E103 - Pat Murphy Ejected by Brennan Miller for Brian O'Nora Out of the Base Path Call on Joey Ortiz
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- HP Umpire Brennan Miller ejected Brewers manager Pat Murphy for arguing an out of the base path call by 1B Umpire Brian O'Nora on Joey Ortiz's bunt in Colorado, who ruled Ortiz ran more than three feet away from his base path to avoid Austin Gomber's tag attempt. Report: www.closecalls...
Buy Me a Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
Patreon: / lindsay715
Discord: / discord
Facebook: / closecallsports
Twitter: / closecallsports
Ironically, if he had actually been in the runner's lane to begin with, he probably would have been safe.
That was my thought too, he wouldn't have been close enough for their to be a genuine tag attempt. Too many guys these days run on the grass, I'm really hoping MLB tightens up base running rules.
He makes how many millions per year and literally isn't smart enough to know that he should be running to the right of the foul line, especially when he hits a ball trickling up the first base line.
His a$$ would be on the bench for a couple of days if I was the manager.
@@mrthingy9072 to be fair tho that is the quickest way for a right handed batter to get to first base.
@@douglassepic9030 I don’t think the Brewers, or anyone for that matter would bench a potential all star 3rd baseman, just returning from injury for a couple of days for that. That’s also the fastest way to the base for a right handed hitter.
@@benjaminwirth1208 but in this case the "quickest" way doesn't matter because the first baseman is out of position and you don't have to beat him or the ball to the bag, you only have to avoid the tag. And if there *was* going to be a throw to first, the runner was partly on the grass so he could have been called out for RLI also.
Feels like a version of Hell, having to explain “base path” over and over and over again.
Welcome to umpiring.
@@teebob21 my partner had a train wreck safe call at first base Sunday in a throw from the shortstop. The coach was sure that we are ignorant buffoons because we didn’t call running lane violation. He said,” Why are the lines ( running lane) on the field? It’s impossible to have running lane violations on throws that don’t originate from the home plate area. An area umpire Jim Evans calls the imaginary box. The coach was ejected and my partner was fired. The travel ball business ruthless. The owners do not care about umpires. When you eject a coach you are ejecting a customer.
@@rayray4192 I would be careful about inventing a hard and fast exclusion that isn't supported by rule. Nowhere do the rules require that the throw comes from the home plate area in order for RLI to occur.
@@teebob21 you are correct, but it’s never ever taught at any umpire school that RLI can happen in a throw from a shortstop. You can have interference by a batter - runner but not RLI. The rule was created for throws coming from the plate area. Jim Evans hands out a paper display of the “ imaginary box.” It’s a rectangle in front of home plate.
@@rayray4192 There's more to this story. Something's off, and it's not the owners. Your partner did something to deserve getting fired.
Love that I've seen enough CCS Videos over the years that I was yelling at my TV "Nope" at the Brewers commentators. Thanks for all you do!
Lindsay sounds like me when I watch sports. I'm pretty chill, but I can't stand when commentators don't know the rules and correct terminology. It's one thing when fans don't know it, but you are literally paid to talk about this sport and you don't know even the basics of baseline/basepath.
Serious question... Is it just his feet that determines if he was he was out of the path.... Because the vast majority of his body was less that 3 feet from the tag
I think it would be like she described. You measure from the same part of the body. In this case, the right foot moved more than 3 feet. But that could be a problem when a runner slides head first and swings his legs out and just grabs the base with his hands. Is that out of the base line because his feet move the length of his body??
Its all crap. It’s literally a judgment call and he wasnt going to overturn himself and his crew chief isnt going to either, all the angles and distances are just empty words with nothing behind them. When exactly is “the tag attempt made”? The core of his vertical body stayed entirely within the runners lane which is believed to be is 3 feet 3 inches.
But as i always say, baseball officiating is somewhat unique in that it only cares about whether the call process is “correct” without any intent to ever get the call “right”.
This was a horrible call, despite Linds being “correct”.
@@johncaccamo "The core of his vertical body stayed entirely within". It plainly did not. When he started his evasion the "core" of him was on the grass, not just his right and left feet. This was the correct call, and there's nothing horrible about a correct call.
0:52 I don't know about that
His “core” or center of mass goes from the edge of the grass at the tag attempt to barely the middle of the running lane-based on his outstretched right foot touching squarely on the line.
He might have gone more than 3 feet--but only by a couple inches at most.
The runner's lane exasperation in the last second! 😂
RLI, baseline - she's just SO over saying the same thing to announcers who don't see her videos - just bask in the sigh's glory like I do, lol.
The level of Baseball knowledge on this channel is incredible.
I agree. And the level of misunderstanding by the game commentators is also incredible.
This is exactly what I had when first seeing this play, that line is 3 ft away from the base line on the right and the runners base path is on the left of the line. Mathematically he has to be more than 3 ft and that is why it is technically correct, of course the best kind.
I wish announcers were REQUIRED to come visit this channel to learn about the rules. It's tiring listening to them making up rules as they blabber.
Now imagine working a high school or college game and hearing all the moms and dads invent rules from the bleachers.
Here's a proposal: the umpires should get on the field mic and explain calls such as this. There's absolutely no reason not to
I don't believe a tag attempt starts when the ball is picked up. It's when the glove is raised and close to the player, not ten feet away from him like your description.
Exactly. This argument is flawed for starting tag attempt before there is an actual attempt.
The MLB interpretation is the tag attempt begins when the fielder is in possession of the ball, is reasonably close enough to attempt a play, and begins to move toward the runner.
