Trembley Suspended

[RShack]

Maybe they had, maybe they hadn't. MLB doesn't air out their dirty laundry in public as far as umpires goes.

I have no idea if they act once a manager makes a big deal about terrible umpiring, but it is 100% obvious that the supervision and ongoing-improvement methods for MLB umpiring are not even close to being adequate.

[Skeletor]

The umpire clearly made the wrong call in this case. Of course, this is not subject to video review so the umpire gets a free pass. From my understanding of the situation, the umpire actually LIED to Trembley in order to get play to resume. Naturally, Trembley consulted with his player and found out the truth, that Reimold had rounded second. Trembley had every right to be upset with this series of events as umpires owe the fans, players, coaches, etc much more than a lie to cover his incompetence.

not to give the umpire a pass, because he truly acted in an unprofessional manner, but the end call was right even if his logic was wrong. The rule states that the runner is awarded two bases from the time of the throw from the outfield only if the batter had reached first base. If he hadn't, then he's awarded two bases from the time of the pitch.

[Dipper9]

Well I hope so. It'd be nice if we could hear something about it, even if it doesn't specify which umpires. Maybe a report at the end of the year citing how many times the umpires were reprimanded and the plan to ensure that sort of thing doesn't continue to happen. The free pass that umpires get (whether real or perceived) is unacceptable.

I have no idea if they act once a manager makes a big deal about terrible umpiring, but it is 100% obvious that the supervision and ongoing-improvement methods for MLB umpiring are not even close to being adequate.

Its one thing to blow a rules call like the Reimold play, or a checkswing like the Varitek play that cost us that game, but to blow the Pedroia call when he clearly was holding the ball in the bare hand when he tagged Pie with his glove is unacceptable and should have been publically addressed, as in a public apology to the Orioles.

[isestrex]

I love Bobby Valentine for doing that. Hysterical.

Hey! We get to know Dave Jauss now!

Too bad this won't coincide with a "Wired Wednesday"

[olehippi]

You go, Dave!!!

I think he rests like a sleeping volcano until the building pressure of lousy umpiring causes him to explode in fury.....:angryfire:

And where are all the dissenters who have complained about Trembley's lack of fire?......

[El Gordo]

The Trembley suspension is so absurd I felt the need to weigh-in.

The umpire clearly made the wrong call in this case. Of course, this is not subject to video review so the umpire gets a free pass. From my understanding of the situation, the umpire actually LIED to Trembley in order to get play to resume. Naturally, Trembley consulted with his player and found out the truth, that Reimold had rounded second. Trembley had every right to be upset with this series of events as umpires owe the fans, players, coaches, etc much more than a lie to cover his incompetence.

It was a mistake for Trembley to admit he continued managing from the tunnel, however, it's common knowledge this is S.O.P. for the situation. Two games is far too harsh a penalty for such a common infraction.

If MLB would pull their head out of their behind they might see a terrible umpire who deserves a reprimand for acting in an unprofessional manner, unbecoming of a Major League Umpire. That call and his actions amount to a stain on the profession. Hopefully, this has already happened, behind closed doors.

Did he? IMO he did, but I have heard conflicting opinions about this. According to Dave "Mickey Mouse voice" Johnson the decision is based on where Scott is when the ball is thrown by the OF. Where can I find the rule on this? It is driving me crazy that no one seems to know the answer.

[Mashed Potatoes]

Hey! We get to know Dave Jauss now!

If we win the next two he HAS to replace Trembley next season. If we lose the next two then we HAVE to get a new bench coach for nex year. It's that simple.

[clarence]

Even though we know DT will still be managing the next two nights, it will be a long all-star break on here if we win the next two, and lose when DT returns to the dugout. I can almost see the threads now.

[hatepaste]

If we win the next two he HAS to replace Trembley next season. If we lose the next two then we HAVE to get a new bench coach for nex year. It's that simple.

What about a split? Co-manager's?

[El Gordo]

You go, Dave!!!

I think he rests like a sleeping volcano until the building pressure of lousy umpiring causes him to explode in fury.....:angryfire:

And where are all the dissenters who have complained about Trembley's lack of fire?......

They'll be back. He needs to do this at least twice a week to keep them happy.

[Skeletor]

Here's the rule.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/runner_7.jsp

Rule 7.05(g) Comment: In certain circumstances it is impossible to award a runner two bases. Example: Runner on first. Batter hits fly to short right. Runner holds up between first and second and batter comes around first and pulls up behind him. Ball falls safely. Outfielder, in throwing to first, throws ball into stand.

APPROVED RULING: Since no runner, when the ball is dead, may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled, the runner originally on first base goes to third base and the batter is held at second base.

The term “when the wild throw was made” means when the throw actually left the player’s hand and not when the thrown ball hit the ground, passes a receiving fielder or goes out of play into the stands.

The position of the batter-runner at the time the wild throw left the thrower’s hand is the key in deciding the award of bases. If the batter-runner has not reached first base, the award is two bases at the time the pitch was made for all runners. The decision as to whether the batter-runner has reached first base before the throw is a judgment call.

[Mashed Potatoes]

What about a split? Co-manager's?

Fire them both, this team needs to set its sights higher than .500 ball.

[olehippi]

Did he? IMO he did, but I have heard conflicting opinions about this. According to Dave "Mickey Mouse voice" Johnson the decision is based on where Scott is when the ball is thrown by the OF. Where can I find the rule on this? It is driving me crazy that no one seems to know the answer.

Yeah, I heard that, too. But what the heck does Scott's position have to do with it? He wasn't the player in question...Reimold was.

Steve A recently posted a baseball quiz which included the following question about a very similar play, and it sounds like the same rule may apply.

Q. Runner on first, stealing on the pitch. The batter hits a ground ball to the shortstop, who throws to second, but the runner is safe at second. The second baseman then tries to throw out the batter running to first base, but the ball gets by the first baseman and goes into the dugout, out of play. What is the correct ruling?

A. The runner going to second base scores and the batter is awarded second.

In this case the runner "going to" 2B, was called safe, then awarded 2 bases on the out-of-bounds throw. Depending on who you listen to, Reimold was either already on 2B or rounding 2b when the CF'er made the throw. Either way, it seems he should have been award 2 bases on the out-of-bounds throw and scored.

[El Gordo]

Yeah, I heard that, too. But what the heck does Scott's position have to do with it? He wasn't the player in question...Reimold was.

Steve A recently posted a baseball quiz which included the following question about a very similar play, and it sounds like the same rule may apply.

Q. Runner on first, stealing on the pitch. The batter hits a ground ball to the shortstop, who throws to second, but the runner is safe at second. The second baseman then tries to throw out the batter running to first base, but the ball gets by the first baseman and goes into the dugout, out of play. What is the correct ruling?

A. The runner going to second base scores and the batter is awarded second.

In this case the runner "going to" 2B, was called safe, then awarded 2 bases on the out-of-bounds throw. Depending on who you listen to, Reimold was either already on 2B or rounding 2b when the CF'er made the throw. Either way, it seems he should have been award 2 bases on the out-of-bounds throw and scored.

Does anyone know if Scott had reached 1B when the CF made his throw?

[Skeletor]

Does anyone know if Scott had reached 1B when the CF made his throw?

Very doubtful. The call was correct even if the ump didn't know the rule.