Corey Kluber: Silent Assassin
April 25, 2014WFNY on the 2014 NFL Draft: Joe Gilbert’s Top Five Running Backs
April 25, 2014So, remember that Elliot Johnson play? The one where the Tribe’s utility fielder caught a ball in right field but lost control during the transfer to throw it back toward the infield? Yeah, that was categorized as an error, massively tilting a game in the opposition’s favor, and debates soon followed.
In a surprise move, Major Leaugue Baseball has not only said that that rule—where the transfer can impact the catch—is dumb and they’re changing it, effective immediately.
FOX Sports’ Ken Rosenthal reports that Starting Friday night, umpires will rule on catches the way they did in the past, using more of a common-sense approach rather than following the incredibly absurd letter of the law. After a meeting last week between the players union and officals, both sides agreed that the way the rule is written is incredibly silly and games are being altered because of it.
Kudos to MLB for being willing to change a rule mid-season rather than waiting until the next year as other leagues would do. Now if we could just get that out back.
15 Comments
This is good. I had a feeling that if they never changed it, we would eventually see an outfielder make a catch in his glove with runners on base, but never transition the ball to his throwing hand. He could then drop the ball to the field and pick it up to throw the runners out for a double or even triple play.
Hallelujah! MLB acknowledged a mistake and quickly corrected it. Wow! I hope the NFL takes notice.
Now if we can get MLB to do something about some of these stupid replay decisions. These guys have slow-motion, stop-action, and a dozen camera angles, AND THEY STILL SCREW IT UP! It just defies explanation.
Huh?
Instant replay is a scam.
The way the rule was written, any catch was never official until the outfielder transitioned the ball from his glove to his throwing hand. It would be ridiculous, but theoretically, the outfielder could make a catch and hold it in his mitt for an extended length of time and then let it fall out of his mitt and it would be considered an error and the hitter would not be out.
In my example above, the runners on base would not advance because they’d assume the outfielder caught the ball. He could just hold it in his mitt and then drop it, effectively creating a double play.
The new rule made no sense – like a solution looking for a problem. Always perceived baseball as more deliberate in its changes, using experienced guys like Joe Torre for input. Good move to quickly admit the gaffe and move on. Because if what happened to Eliot Johnson affected a playoff game there’s be ridicule everywhere.
to what end?
More commercial breaks mean more advertising revenue.
But more importantly: It doesn’t get more calls corrects. It gets SOME calls correct, but creates whole new gray areas to argue, fuss, and fight over. The aggregate of incorrect calls remains the same. They’re just a different kind of blown calls.
A good example is the tuck rule. Replay lets us look at Woodson hitting Brady with more detail, but with that detail we now need to further define what constitutes a pass, fumble, forward motion, etc. So all we’ve done is create a more nuanced set of rules that result in ambiguous plays which result in the same amount of difficult calls and stupid rulings.
I feel that instant replay has made the NFL into some grand philosophical, lawyerly debate over the nature of “tackle”, “forward motion”, “catch”, and so on. It annoys me.
imagine a second baseman making an over the shoulder catch in short right, then running at a base runner hung up between bases. Fakes a throw to freeze the runner, drops it … no catch? [I never read the new rule so it may not have applied to such a scenario].
Runners can tag up as soon as the outfielder touches the ball, which would force the outfielder to make a decision immediately as to whether or not to drop the ball intentionally.
No, because the runners would not tag in this situation.
Let’s say there’s runners on 1st and 2nd, no outs. Batter hits a shallow fly to left field. The left fielder catches it in his glove but never removes it. The runners would go back to 1st and 2nd because they’d be crazy to try to tag and run on a shallow fly ball. So, the left field “oops” drops the ball. Now, the base runners would need to advance and the batter would need to get to first. The left fielder picks up the ball he just “dropped” and rifles it to 3rd for the force out, the 3rd baseman to 2nd for the 2nd force out, and on to 1st to get the batter who presumably went back to the dugout thinking his ball was caught. Triple play.
Thankfully the rule was changed so this hypothetical situation is moot.
MLB agreed with me. So, does that mean I won the argument or lost it? If MLB is agreeing that doesn’t make me feel good about my stance 🙂
You should have tweeted this to Tito a month ago.
I was here when that exact scenario was discussed, and agreed that the ability to game the rule in that specific scenario made it an issue.
And not that it matters, but if the runners were to stay in the play and be back at their original bases and ready to advance immediately upon the outfielder touching the ball, by the time the outfielder dropped it and picked it up, I’d bet he could get no more than one out on most plays.
I believe it was ruled a hit on the play, which is even dumber, meaning that whole scenario as it played out reached a level of dumbness that is so dumb it might be smart.