@@teebob21 which they clearly weren't at yet at that point.
@@IkLms11 They weren't close enough to attempt a play? Why did the runner have to juke the tag by so much, then, when it missed by only inches? I'm curious to understand your thought process on how the pitcher was not attempting a tag from the instant he possessed the ball.
@@teebob21 you can't attempt a tag on someone you can't reach.
You have to first run to a spot where you can actually reach them. You clearly aren't making a tag attempt until it's actually possible to do so.
Heres a fun controversy. I was in an umpire forumn and a debate over skunk in outfield came up. Does the reaching up of a glove constitute a bonofide tag attempt if 80 feet away. Most say no but then came up that if yes the runner has 3 feet to 2nd but if the runner goes 2 feet and the fielder takes on step towards him or makes any move really, then that is technically a new attempt so the runner gets a refresh of his 3 feet on new attempt. I wonder about that in the infield as once pitcher steps toward him is it now a new attempt.
To me, if the runner is reacting to the actions of the fielder with the ball, in any way that makes a tag play by that fielder more difficult, that is evading a tag attempt.
The fielder could be preparing to run toward the runner. If the tag attempt doesn't start then, then when does it start? If there were no tag attempt until the fielder were within a step and a reach of the runner, then the runner could lead the fielder on a goose chase all over the outfield.
When a tag attempt is initiated, the runner has to run in a straight line to the bag, yeah? So if the skunk moves, they must be in a direct line to a bag.
I don’t understand how commentators still do not understand this rule, is this channel not mandatory viewing for them?
Managers don’t understand it, why would you expect commentators would? 😂
@@450thParatrooper it’s their job?
I watched this live and immediately after it happened I said two things: 1) I told my kid that manager was going to get tossed. 2) I told him Lindsay was definitely doing this play on CCS.
and the funny thing is when I saw it was that if he called the runner safe, a manager wouldve gotten tossed & Lindsay still wouldve done the play lol
Well, on this one we do have a good measure... first.. he's on the grass when his base path is established.. and in trying to avoid he hits the chalk of the runners lane.. since the lane to the foul line is 3 ft... yeah, he deviated between 4 and 5 ft... rule only allows for 3 from the path... The runners lane in this case actually proves this call to be correct as it shows us a 3 ft measurement...
But it should start at the chalk as the attempt wasn't started until he does his hop
Miller ejecting Murphy is a childish move. He had a legitimate argument and deserved a better explanation other than 'because I said so.' Watch Murphy. He's not berating or yelling at the umpire, he's just looking for an explanation. It was Miller who lost it.
Note, the runner's lane line, should be 3 feet from the foul line. From former minor league and indy ball ground crew member. Also nice maple leaf for Canada Day in the logo.
What constitutes the start of a tag attempt? Surely it's not as soon as the fielder has the ball and moves towards the runner, no matter the distance?
For the baseline, is it drawn to the nearest corner of the base, the centre, or any corner?
Per MLB interpretations, the tag attempt does begin once the fielder who is reasonably close enough to make a play has the ball and is moving to make a tag. Other rulesets clarify further, by restricting the runner to his path when "a tag attempt is imminent", though the fielder must also have the ball under those codes, too.
@@teebob21horrible rule
Let's see if the rules answer these questions
"A TAG is the action of a fielder in touching a base with his body while holding the ball securely and firmly in his hand or glove; or touching a runner with the ball, or with his hand or glove holding the ball (not including hanging laces alone), while holding the ball securely and firmly in his hand or glove. It is not a tag, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his touching a base or touching a runner, the fielder drops the ball. In establishing the validity of the tag, the fielder
shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball. If the fielder has made a tag and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the tag, the tag shall be adjudged to have been
made. For purposes of this definition any jewelry being worn by a player (e.g., necklaces, bracelets, etc.) shall not constitute a part of the player’s body."
so that only tells us what a tag is but not what a tag attempt is so sadly because of which, not covered in the rules so that falls to the Umpires to rule on that unless I can find it somewhere else. Ah yes Baseball Rules Academy covered this regarding the tag attempt on Cleveland's Jose Ramirez, here's what they posted regarding tag attempts "As of 2017, the fielder no longer has to extend ball in glove or ball in hand toward the runner to create the restricted basepath. Under current rules, the tag attempt begins made the moment the fielder with control of the ball in his hand or glove, makes a motion toward the runner. At that point the runner’s basepath is an “imaginary” straight line to the base he is going to, and he cannot exceed 3-feet to either side of the line. Therefore, the runner has 6-feet of real estate he can use. This is always a judgment call, and it is not reviewable."
so this tells me that the second a fielder gets the ball and makes a motion towards the runner then that's considered a tag attempt even if the runner is technically out of reach.
Now back to the other part of your question, this copied and pasted from the MLB rules
"Any runner is out when:
(1) He runs more than three feet away from his base path to avoid being tagged unless his action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball. A runner’s base path is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight line from the runner to the base he is attempting to reach safely"
so it just says a straight line so whatever area of the base would be the closest to as straight of a line as possible without going over 3 feet to avoid a tag.
why not?
Point of order - isn't the runner's lane three feet wide? So if he started completely in fair territory (looks like it since he's on the grass), then how can you conclude he "barely" went three feet or "it's close." It's actually not close, it's clearly more than three feet, if we're judging his right foot placement. If we're going off his torso or hips ... yes it's closer.
yup the original runner's lane was 3 feet in length either way so it's the best way to measure for out of basepath calls
But when the right foot came down, he already was past the pitchers tag. Isnt it 3 ft from when the tag attempt is made?
