved back to the bag it would have been a nonissue.

 

Or, if the ump had exercised even a small amount of rational judgment.

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Or, if the ump had exercised even a small amount of rational judgment.

Right.  Terrible call.  Mostly all of us seem to agree.   Mancini should have gotten back to the bag quicker to take into account the possibility of the terrible interpretation by the ump.    

[Jammer7]

12 hours ago, tntoriole said:

This is theater, period  .. performaces performed for us as fans. That is the product.  They don’t make widgets.  It has nothing to do with a general workforce.  The issue is whether the “rhubarb” rituals acted out by plsyers and umpires actualiy improve the product or not. 
This umpire performance was petty and vain imho and robs fans of seeing the product. Certainly order can be maintained without this 1900s era macho procedure and this  arbitrary ability of field umpires makes the game worse imho 

If your assessment of the umpire were correct, Trey and Hyde would have been thrown out much sooner. Probably within seconds after they began arguing. Although that does happen, on occasion, it is rare in MLB. The umpires of today generally display a lot less ego than those of years gone by. 

Trey needed to let it go. The umpire explained it to them, and calmly told them to go watch the play and “you’ll see.” Trey might have done this intentionally to fire up his team, not certain of that, but it is possible.

[Moose Milligan]

Lmao upon further inspection, Rob Drake is a certified moron, it’s not just limited to yesterday. He can’t spell “civil” correctly.  Spelled it CIVAL.

 

 

[DrungoHazewood]

13 minutes ago, Jammer7 said:

If your assessment of the umpire were correct, Trey and Hyde would have been thrown out much sooner. Probably within seconds after they began arguing. Although that does happen, on occasion, it is rare in MLB. The umpires of today generally display a lot less ego than those of years gone by. 

Trey needed to let it go. The umpire explained it to them, and calmly told them to go watch the play and “you’ll see.” Trey might have done this intentionally to fire up his team, not certain of that, but it is possible.

Or he was just emotionally reacting to being called out in a close game for essentially no reason whatsoever. I'm sure I'd have done the same thing.

[Going Underground]

Yelich play from last year.He was thrown out immediately. I guess slightly more of a turn but close.