Worst blown call ever?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

In MLB - the worst blown call I can think of is the Jeffrey Maier play (given the impact it had on the game and series)

This call sucked - it was the 19th inning and I think the ump wanted to go back to the hotel...

[TwinTownBisonFan]

Is a missed safe-out-call on which the entire game hinged really any worse than the call last year that cost a pitcher a perfect game? Pretty big, but I'm not so sure it's any worse than that. And it's probably no worse than the blown forward-lateral non-call that went in Tennessee's favor.

others may have let "classic SH" slide for this... I won't.

are you kidding? the music city miracle was legitimate... the play was REVIEWED for 3 minutes - and there was NO CONCLUSIVE VIDEO EVIDENCE to reverse the (correct) call on the field.

oy vey...

[JoltinJoe]

In MLB - the worst blown call I can think of is the Jeffrey Maier play (given the impact it had on the game and series)

This call sucked - it was the 19th inning and I think the ump wanted to go back to the hotel...

The Maier call had zero impact on the series. You can't get swept and mauled in your own ballpark three straight, and then blame a kid.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

In MLB - the worst blown call I can think of is the Jeffrey Maier play (given the impact it had on the game and series)

This call sucked - it was the 19th inning and I think the ump wanted to go back to the hotel...

The Maier call had zero impact on the series. You can't get swept and mauled in your own ballpark three straight, and then blame a kid.

I get it JJ - you're a Yankee fan...

if it ever came to pass by the by that the Yankees EVER got hosed on a blown call ala the Maier call - or Joe Mauer's double-turned-foul-ball, I do believe your head would actually explode... but, they're the Yankees - so it's doubtful that will happen in our lifetimes...

[andy7171]

In MLB - the worst blown call I can think of is the Jeffrey Maier play (given the impact it had on the game and series)

This call sucked - it was the 19th inning and I think the ump wanted to go back to the hotel...

Joe ain't gonna like this one bit!

[JoltinJoe]

The Maier call had zero impact on the series. You can't get swept and mauled in your own ballpark three straight, and then blame a kid.

I get it JJ - you're a Yankee fan...

if it ever came to pass by the by that the Yankees EVER got hosed on a blown call ala the Maier call - or Joe Mauer's double-turned-foul-ball, I do believe your head would actually explode... but, they're the Yankees - so it's doubtful that will happen in our lifetimes...

The Yankees get screwed just like any other team. How about Joe West's (cough, cough) interference call on Robby Cano in the 2005 ALDS against the Angels? That call might have actually cost the Yankees the series. The difference is Yankee fans suck it up, accept that calls go against them sometimes, and usually find reasons that they could have won if they had played better. We don't find excuses and God knows we don't whine about it for forever.

It's like that '99 playoff series between the Yankees and the Red Sox. The Sox played awful defense, made 10 errors or something like that, and gave away runs to the Yankees. But if you listen to a Sox fan, they will swear that they loss that series because of the Chuck Knoblauch call in game 1. No, they lost the Series because they played badly and deserved to lose. And that was the case with the Yankees in 2005. The pitching crapped out and the defense was poor. So Joe West blew the call? If we had played better ball, one bad call -- even one at such a critical moment -- wouldn't have mattered.

In 2009, the Twins played badly and got swept. Geez, you sent Carl Pavano to the mound down 0-2. What did you expect?

n 1996, the Orioles lost three straight at home, and looked bad in the process.

[89Hen]

Are you so dense that you don't grasp that the rule has changed since 1983??

At the time, such a hit was defined in the rules as an illegally batted ball, the penalty for which is that the batter is declared out according to Rule 6.06. Nonetheless, at the time, the out call was challenged and overruled, and the game was resumed on August 6, starting after the now-upheld home run. Rules 1.10 and 6.06 were later changed to reflect the intent of Major League Baseball, as exemplified by the Commissioner's ruling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball_b ... egulations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You're already out. You can't argue balls and strikes. You are now tossed from the game. I sure hope you're never my attorney.

[JoltinJoe]

Are you so dense that you don't grasp that the rule has changed since 1983??