@@mptr1783 it should be sadly this isn't what it has been since as of 2017, it's stupid and I think it's ridiculous but the rules that MLB now tells Umpires regarding tag attempts, this isn't covered within the actual posted rules on the MLB site but what they've been telling them since then is a tag attempt just requires possession of the ball and a motion towards the runner.
Seems like if you would need a tape measure to confirm whether it got to technically correct status, you should defer to a no call. But mad props for one of the best Futurama quotes of all time.
Luckily for ONora, there actually was a tape measure: the runner's lane. If you go from the grass out to the runner's lane mark, you have gone farther than 3 feet. Maybe by only an inch, but baseball is a game of inches.
If we're going to insist that umpires are perfect down to the tenths of an inch on the plate, we have to accept judgment calls that are that close on the bases, too.
@@teebob21 I normally agree with you teebob but slow this play down. When the tag attempt was made, the runner was in the middle of the dirt. His right foot came down after he passed the pitchers tag. IMO, this shouldve been a no call
@@mptr1783 My friend, we will have to agree to disagree on when the tag attempt starts. MLB interprets it as beginning when the fielder has the ball and is moving toward the runner. If we accept that interpretation, I can't see this as anything except what was called on the field. I'm open to other explanations but please come armed with some other rule interpretation.
@@mptr1783 but his direct line to the base starts at the moment the fielder starts attempting a tag, so if the runner deviates more than 3 feet from the line from time the pitcher has the ball, it's immaterial when the first swipe is.
Uggg never more than 3 feet. Nor does it say that only part of your body has to go outside of the 3 feet.
Exactly, every part of body has to be past 3 feet or it's under 3 feet.
I always use the center mass of the body, which I was taught. To say the right foot might have been more than 3 ft is useless. I don't think he was attempting to tag his right foot, was he?
How does a tag attempt “start” with arm straight down?
Because that's what allows the call to be seen as right in this instance.
It's pretty silly to actually argue that you're attempting a tag while your arm is straight down and not anywhere near close to being able to make the tag
And you still have to take 2-3 steps before you're close enought to actually make contact with the runner.
Like it or not, a tag is initiated when a fielder with the ball begins moving towards a runner. Distance is irrelevant.
@@DarkLordofDnD that's clearly not true. Otherwise a guy in a run down would never escape because a fielder can just immediately move the hand towards him before he starts running towards the runner even when they are 30' away.
@@IkLms11 You're allowed to retreat or remain within the 3 ft to try and get around person with the ball. But that is in fact the interpretation of the rule.
I feel that last "ugh"... 😂
Keep teaching & preaching Lindsay. You only have a hundred+ years of misconceptions to undo. (big sigh)
When i first saw the ejection and i heard runner's lane, my first thought was.....
You idiots.
Learn the rules of the game.
Technically correct is the worst kind of correct or least satisfying, anyway.
The last thing I say to my crew before taking the field…Guys, if we have to get together for anything ALL of us will get together. And we will all share what we saw on the play we are discussing. It is then up to the calling umpire to absorb all the information from the crew and they will decide if they want to overrule themselves and reverse the call.
Yep. Good pregame reminder.
It doesn't even have to be what everyone saw. Just talking through a play and having someone listening helps. In this case, 3B umpire, who had no real view, could be there just making sure the conversation is held, and if there's any really unusual rule situation involved, make sure the crew's interpretation is consistent. It makes it clear it's "our" call, not "his/her" or "my" call.
@@haroldbrooks5930 Yes! This is also key. If there’s a rule to be cited or interpreted in the crew’s final ruling someone on the crew may have something to add to the proper rule citation/interpretation even if they did not have any information to add from their position on the field. Thank you for pointing this out.
I have no dog in this fight, but still just a terrible call.
Personally feel like "Runners path" needs to have a look at and have some modifications.
Thank you, after watching a lot of these plays I am now a psudo-expert in “base path ” and the 3’ rule. We always want to go to the word “base line” which doesn’t apply. We should have a default umpire maybe in NY or Chicago that the announcers can go to so they don’t sound like an idiot. This would be just like football broadcasts but maybe have just one person for for all broadcasts.
you should have a few just in case, even retired Umpires hired by a network would be good.
I was at this game!! I was with you Lindsay, I thought it was a bad call in real time but when I looked at the replay it was way closer than it seemed. Looks like the plate umpire knew the argument was going nowhere and I think Pat Murphy wasn't going anywhere until he got tossed.
Another comment. You rightly say that the base path is not a line. It is a path. Then why do you draw a line. Why did you not draw a path. The path is the width of the runner's body to the width of the first base bag. It is not drawn at the time the fielder has possession of the ball. It is drawn when the fielder makes his attempt to tag the runner. When you draw the two lines the width of the runner's body, you have to measure three feet from the runner's right foot. Not three feet from the runner's left foot. And the runner's entire body, not just part of it must be outside the three foot mark of his right foot or his body is not three foot outside his base path. The path must start when the fielder attempts the tag - frame 27 - not frame 26. Frame 26 is when the fielder has possession of the ball and begins chasing the runner to see if he can make the tag. In frame 27, his left foot is six inches to the right of the foul line and his body and right foot is almost on the lane violation line. He never goes three feet outside of that PATH, which would be his entire body - not just the right side of it - three feet from that position. By rule, the outside the base path rule does not go into effect until the fielder has a "reasonable" opportunity to tag the runner. - here frame 27 - not before. This rule contemplates the situation that the fielder is in the runner's basepath with possession of the ball and is attempting to tag the runner and the runner leaves the base path to go around the fielder and AVOID the tag. It was never intended for this situation. For those who love baseball the outcome should have determined the result, not some made up technicality that does not apply. Here we had a great bunt by Ortiz where the defense was so confused that no one knew which fielder would field the bunt and which fielder would cover first. Here no one covered first. Also there was a great attempt by the fielder - the pitcher - to make the tag. Unfortunately, a fake "technicality" ruined the beautiful baseball moment. Let the great players play the game the way it was designed to be played so fans can enjoy their love of the sport and these great athletes.
