Same Old Same Old Same Old: Threading the 2013 World Series

[Frayed Knot]

3B ump indicated obstruction immediately so the home plate ump had no choice but to call the runner safe.
I'm just not sure that a runner tripping over a prone fielder qualifies as obstruction.

Amazing that the Cards have now won two games largely because of bad throws from home to 3rd.

[metirish]

Baseball really is a great game......wow

[Zvon]

metirish wrote: Baseball really is a great game......wow

agreed

Frayed Knot wrote: I'm just not sure that a runner tripping over a prone fielder qualifies as obstruction.

What's the rule? Does it have to be intentional or does that matter in any way? Because that wasn't intentional.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

"Come on. Really? I'm really not sure that interference call should have been made there."
[shake heads incredulously]
-Best Fans In Baseball

[Frayed Knot]

Zvon wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: I'm just not sure that a runner tripping over a prone fielder qualifies as obstruction. What's the rule? Does it have to be intentional or does that matter in any way? Because that wasn't intentional.

I guess technically Middlebrooks, because he didn't have the ball, can't block the runner from trying to advance.

The rule is, that once obstruction is indicated, the play is allowed to play out and it becomes a judgement call as to whether the runner would have advanced had he not been interfered with. Craig was clearly out at home but had he not fallen over the prone Middlebrooks he probably would have made it.
McCarver is saying that intent has nothing to do with it which, while true, doesn't mean that every UNintentional obstruction results in an automatic free base.

[Zvon]

They say unintended obstruction is obstruction. So good call, great new way to see a ballgame end. Too bad it's a World Series game Boston.

[Zvon]

Frayed Knot wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: I'm just not sure that a runner tripping over a prone fielder qualifies as obstruction. What's the rule? Does it have to be intentional or does that matter in any way? Because that wasn't intentional. I guess technically Middlebrooks, because he didn't have the ball, can't block the runner from trying to advance. The rule is, that once obstruction is indicated, the play is allowed to play out and it becomes a judgement call as to whether the runner would have advanced had he not been interfered with. Craig was clearly out at home but had he not fallen over the prone Middlebrooks he probably would have made it. McCarver is saying that intent has nothing to do with it which, while true, doesn't mean that every UNintentional obstruction results in an automatic free base.

Thanks for the extended view. Yea, if he didn't go down he scores ahead of the throw that just nipped him. Hey, good thing we didn't have to see that happen to the Mets, huh?

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Bullshit call, but the game was all but lost on Farrell's questionable moves anyway.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Look at the direction Jim Joyce is facing as Craig pushes Middlebrooks into the ground.

[Guest 86-Dreamer]

Craig had a clear path around 3B. But, regardless of intent, he takes a step instead toward 2B. why doesn't he then have to retouch third?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Stupid Red Socks and their throwing errors.

[MFS62]

Zvon wrote: They say unintended obstruction is obstruction. So good call, great new way to see a ballgame end. Too bad it's a World Series game Boston.

Its really fun watching the World Series reports on the pro- Boston tv stations up here in Connecticut.
Just as I turned off the sports report, they were blaming the interference call from last night's game on not burning enough witches in Salem.

As for the direction Jim Joyce is facing, it looks like he is following the throw, to see if it went into the stands or if a fan touched the ball. From the replays I saw this morning, the home plate ump made the interference call.

Later

[Frayed Knot]

They say unintended obstruction is obstruction. So good call, great new way to see a ballgame end. Too bad it's a World Series game Boston. As for the direction Jim Joyce is facing, it looks like he is following the throw, to see if it went into the stands or if a fan touched the ball. From the replays I saw this morning, the home plate ump made the interference call.

No, a wider shot where you can see that entire side of the diamond shows Joyce turning back and clearly making the call with the home plate ump acknowledging it immediately afterward.
On an obstruction call the obstruction is indicated (as it was by Joyce) but play is allowed to continue. Only after the play is over does it become a judgement call as to whether or not they believe the obstruction prevented the runner from safely advancing. The home ump did so immediately by signaling safe despite the obvious tag (and Craig never touching the base) and quickly pointed toward 3B as the reason.

Sox fans may remember a similar play from a playoff game a few years ago where they benefitted. In that one, Oakland's Miguel Tejada was obstructed rounding 3rd but then stopped halfway to home to complain about it. Because he did he was not awarded the base, just as had Craig been out by a larger margin last night the umps could have still called him out despite the obstruction*.