At the time, such a hit was defined in the rules as an illegally batted ball, the penalty for which is that the batter is declared out according to Rule 6.06. Nonetheless, at the time, the out call was challenged and overruled, and the game was resumed on August 6, starting after the now-upheld home run. Rules 1.10 and 6.06 were later changed to reflect the intent of Major League Baseball, as exemplified by the Commissioner's ruling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball_b ... egulations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You're already out. You can't argue balls and strikes. You are now tossed from the game. I sure hope you're never my attorney.

You realize that everyone knows you are wrong? Take a a look at the KC paper from 1983. Why do you keep ignoringn that?

[89Hen]

The Maier call had zero impact on the series.

That's your OPINION. Who knows, maybe the Yanks tie the game up in the bottom of the 9th and the result would have been the same. Maybe the O's hang on and go home up 2-0 and the Yanks come into B'more feeling dejected and lose the next two. There is NO way you can say that a rule DECISION in a game in July between two teams that weren't playoff bound was worse than a late inning MISSED CALL (there's no arguing that the call was BLOWN) in an LCS game.

[89Hen]

You realize that everyone knows you are wrong?

Funny, I'm thinking the same of you. A news reporter getting the story wrong??? That's never happened before.

Can you show me the actual wording of Rule 6.06 in 1983?

[GannonFan]

The difference is Yankee fans suck it up, accept that calls go against them sometimes, and usually find reasons that they could have won if they had played better. We don't find excuses and God knows we don't whine about it for forever.

You guys still whine about those bugs in Cleveland attacking poor Jobba.

[JoltinJoe]

The difference is Yankee fans suck it up, accept that calls go against them sometimes, and usually find reasons that they could have won if they had played better. We don't find excuses and God knows we don't whine about it for forever.

You guys still whine about those bugs in Cleveland attacking poor Jobba.

No, we don't. We do question why Joe Torre didn't try to have the umps invoke the unplayable condition rules, but that's on us.

[JoltinJoe]

You realize that everyone knows you are wrong?

Funny, I'm thinking the same of you. A news reporter getting the story wrong??? That's never happened before.

Can you show me the actual wording of Rule 6.06 in 1983?

I don't have the wording. But in the summer of 1983 (I was still in college), my summer job was the Director of Youth Baseball programs for my county (a great summer gig if there ever was one). The day after the game, we went through the rule book with our coaches, umps, and staff to determine if the umps were right.

Rule 1.10 said that you could not apply pine tar more than 18 inches past the bat handle.
Another rule (apparently now amended) defined an "illegally batted ball" as one hit with a bat which violated Rule 1.10.
And rule 6.06 said that the penalty for hitting an illegally batted ball was that the batter was to be called out.

All four umps said they knew the rules and debated only for a moment whether they should apply them. The rules at the time were explicit.

[89Hen]

Funny, I'm thinking the same of you. A news reporter getting the story wrong??? That's never happened before.

Can you show me the actual wording of Rule 6.06 in 1983?

I don't have the wording. But in the summer of 1983 (I was still in college), my summer job was the Director of Youth Baseball programs for my county (a great summer gig if there ever was one). The day after the game, we went through the rule book with our coaches, umps, and staff to determine if the umps were right.

Rule 1.10 said that you could not apply pine tar more than 18 inches past the bat handle.
Another rule (apparently now amended) defined an "illegally batted ball" as one hit with a bat which violated Rule 1.10.
And rule 6.06 said that the penalty for hitting an illegally batted ball was that the batter was to be called out.

All four umps said they knew the rules and debated only for a moment whether they should apply them. The rules at the time were explicit.

Cool. I was still in HS in 1983 but was working for Ruly Carpenter that summer and did the same thing you did with several MLB umpires that came to Wilmington for a little league celebration and we didn't see it the same way you did.

[SuperHornet]

Is a missed safe-out-call on which the entire game hinged really any worse than the call last year that cost a pitcher a perfect game? Pretty big, but I'm not so sure it's any worse than that. And it's probably no worse than the blown forward-lateral non-call that went in Tennessee's favor.

others may have let "classic SH" slide for this... I won't.

are you kidding? the music city miracle was legitimate... the play was REVIEWED for 3 minutes - and there was NO CONCLUSIVE VIDEO EVIDENCE to reverse the (correct) call on the field.

oy vey...

I saw that replay 10 ways to CHN, and all I saw was the ball leave the thrower's hand on the back side of the yardline and enter his buddy's hands on the OTHER side of said line. Classic forward lateral. Ref got it wrong, and I stick by that.