What if it was torso (or centre of gravity) instead of feet if we go right foot grass divot to right foot RLI divot. If we take into account the angle from vertical of the runner he's SERIOUSLY leaning infield when he divots RLI line - how far is THIS from his grass divot torso - looks MUCH less than 3 feet now! Is that what coach could have argued? Rule book doesn't say what PART of runner, does it? Lindsay mentioned apples with apples - my apple is runner's torso.
I wish we could see the end of the conference and see how strongly (or not) Acting Crew Chief O'Nora signaled that HE was keeping the call the same. He got the rule correct and nothing Miller said convinced him that his judgement (of when the tag started, which I also think was correct) was incorrect. The only thing Miller could say is "He got it right" and "Why are you expecting a junior umpire to overrule a senior umpire who is correct?" If an argument between O'Nora and the manager got out of hand, I'd expect the second crew member (Miller) to provide backup, but this discussion shouldn't have left O'Nora.
The sigh reminds me of Kif sighing at Captain Brannigan.
Foot to foot measurement does not make sense to me. Runners body measured by belt-line (ergo center of gravity) should be the Umpire discretion call. I think that is why it look straightforward. (Also why common sense needs to return to baseball, not the the 37 definitions of "IS" in the rule book.) It's a kids' game afterall!
The tag attempt is not when the fielder is running after the runner to tag him It starts when the fielder attempts to apply the tag. Here frame 57. The runner's left foot is 6 inches right of the foul line and the rest of his body is already over the runner's lane line. The runner does not go three feet from that line to avoid the tag. Also by rule for the out of the baseline rule to apply, the fielder must be in a reasonable position to tag the runner out. Here the fielder is never in a reasonable position to tag the runner out because when he tries to tag him out frame 57 he can't and t he runner is in his base path at that time because that is when the tag is attempted. This rule assumes that the fielder is in the basepath with the ball and the runner has to go around him to avoid being tagged out. Just because the runner is running away from the fielder with the ball in his possession doesn't mean that the fielder has already reasonably attempted to apply the tag.
I couldn’t get the login/signup verification email at the website, so I’ll post the comment here: Hi there, Lindsay. I want to argue your “technically correct” judgment on two counts. I think you are injecting technical criteria that aren’t in the rulebook. Might be in the history of such decisions, you’d be a better judge. But first, you used extreme left foot strike versus extreme right foot strike. What if instead we measured center of torso, body as a whole, which is where the tag attempt was made-I don’t think that reached three feet of variance. Who’s to say if foot strike extreme is the best measurement? Second, you measured “tag attempt” from the moment the defensive player touched the ball. Why not measure from the actual stretching of the arm toward the runner? The runner began his change of base path to the right in anticipation of the tag attempt, but before the tag attempt. I kinda think the defensive team wouldn’t have argued a safe call here, but hey, we have a noble baseball tradition of otherwise nice people screaming profanities in each other’s faces from fractions of inches away, so I may be wrong on that one.
2 words!, Center Mass, no it is not in the text of the rules but neither is farthest appendage either but the idea that it's not center mass when it's possible to reach these mlb players foot to hand reach beyond 3 ft is rediculous! A big enough mlb player's foot and hand in opposite reaching/running directions can be more than 3 ft! So it should be center mass over farthest appendage and this was a bad! Bad! Bad! Call
The rule says 3 feet. So get out the tape measure and see if he violated the 3 feet rule. If not, safe. If so, out. 3 feet is not subject to the umpire's interpretation. It is a fixed measured distance specified in the rule. Measure it. Make the ruling. No argument necessary. Get on with the game.
Came for an explanation of why Pat Murphy was ejected yet again, stayed because I'm excited to see more trans baseball nerds in the wild. Hell yeah
Honestly have you ever found an umpire at fault for a bad call. Even when they make bad calls you stick up for them
I really like these videos, but I could do without the constant sass to announcers where you act like you’re doing a live video and the announcers disregard what you say. It’s not funny to constantly berate them after the fact for talking base line or runners lane.
Should we be judging from the deviation of the feet or the center of the runner's gravity? That most outside step by the right foot is taken with a heavy lean to the runner's left. Is it a 3 ft. deviation of the runner's center of mass? I'm not sold that it is.
Yeah 3.2 or 3.3 feet. AFTER he avoides the tag. Technically correct and no common sense applied.
They should hire Lindsey to talk to the announcers every spring and explain the difference between path and lane and which applies when lmao
May as well put announcers on mute and wait until the next day to hear what Lindsay has to say.
Do any announcers follow your channel? Well, they should.
the image showing of the new "runners lane" shows the grass cut much further from the foul line than in the video, which is in line with the corner of the base. is the diamond not to spec?
If Colorado wanted to be technical about it, Ortiz may not have gotten the base with his fingertips, either.
what i learned: commentators dont know their @ss from their elbow.