What's kind of funny is that, between the reversed dropped-ball call at 2nd in Game 1 and now this obstruction deal in Game 3, we've had two of the three games ending with one of the managers giving a near identical post-game quote along the lines of: 'maybe it was technically the right call but, in that situation, it's a tough one to swallow'






* That was what should have happened in that Zeile/Knoblauch obstruction call during the inter-league game a bunch of years back.
If you recall that one, not only did the 1st base ump allow coach Mazzilli to talk him into the obstruction but it was one where Knoblauch barely had to dip his shoulder in order to get around Zeile and wound up being out by about 17 feet despite only slightly breaking stride.

[metirish]

Sorry but McCarver sounds like a babbling fool tonight, he really sounded incoherent in trying to explain the reason the obstruction rule should be looked at by the rules committee ...I felt bad for him actually.

[metirish]

Beltran knocks in the first run of the game ....1-0 in the 3rd.

[Guest d'Kong76]

The more I look at that historical play, I think there was
a little intent. Still no way to finish a World Series game.
Like they say, watch baseball long enough and you will
always see something new from time to time.

[Frayed Knot]

McCarver has stumbled over his words several times in this series.
Even those who didn't like him all along would probably not cite that as one of his faults. Maybe he's getting out at the right time.


Meanwhile, the Cards continue to take advantage of every BoSox mistake.
They're not hitting all that well and didn't during the LA series either (except for the final game) but they seem to hit about .900 following walks, errors, or passed balls.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Stand up, get back on your feet ... but no, he stuck 'em
straight up in the air and that's what the home plate ump
saw ....

[youtube:18y3rfq5]huh8oW4dEwA[/youtube:18y3rfq5]

[Guest d'Kong76]

Frayed Knot wrote: Even those who didn't like him all along would probably not cite that as one of his faults. Maybe he's getting out at the right time.

Funny, I thought he looked a little extra 'happy' in the opening
comments ... maybe a few glasses of wine at dinner. Hell, why
not ... it's his swan song.

Thank god

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Joyce said the legs didn't matter. What he didn't see was Craig pushing off on Middlebrooks back forcing Middlebrooks back into the ground. Without that push they both may be able to stand at the same time and Middlebrooks may get out of the way. Maybe it doesn't change anything, and I doubt the push was intentional, but I've seen no one address how this push could be a mitigating factor.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

metirish wrote: Sorry but McCarver sounds like a babbling fool tonight, he really sounded incoherent in trying to explain the reason the obstruction rule should be looked at by the rules committee ...I felt bad for him actually.

We've been watching the MLB International stream. There's no bells & whistles (such in game interviews, celebrity promos, etc) or missed action coming back from the commercials. The announcers are Gary Thorne (who is pretty good) and Rick Sutcliffe (who is apparently a McCarver acolyte, but doesn't have the whiny, nasal voice that gets under my skin so he's easy to ignore). It's kind of nice to have an alternative.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I say the legs matter too!
I was rooting for the Sawx all the way until I saw some
of the reactions to this ... it will be more fun to see them
lose and listen to how they were robbed of a victory yet
again.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Kong76 wrote: I say the legs matter too!

Yeah, but you're not the ump. He said that body was in the way and the legs were of no consideration.

The fact of the matter is that Jim Joyce made a judgment call and was wrong. The Cardinals got a gift-wrapped win. But in the end it won't matter because there are four more games to play.

[metirish]

Mets � Willets Point wrote: metirish wrote: Sorry but McCarver sounds like a babbling fool tonight, he really sounded incoherent in trying to explain the reason the obstruction rule should be looked at by the rules committee ...I felt bad for him actually. We've been watching the MLB International stream. There's no bells & whistles (such in game interviews, celebrity promos, etc) or missed action coming back from the commercials. The announcers are Gary Thorne (who is pretty good) and Rick Sutcliffe (who is apparently a McCarver acolyte, but doesn't have the whiny, nasal voice that gets under my skin so he's easy to ignore). It's kind of nice to have an alternative.

I like Thorne, Sutcliffe is one of those guys that seems to talk very low in a monotone voice....except of course when he's drunk in the booth, then all bets are off.

[Guest d'Kong76]

If he said legs were of no consideration, he was wrong on
more than one thing. He raised his legs and slowed his progress.

Listen to the record.

[metirish]

That Bogartes kid has had some of the best at bats in this series....really like him

[Frayed Knot]

Wow! Ortiz now with 7 of the Sox' 20 hits in the series (and their only two HRs).
Not going to win a long series spacing out the hits that way.

[metirish]

shold note followed by a guy Drew who has had some of the worst.....and he pops out but a run scores.

[Frayed Knot]

That was chance-y and that was close.

[metirish]

Yeah, if Ortiz doesn't do that slide of his maybe the ball beats him because his legs hit Molina's hand.