[JoltinJoe]

I don't have the wording. But in the summer of 1983 (I was still in college), my summer job was the Director of Youth Baseball programs for my county (a great summer gig if there ever was one). The day after the game, we went through the rule book with our coaches, umps, and staff to determine if the umps were right.

Rule 1.10 said that you could not apply pine tar more than 18 inches past the bat handle.
Another rule (apparently now amended) defined an "illegally batted ball" as one hit with a bat which violated Rule 1.10.
And rule 6.06 said that the penalty for hitting an illegally batted ball was that the batter was to be called out.

All four umps said they knew the rules and debated only for a moment whether they should apply them. The rules at the time were explicit.

Cool. I was still in HS in 1983 but was working for Ruly Carpenter that summer and did the same thing you did with several MLB umpires that came to Wilmington for a little league celebration and we didn't see it the same way you did.

Here is an article from the Fordham Law Review from around that time:

http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewco ... %201983%22" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[89Hen]

Here is an article from the Fordham Law Review from around that time:

That article COMPLETELY destroys your position. They come to the conclusion that the umpires call was correct AND that McPhail's reversal was ALSO correct. Go to the last page to see their conclusion...

KANSAS CITY ROYALS 5 - NEW YORK YANKEES 4

There, it's settled.

[JoltinJoe]

Here is an article from the Fordham Law Review from around that time:

That article COMPLETELY destroys your position. They come to the conclusion that the umpires call was correct AND that McPhail's reversal was ALSO correct. Go to the last page to see their conclusion...

KANSAS CITY ROYALS 5 - NEW YORK YANKEES 4

There, it's settled.

The article plainly states that the on-field interpretation of the rules, as applied by the umpires, was the correct application of the rules as they were then drafted.

[JoltinJoe]

Great quote from McClelland in one of the footnotes, after MacPhail's ruling, about the umps have the rules, and they have to apply them, and if the League President wants to make a farce out of the rules by invoking the "spirit of the rules," there's nothing he can do about it.

Also Richie Phillips, the head of the umpire's union, expressing the common sentiment at the time that the league's office failure to back the umps was a disgrace.

[JoltinJoe]

[89Hen]

That article COMPLETELY destroys your position. They come to the conclusion that the umpires call was correct AND that McPhail's reversal was ALSO correct. Go to the last page to see their conclusion...

KANSAS CITY ROYALS 5 - NEW YORK YANKEES 4

There, it's settled.

The article plainly states that the on-field interpretation of the rules, as applied by the umpires, was the correct application of the rules as they were then drafted.

Yup, it also states that McPhail's reversal was also correct. So where is the "blown call"?

[SunCoastBlueHen]

You realize that everyone knows you are wrong?

Funny, I'm thinking the same of you. A news reporter getting the story wrong??? That's never happened before.

Can you show me the actual wording of Rule 6.06 in 1983?

I think it's funny that you guys seem to be under the impression that anybody other than the two of you are still remotely interested. Damn, you two will argue to the death over the most inane shit.

[JoltinJoe]

The article plainly states that the on-field interpretation of the rules, as applied by the umpires, was the correct application of the rules as they were then drafted.

Yup, it also states that McPhail's reversal was also correct. So where is the "blown call"?

What it says is that it was within his discretion to change the call ... However, as I have been saying all along, the rules were clear and the umps were right.

[JoltinJoe]

Funny, I'm thinking the same of you. A news reporter getting the story wrong??? That's never happened before.

Can you show me the actual wording of Rule 6.06 in 1983?

I think it's funny that you guys seem to be under the impression that anybody other than the two of you are still remotely interested. Damn, you two will argue to the death over the most inane ****.

As you know, this is all largely tongue-in-cheek and not to be taken all that seriously ...

Even though it is clear that I am right

[89Hen]

Funny, I'm thinking the same of you. A news reporter getting the story wrong??? That's never happened before.

Can you show me the actual wording of Rule 6.06 in 1983?

I think it's funny that you guys seem to be under the impression that anybody other than the two of you are still remotely interested. Damn, you two will argue to the death over the most inane shit.

As you know, this is all largely tongue-in-cheek and not to be taken all that seriously ...

Even though it is clear that I am right