Your logic is that the tag attempt starts as soon as he has the ball in his glove though? How do you figure in any way that that is the case?
i still think it was too close to call and i probably wouldn't have called it, but yes, it was close.
I'm curious about the brewers having two coaches out on the mound? Before the walk off the commentators were also confused. The umpire even looked like he had no answer for bud black
I was wondering that too. Seemed like it should be 2 visits from the dugout, meaning the pitcher should've had to be removed.
But, didn't matter in the end, as the Rox ended up winning the game like a pitch later, but I'm also curious about that.
I don’t see why they can’t have two coaches. They can pull the entire infield in for the visit and it doesn’t count as a separate visit for each player in the huddle. Every other sport lets you call timeout and every coach participates in the timeout.
Let the pitching coach talk to the pitcher while the manager sets the defense. Makes a lot of sense to me.
@stephenbeck7222 because it's a visit from the dugout.
2 visits from the dugout and you have to go to the pen
@@kinkaid7477 it’s charged as one singular timeout. Given that they conclude at the same time. Which they did here. I think the broadcast got that wrong (shocker), believe Bud Black was also more interested in shift limitations with a 5 man infield which the Brewers put on. Hope that helps.
@@benjaminwirth1208 Bud Black should know the shift rule by now. Original infielders have to stay on their original side of 2nd base but outfielders can set up wherever they want including as extra infielders. It’s also not something to really talk to the ump about as the offensive coach before the at bat, because they should wait until after the first strike during the at bat (or out at the end), then appeal the shift and get a free ball called.
I think that even the runner was under the impression that if he was in the runners lane, he was safe.
Just like SO MANY rules in baseball the rule is incomplete. Im involved in baseball as a profession as well as have been an umpire through college for almost 30 years. The "runner".. What part of the runner? The foot furthest away from the tag or body part closest to the tag. In other words, the runner's right foot could be 4 feet away from starting path but his left arm / hand could be only 2 feet away, and the hand is tagable. My point, baseball NEEDS to clarify so many things in their rules.
totally agree
Unpopular opinion Brennan miller escalated that situation for no reason….
0:58 Lin out there creating the endorsements. That's some good work.
@CloseCallSports The analysis in the video uses the runner's left foot to define where the runner was when the tag attempt began and the runner's right foot to define where the runner was furthest from the tag attempt. While the rule is vaguely worded, I believe the accepted definition is to use the center of the runner's body. If you add to the diagram the center of body, I don't think you'll arrive at a 3'+ deviation. You can also get apples-to-apples by looking where the left foot is at 3:43 (there's also a divot). Runner is probably safe upon close analysis.
I agree
It's weird when you insult randomly for comedic effect, but it's particularly distasteful when you ALSO use the same terminology in your interpretation and someone could quote you out of context just as easily.
Boo hoo
I don't like this out call. Stop the video at the 0:56 mark. The runner clearly is not 3 ft from the tag attempt at the moment a tag is applied. When the right foot makes contact with the ground, the batter-runner is past the fielder. I also believe the intent of the rule is a tag attempt from a stationary position, not a tag where the fielder is running towards the baserunner and could theortically make an attempt earlier than needed. A safe call wouldve just meant the Rockies manager wouldve been ejected again
Also, if the pitchers glove had some laces hanging and tagged the runner, would he then be out?
If you can't tell after looking at the replay in slowmo multiple times, then it's a "call stands" kind of call and one of the managers is going to be mad either way.
Either call is just as good as the other in this situation.
Wrong, but thanks for playing. The right call is the good call. You know nothing about how umpires think.
@@rayray4192 ray, youre being a little harsh. I the umpire called nothing, you wouldve had a problem with that? And isnt it the center mass of the body that has to be more than 3 ft from a tag attempt? I only saw a right foot land that may have been more than 3 feet but it also was after he passed the pitchers glove
@@mptr1783 you are right. I was ignorant and needed correct information
Hope O’Nora gets a game suspension or fine
The problem with your argument here is where you say the tag starts. It does not start when u pick up the ball. It's a "tag attempt" so u start when he actually goes to try and tag him. Then u will find it was only 3 ft and the call was wrong.
Incorrect, Baseball Rules Academy actually covered this regarding the controversial tag attempt on Jose Ramirez
Now they refer to it as a baseline when it's a basepath so just remember to substitute that in there since most people make that mistake anyway here's what they said, in quotes "As of 2017, the fielder no longer has to extend ball in glove or ball in hand toward the runner to create the restricted baseline. Under current rules, the tag attempt begins made the moment the fielder with control of the ball in his hand or glove, makes a motion toward the runner. At that point the runner’s baseline is an “imaginary” straight line to the base he is going to, and he cannot exceed 3-feet to either side of the line. Therefore, the runner has 6-feet of real estate he can use. This is always a judgment call, and it is not reviewable."
@@MattZRJSRoxy then it's a terrible rule cuz anyone with common sense in knows what the word "attempt" means. That's like saying u attempt a throw when it's in your hands or glove.
@@cheapseats12 sadly MLB is filled with terrible rules with zero common sense, it's part of the game's charm but in situations like this, it is ridiculous.
@@MattZRJSRoxy oh it ain't just mlb. Believe me I know I've coached high School. A lot of the rules are just nonsense
@@cheapseats12 yup I believe that
I nominate Lindsay to live fact check every broadcast. MLB would of course be reasonable and pay her well for this.
yeah, the same MLB that tries to shut her channel down every year for copyright infringement?
hyperbole
[ hahy-pur-buh-lee ]
noun, Rhetoric.
An obvious and intentional exaggeration.
