Non-Reviewable Backswing Interference No-Call Leads to Ejection 195 - John Libka and Scott Servais
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- HP Umpire John Libka ejected Mariners Manager Scott Servais in Seattle following an unreviewable backswing interference no-call. Ejection report & analysis article: www.closecalls...
Current Replay Review rules do not allow umpires to review issues of backswing contact or interference, and this restriction by the league led to Servais’ ejection for arguing such a call after he saw the replay on the stadium’s video screen. The umpires aren’t allowed (by rule) to look at video for this play, so they had no choice to eject Servais because ANOTHER regulation (called “Standards for Removal from the Game”) states that a manager/player/coach shall be ejected for referencing having observed a video replay that contradicts an umpire’s on-field ruling.
Under Official Baseball Rule 6.03(a)(3) Comment, this is an example of contact on the backswing that doesn’t rise to the level of bona fide interference (in NFHS/high school, it’s called “follow-through” contact), so the penalty is not an automatic out on the batter.
Instead, the penalty for this inadvertent backswing contact (“backswing INT”) is a dead ball strike. Because Reds batter Derek Dietrich already had two strikes on him when this backswing INT occurred, the dead ball prevents him from running on the uncaught third strike and instead stops play with a strike three call. Because it’s a dead ball third strike, the batter is out and, in this case, the game is over due to the third out of the inning.
Conclusion: Make this play reviewable.
Also weird how the rule states he must "swing so hard he carries the bat all the way around". So by that wording, this rule would not apply to a check swing. It totally should though, by the spirit and intention of the rule it should 100% have been a dead ball, strike 3, inning over. So not only does the MLB need to make it reviewable, they also need to change the wording
I really don’t understand why replay rules have to be limited. Why can’t replay officials review anything they want? Why do sports leagues feel they have to list plays that can and cannot be reviewed? Let EVERYTHING be reviewable.
They need to really.lomit what's being reviewed or we are going to review every play just cause and baseball needs to be called lived.
i heard from someone that mlb doesnt wanna slow the pace of the game. probably would bring down overall ratings and money for them if there were more time allotted to review every single close call
@@gforce97 I don’t disagree with you. But then my follow up question would be this - if you aren’t going to use replay for everything then why have it at all? Who knows what blown call will mean the difference in a game? Limited replay is frustrating. Unlimited replay is not really workable I guess. I say get rid of it all. Just go back to umpires calling the game in real time and we all live with the occasional blown call.
You should use the Super Mario coin sound and animation whenever we get the money's worth comment.
Are you the origin of this running gag?!
It's really stupid to make some plays reviewable and not others. Who knows what play could affect the outcome of the game.
Any play including balls and strikes and judgement calls should be reviewable with a limited number of challenges
I know I never encountered this when umpiring, nor have I even thought of this series of events.
I figured that rule is more a follow through interefence, but there's no follow through on a check swing. My initial reaction was this is more like a batter-runner unintentionally running into an uncaught third strike that had deflected into his basepath.
Did the Mariners win this game?
It almost looked like he might have felt tipped it while the ball bounced. It was very slight but in replay it almost appears at the ball redirects lately after it bounces when it passes the bat. Does anyone else see the same thing? If that is the case would that make it a dead ball at the foul ball points and no longer interference? Obviously this wouldn’t happen as it is only visible on replay and it cannot be reviewed but I’m curious if anyone else sees this
Too bad they missed the call, but neither the Reds nor the Mariners will be .500 this year. Plus, Seattle won, anyway.
Can you make a video on the Phillies/Braves interference last night as well?
The crew f*ucked this one up big time. You HAVE to get together at least.
Pay attention to the video. The crew was unable, by rule, to do anything.
It's a rule. Protest the game
The disagreement was over judgment (did the bat hit the ball?) not the rule, so it is not protestable.
instead of more reviewable plays, replay needs to be completely eliminated in all sports.
JOMBOY
It is reviewable play
That 3rd base ump is so smug . Totally missed the call. These umps think they are bigger than the game.
Unless you have ever been in their position shut up
Again, MLB umpires are too arrogant to do the right thing. This is why they suck.
I've seen a lot of umpires with power trips or ones that screw up and won't correct their mistake. But to assume they are all arrogant is a bit much. I actually knew Libka in college, he's a stand-up guy. Bluntly put they were put in a hard situation and did what little they were allowed to do.