They say that you learn something new every day and that is exactly what happened today when I was watching the Phillies @ Marlins game. The game was going pretty normally if not boring until the 6th inning. Now I don't know if it was the fact that it was the Phillies last game at Sun Life Stadium or that Joe West was the umpire or that Halladay was pitching for the Cy Young, but something made this game go from normal to crazy.
Ryan Howard had reached after Chase Utley made an out to start the inning. With Howard on first, Pence bombed a ball toward the right field. The right fielder, Peterson, whose name will certainly be more recognizable because of the play he made today, leaped up toward the wall to make a play on Pence's ball. He missed the ball and Howard went to third, Pence "safe and secure" at second with a double.
Unfortunately for the Phillies, Peterson immediately called fan interference. He brought to the umpire's attention that the fan in the outfield reached over with his hat and interfered with his ability to catch the ball. Now from my view it looked like Peterson was closing his glove to catch the ball before the fan interfered but I guess that is the reason why I'm not an MLB umpire.
Anyway back to the game. Jack McKeon, the Marlins manager, came out and argued with the umps until they agreed to review the call. Led by everyone's favorite crew chief, Joe West, the umpires headed to the review station to take another look at the play.
About ten minutes later West came out and signaled for Howard to go back to first and called Pence out. All of this was fine and good because according to the MLB rules for fan interference, if a fan interferes with a play being made that hampers a player from making a play, the ball is ruled dead and the batter is called out. I'm not a big fan of this rule because it is not the batter's fault some fan decides to interfere. Besides there was and is no guarantee the player trying to make the play would have caught the ball anyway. Call the ball dead sure but just treat it as a foul ball. Give the batter a strike but not an out.
So as I said it all looked kosher until the Phillies announcers brought a certain instant replay rule to attention. Now personally I never fully understood instant replay and have not been a fan since its inception. I understand why there is a need for it but human error is a a part of the game of baseball and it is what makes this sport different from the rest. Cameras and booth reviews don't decide the aspects of the game but rather play on the field. Sure, the calls aren't always right but I would rather an ump make a call an stick to it. The rule that was in play on this call had to do with what replay allows. According to the MLB rules official definition of instant replay, it is to be used when a HR call is disputed. As I watched the tv replays they showed and listened to the commentary it was clear that the play was originally called a double and not a HR. Charlie could have called a replay if he believed it was a HR but for McKeon to call it he clearly was not looking to turn a double into a HR. McKeon wanted the replay called to see if there was fan interference.
Fan interference can be reviewed on a HR call to determine if a fan reached over the fence. In that case the ball is called a ground rule double. In the case of McKeon's review however he was trying to get a double that was called originally reviewed to determine if there was fan interference. By the rules of instant replay that is not allowed. When West came out and did call Pence out on fan interference, Charlie came out and argued it. He was ejected but after that, the Phillies announced they were playing the game under protest.
"Under protest, what does that mean?" I was asking myself this question as I watched the game and tried to make sense of it all. My brother who was watching the game with me clued me in a little but still I needed more. So I took to the internet and did what all answer seekers did and I googled it.
I had never seen a game be played under protest before so this was new for me. After doing some research and again listening to the tv commentary I found out that 14 games had been played under protest, one that even involved the Phillies and another and probably the most notable one involving George Brett and a bat loaded with pine tar.
This info was all fine and good but it didn't answer one key question, "what does this mean?"
So again I took the net and found MLB's official rules for how to handle games a team protests. According to MLB, a team may protest a game if they believe that a rule was violated. The Phillies were protesting what they believed was an illegal use of instant replay. The game will continue to be played but after announcing the protest said team will have the ability to appeal to the Commissioner of the league, in this case the NL Commissioner. The Commissioner will review the play and if they deem that the rule violation directly interfered with the team;s ability to win the game, the game will be replayed from the point of protest.
Okay, everything made sense now so now I just had to wait until the end of the Phillies game to see what would come of this. I was hoping the Phillies won and the protest wouldn't matter but as it were the Phillies lost in 14 innings. So now it was a wait and see approach to whether the protest would uphold. However, Joe West was able to immediately kill it by claiming that Charlie called for a HR replay and in that case West was fully within his umpiring rights to say it was fan interference. It was certainly a he said, he said and West being the umpire won. As a fan of not only the Phillies but the integrity of baseball itself, I call shenanigans.
West was clearly just covering his own skin by saying that Charlie called for a HR replay when Charlie never called for a replay at all. It was McKeon that wanted it reviewed and not for the same reason the Phillies chose to protest. The review should not have been able to happen at all per the rules and West was wrong in allowing it to happen. He should have owned up to it. Jim Joyce could have lied until he was blue by telling people he trusted his call but no he owned up to his mistake by saying that he cost Gallaraga a perfect game. All West had to do was own up to it but no. He wanted to keep his own record clean instead of fight for the integrity of the game of baseball. It is umpires like him that have turned so many away from the game.
It is no question that umpiring this year has been subject at best but eventually MLB needs to do something and stop protecting their umpires when they make a mistake. The NFL puts postseason bans on refs who constantly make bad calls. They only pick the cream of the crop to officiate the Superbowl. Why can't MLB do the same thing? Now, I understand human error occurs and I like that aspect of the game but when it is obvious you made a mistake and the whole world knows it just own up to it. Don't try to hide behind lies and made up rules and comments like, "it was a judgment call."
We as fans wouldn't hate umpires as much if they just manned up and admitted their mistakes. Joyce admitted his mistake right away and in what could have been an entire ordeal wasn't and it had blown over in a few days. Joyce and Gallaraga handled it as true baseball people should and as a result both are still respected especially in Joyce's case as he is still continually voted as one of the top umpires in baseball by the players. West however is not respected by baseball people, fans or athletes. This isn't the first bad call he hasn't owned up to and I believe it won't be the last. So in something that could have so easily been solved by a simple, "I made a mistake," it has become something that Philly fans and the Phillies personnel are not going to soon forget.
No comments:
Post a Comment