3:30 Tag attempt starts? Are you serious? The guy is at least 6 feet away from the runner. No, the pitcher has only just picked up the ball and clearly has some ground to cover to actually be able to physically reach the runner. Unless we're advocating standing any distance away and waving at a guy from across the entire stadium as a tag attempt. So if it's going to take a step or two to close the distance the runner also has moved a step or two. That is of course if we're applying logic here but it's an umpire apologist leaning channel so we're probably not interested huh?
that's kinda harsh calling it an umpire apologist leaning channel when this is a learning the rules channel, her objective is to explain what the rules are so it assists fans, she's been critical of Umpires making poor decisions if it goes against the rules. Part of a tag attempt requires possession of the ball so generally the second an Umpire sees a fielder with a baseball attempts a tag of any kind then that is how they are going to see it, as a tag attempt even if the runner might be out of reach. It might be harsh to see it that way but that's what they were all trained to do. She's also been critical of unfair rules as well but Umpires can't do anything about that, Umpires have to enforce the rules as they are written even if it might create negativity towards them. MLB gives them the power to rule on any matter in a game that's not covered in the rules as well.
Look. I like the videos too but the approach the channel takes towards them is clearly done from a "how can this call be justified via the rules" rather than was it actually the correct call. And any subjective interpretations are taken in a way that defends the umpires call always.
This one is a perfect example where the decision point about when the tag has started is being placed at the earliest point you could possibly argue because it has to be to defend the call.
No one is going to claim the tag attempt starts while the guy is 6+' away and the pitcher has their glove nearly on the ground without needing to do so to justify the call because that is laughably not a tag attempt at that point. Although you can subjectively argue that it "technically" is under the rules.
And it persists with the base path. The evidence is foot placement but nowhere in the rule does it require the entire body to remain within the base path. If it did, someone stepping 1' to the right and throwing their arm straight out to the side for stability would violate that rule every time. Common sense says that it is referring to the body (torso or center of mass) of the runner and if that's what you are judging by, there is no shot that he was anywhere near going out of the base path.
But because you can argue the vague rule that it's the feet in this instance, that's what the channel uses because it allows them to claim the Umps were correct.
@@IkLms11 sadly if you search the rules up then you can easily find it on Baseball Rules Academy so you'd be wrong regarding tag attempts
"As of 2017, the fielder no longer has to extend ball in glove or ball in hand toward the runner to create the restricted basepath. Under current rules, the tag attempt begins made the moment the fielder with control of the ball in his hand or glove, makes a motion toward the runner. At that point the runner’s basepath is an “imaginary” straight line to the base he is going to, and he cannot exceed 3-feet to either side of the line. Therefore, the runner has 6-feet of real estate he can use. This is always a judgment call, and it is not reviewable."
This was covered due to a controversial tag attempt on Jose Ramirez which was over a month ago, almost 2 months. It's a stupid rule when they aren't within close enough distance but those are the rules and that's what the Umpires are enforcing whether we like them or not.
The channel doesn't go out of its way to kiss up to the Umpires, it might seem like that but the job is just to educate people. She's been critical of the Umpires when they do something against the rules and she's been critical of the rules as well when she feels it's a ridiculous rule
I disagree that you need all four conferring. The other two have no information that is relevant to what the two are discussing.
We do it to cover who is going to do what when the ejection almost inevitably occurs. Who has the manager? Who covers comments from the bench? Who has the runner if he starts barking? It's also a pre-emptive move to keep them from asking for another conference when they don't get the result they want from the first one.
I neglected before to compliment your use of "conferring." When I was a college umpire I always wanted to smack Rich Fetchiet and Dave Yeast for their constant use of"conferencing" when they were the representatives of(allegedly) higher education.
OK , you've lost me Lindsey. The running lane stripe is 3' to the right of the foul line. From the foul line to the grass, it's a bit over an additional 18". It's not close.
I think these local broadcasts should consider hiring former umpires to help out with understanding the rules. Or the broadcasters could learn the rules smh. It hurts listening to these guys sometimes, even when they're right
But...but.....the runner's lane....Great job. Love the frustration grunt.
I love this channel! It really gets me to understand so many of the technical calls that I was not aware. Thank you!
I believe it's 3 feet from foul line to the grass (outside) this is definitely more than 3 feet.
The runners lane is 3 feet. The dirt to the left of the foul line is usually between 1.5 and 2 feet.
When the fielder begins to lift his glove up in the tag attempt it appears the runners right foot is right on the edge of the grass. His right foot ends up on the edge of the chalk so we know that foot moved just over 3’. However the rest of the runners body (above the right knee) appears to have stayed within the 3’.
Maybe this is the technically correct call but it seems harsh that a player that’s 6’ tall must keep each of their appendages within 3’ of its starting point.
I don't think this is a VAR situation where we analyze if a toe is beyond the 2nd to last defender. If you move your body three feet away from your bee line path, you are in violation
Not sure why he got ejected, Pat was as calm as ever and still got tossed!!
usually what happens if someone keeps arguing a call, there are times where Managers will go out there to argue until an Umpire ejects him
@@MattZRJSRoxyoh I totally get that but I’ve seen worse not get ejected. Point is, he wasn’t yelling or throwing his arms or in his face. Seemed pretty calm and he was even shocked he got tossed 😆
Consider this as part of the "prolonged" qualification for ejecting. At some point you have to move the game along, even there being calm because he had nothing to legitimately argue over the call.
@@RaleyCreativeTravel true but sadly if he was warned to stop and didn't then it was grounds for ejection, we generally see them use a stop sign signal as a warning for this but not always a guaranteed signal that we'll see
@@duelist301 yup exactly at some point an Umpire can rule that an argument is delaying the game which can also be grounds for ejection, the call was standing regardless of what the Manager was trying to argue, it was a moot point once the 1st base Umpire wasn't going to change his call
In terms of the ejection, the manager actually seemed pretty cool the whole time and it seemed like the umpire was the one escalating things. Where was the crew chief?
Wasting time and he got run for it. You can’t stand there and argue about it forever. Miller said it’s over, move on, and Murphy didn’t leave.
It was a bad call. You can go 3 feet off the line and he should have been called safe. That was a big call and was awful call that infected the game. Rockies couldn't beat the Brewers without the umpires helping them.
What exactly could U2 and U3 add to the conversation. It's just performative nonsense to bring all 4 together. Good for them.
Hey did you retain the rights to the BRD after CC died?
@@hankluvsdagny I walked away well before he passed.
This call seems to hinge on when one considers the tag attempt to have begun. The confusing part to me is that the pitcher is running with his glove sticking out far sooner than he can possibly reach the runner with it. BR's right foot is on the inside chalk line and the pitcher is still approximately 4-6 ft away from that line. Hypothetically, if the pitcher fielded a ball on the mound and started running with his glove out to tag a runner, would the tag attempt have started on the mound? In my uneducated opinion, the tag attempt doesn't truly start here until the pitcher's arm is almost parallel to the ground, by which point, the BR is either right on the inside chalk line or just inside of it, meaning the 3 feet limit wasn't exceeded. Super close call and tough that it wasn't reviewable. That said, when does a tag actually begin?
A play or attempted play is interpreted as a legitimate effort by a defensive player who has possession of the ball to actually retire a runner. This may include an actual attempt to tag a runner, a fielder running toward a base with the ball in an attempt to force or tag a runner, or actually throwing to another defensive player in an attempt to retire a runner.
Per MLB interpretation, the tag attempt begins when the fielder has the ball, is reasonably close enough to attempt to make a play, and begins to move toward the runner.
@@teebob21As usual, the MLB rulebook contains a giant word salad that is no more specific than if the word salad didn't exist. In this play, the pitcher is running, grabs the ball near the ground and continues running as he raises his glove. Regarding the definition you gave, which is it here? - an actual tag attempt, in which case, I think the runner is safe because I don't believe the runner deviates more than 3 feet from the base path once a legitimate tag attempt begins. Maybe that's just my non-expert opinion, but how can you have a tag attempt when you're 6 feet away? On the other hand, with my definition, the runner could just keep running further way and the pitcher would never get close enough to trigger a tag attempt/setting of the base path. If it's the running toward a base/runner definition, then sure, he is clearly out. In conclusion....who knows?! 🙂
@@wackybadger By rule, the tag attempt here started as soon as the pitcher was in possession of the ball. If you don't think he was attempting a tag as soon as he had the ball, what was he doing instead?
@@teebob21 he was running towards the area where he thought he then would try to tag the runner. How can you say that when he fielded the ball he then is making a tag attempt? Hes attempting to move his feet to make a tag. I think the spirit of this rule is more for stationary fielders who are waiting to make a tag and a runner who then moves more than 3 ft to avoid a tag. But if Im wrong I wont be surprised
@@mptr1783 how do you make an out in that situation?
The way Lindsay draws these lines and decides when a tag attempt starts I don’t think any runner could ever successfully evade a tag. Also I would think it’s about where the center of mass of the player moves, not a single right foot.
I agree.
@@theburnetts that’s what I was thinking as well. One step to the left or right for any person with size and length running could be 3 feet
Once again, Lindsay (I hope I spelled that right), my argument is why does the tag attempt start when the fielder gains possession of the ball? He gets it and has take 2 or 3 large steps to get close enought to make a tag attempt. If gaining possession of the ball is enough out, but if it has to be an actual legitimate tag attempt easy safe.
The short answer is that the tag attempt begins at that time because that's what the official rules interpretation says it is.
@teebob21 it's a poor interpretation. I'm 10-15 feet away. I'm not attempting a tag.
@@chesterthompson6835 If the fielder isn't attempting to make a play or make a tag, what is he doing?
@teebob21 when does the actual tag attempt start? I'm not saying he isn't moving into position to make a tag, but just because he has the ball doesn't mean he's actually making a tag. In this case, he has to take 2 more steps to even get close enough that if he extends he arms he might be able to make contact. There was one last week on this channel that the 3rd baseman or short stop collected the ball, but his momentum took him another step forward and then he still had to turn and by that time the runner was already by him.
@@chesterthompson6835 A play or attempted play is interpreted as a legitimate effort by a defensive player who has possession of the ball to actually retire a runner. This may include an actual attempt to tag a runner, a fielder running toward a base with the ball in an attempt to force or tag a runner, or actually throwing to another defensive player in an attempt to retire a runner.
Per MLB interpretation since 2017, the tag attempt begins when the fielder has the ball, is reasonably close enough to attempt to make a play, and begins to move toward the runner.
Need to have better quality umpires.
Runners lane is three feet wide. I guess that confirms the call as correct.
much less obvious if you use center of mass or if you say the entire player needs to be 3 feet.
The rule doesn't specify how to measure. Belly button makes the most sense to me. If you shoot your leg out I don't think that's the intent of the rule.
He starts on the grass, inside the grass, and he ends up stepping on the chalk of the runner's lane. I think that pretty much sealed it.
Nope that's irrelevant, what needs to be defined is what's an actual tag attempt.
This seems like an easy call. He starts on the grass and ends on the opposing end of the runners lane. If the runners lane is supposed to be 3 ft wide from the foul line then he would have to go over 3 ft to get there. He's out.
I don’t think O’Nora is processing this in real time as a matter of literal inches. In my opinion he rushes this call a bit. Signaling out of the base path almost before Ortiz even takes that step on the chalk. O’Nora gets lucky that he’s *probably* technically correct by a matter of what 3-4 inches (depending on where you determine the pitcher started the tag attempt). Not a fan of the call, opposing team isn’t going to question anything if this is ruled a no tag and safe.
No one cares what you think. Brian used experience and finely tuned judgment to make the correct call. There was no luck involved. He did his job.
@rayray4192 even on review this is close and may have been overturned if allowed.
@@arley2246 umpires are paid to make close calls correctly
@@rayray4192 if you can process 3-4 inches from 30 feet away in a matter of seconds the power to you man. That’s also only if you determine the tag attempt started as soon as the pitcher gloves the ball. It’s so close.
@@benjaminwirth1208Processing 3-4 inches from 30 feet away is a basic judgment skill that has been mastered by any umpire wishing to work ball at a higher level than JV high school.
aww, the profile pic is no longer pride-ified
Join us on Discord where that logo lives year-round discord.gg/eFXWr7yHWM
I don't know if using the location of feet is the precedent, but personally I wouldn't interpret "runs more than three feet away from his base path" quite like that. Rather than looking for any single aspect of the "running" to be >3 feet deviated (e.g. a foot step), I think it's a matter of whether he moves (via running) himself *as a whole* >3 feet away. His established base path would be the line to the middle of the base from his center of mass when the tag attempt begins. If his center of mass moves more than 3 feet away from that line, he's out.
In this case, Ortiz's center of mass starts at roughly the grass/dirt boundary, and the farthest deviation is about 12-15 inches inside the runner's lane chalk line. Even though his feet go out farther, he's leaning significantly to the left at that point. I don't know what the distance from the foul line to the grass is at Coors field, but it looks like it's about a foot. Overall, my estimate is that his center of mass deviated about 2.75 feet during his maneuver, even though his feet deviated about 3.25 feet. Accordingly, I wouldn't see this as a violation of the out-of-the-base-path rule.
4:02 The best point of this video. Everybody in Korea does confuse the same....
Umpires like O’Nora have been horrendous this year
I know this channel is all about technicalities, but that was a BAD call. I tire of overcomplicating stuff like this. It was just BAD! In many ways, it was REALLY BAD.
Way right call slow down see over 3 feet wow see normal just gusss ump all got together not 2 error there part
As soon as I saw this game highlight on ESPN I had to come here to find out the real scoop!
He was out of the lane when he was running on the grass 😂
hes allowed to be out of the lane
The irony of using that particular Futurama clip.
Shouldn't the play by play and colour people in the booths of TV and radio know the rules or at least have an expert near by? Also they should be watching your fantastic TH-cam channel so they know what the actual rules are and how they apply in different situations.
Broadcasters rarely know the rules. Most color commentators are former players who rarely know the rules. Many managers rarely know the rules. The game is plum silly with rules illiteracy.
Running on the grass is a thing
Running on the grass isn't illegal here. The grass is just useful as a reference for how far left the runner is because chalk-to-chalk is exactly 3 feet so grass to chalk is definitely more
Yes, running on the grass is a legal thing.
Why do you think the tag attempt starts when the pitcher has possession but his glove is hanging down at his leg?
Tag attempt starts at it's beginning
Onora completely blew that call
While it may be technically correct this is another one of those plays that doesn't "feel right" to me. The runner was still proceeding to the base and the evasion of the tag seemed a natural maneuver and reasonable. It may be the rule, don't think it is fair to the runner that they are expected to proceed linearly, especially as many right handed hitters take a similar curve starting on the infield grass and crossing into foul territory before touching the bag. I also don't think the feet are a good point of reference as they exaggerate adjustments to changes in direction of travel.
In my mind, the purpose of this rule should be to keep players from playing games in a rundown situation or to avoid chaotic situations that might allow another runner to advance by intentionally leaving the base path.
The runner couldn't even reach the bag due to his evasion attempt
You started the attempt too soon. His foot was on first white line when ball as controlled and reached out. Not the grass
He's out for runner's lane. He actually veers into the runner's lane, so he's out either way, but I'd have out for runner's lane myself.
As explained in the video, the running lane is irrelevant. The only question is whether or not the batter-runner deviated more than three feet to avoid the tag.
No, that is not how that rule works. Please learn the rules before commenting Daddy Ball answers. Fun fact: if you watch this entire video, you will have an opportunity to learn the applicable rules.
@@alanhess9306 alan, whats your call on this play?
@@mptr1783 I wouldn't call him out unless I was sure he truly violated the 3 feet rule. What do you think? Was he out of his path to avoid the tag? It's really close.
@@alanhess9306 yeah, I agree its close, but the center mass of his body(which I was always taught to look at) doesnt appear 3 ft away
It's a ridiculous call.
Why should 4 confere,when only 2 had a good look at the runner and it’s path?
U3 and U4 shouldn't NOT be in the huddle just because they were too far away from the play, but they indeed should have been in the conversation as all umpire's opinions and insights are needed to make the correct call, as some umps may know the rules and nuances of them just a bit more than others.
It is best practice during a crew consultation to involve the entire crew.