If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Deadspin)   MLB umpiring crew forgets a batter's count and take three minutes using the new instant replay rule to determine what it was. Yep, that was a real improvement to the game   (deadspin.com) divider line 41
    More: Fail, Major League Baseball, hitter, Bo Porter, mulligan, pitch out  
•       •       •

574 clicks; posted to Sports » on 05 Apr 2014 at 8:31 AM (24 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



41 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-04-05 08:37:43 AM
They must be Big Eight officials. Who else could lose count of such a low number ?
 
2014-04-05 09:13:14 AM
Boo hoo, subby. Baseball games get delayed a lot longer than three minutes because of the "human element" - when the umpires have only double-digit IQs, it's more important that instant replay is available to get it right.
 
2014-04-05 09:26:01 AM
I wasn't aware the umps could use it for just anything. That will slow things down.
 
2014-04-05 09:39:53 AM
What's more important, getting it right or getting the game over faster?
 
2014-04-05 09:43:27 AM

Krymson Tyde: What's more important, getting it right or getting the game over faster?


C) Having umpires that can farking count.
 
2014-04-05 09:46:52 AM
So a bunch of baseball fans had to sit around and wait for something interesting to happen?
 
2014-04-05 09:51:59 AM
Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?
 
2014-04-05 09:57:03 AM

Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?


That's puzzling as well...it's baseball... it's MLB. You'd think they'd have 4 or 5 stats monkeys collecting every sort of statistic possible.
 
2014-04-05 10:00:29 AM

Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?


It's not official.
 
2014-04-05 10:01:42 AM

Man On A Mission: Krymson Tyde: What's more important, getting it right or getting the game over faster?

C) Having umpires that can farking count.


Of course it would be better if people didn't ever make mistakes, but that's never going to happen.
 
2014-04-05 10:02:30 AM

Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?


Doesn't the umps carry a count indicator in their pouch, found at any sports store or department for a few dollars?  They are only $2.99, I still have mine.  I bought my own ump gear years ago, the indicator was the cheapest and easiest to get.  Stores that don't sell shin guards and other protective gear sells indicators.
 
2014-04-05 10:03:02 AM
So instead of the game being 3 hours and 17 minutes of yawn inducing action, it's now 3 hours and 20 minutes...

/other than the umps screwing up.
//not sure how the time comes into play making a difference.
 
2014-04-05 10:05:32 AM

lack of warmth: Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?

Doesn't the umps carry a count indicator in their pouch, found at any sports store or department for a few dollars?  They are only $2.99, I still have mine.  I bought my own ump gear years ago, the indicator was the cheapest and easiest to get.  Stores that don't sell shin guards and other protective gear sells indicators.


Did you never question your count? I umpired for 6 years, during that time I had a few occasions when I asked myself whether or not I turned the dial on a ball or strike.
 
2014-04-05 10:15:54 AM

lack of warmth: Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?

Doesn't the umps carry a count indicator in their pouch, found at any sports store or department for a few dollars?  They are only $2.99, I still have mine.  I bought my own ump gear years ago, the indicator was the cheapest and easiest to get.  Stores that don't sell shin guards and other protective gear sells indicators.


The indicator is still operated by a human.
 
2014-04-05 10:16:28 AM

Krymson Tyde: lack of warmth: Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?

Doesn't the umps carry a count indicator in their pouch, found at any sports store or department for a few dollars?  They are only $2.99, I still have mine.  I bought my own ump gear years ago, the indicator was the cheapest and easiest to get.  Stores that don't sell shin guards and other protective gear sells indicators.

Did you never question your count? I umpired for 6 years, during that time I had a few occasions when I asked myself whether or not I turned the dial on a ball or strike.


Never did, I am good with numbers in my head, so I used the indicator to make sure if something did happen during a player's at bat which was maybe twice.  The pace of the game isn't that difficult to click after every pitch.  Besides, the ump sets the pace.  The ump can pause whenever they need to, but taking a few minutes to watch video should be embarrassing to what should be a seasoned veteran.

I had umps mess with the count when I played, but I couldn't work an indicator and bat at the same time.  My teammates saw the same thing, so I didn't imagine it.  So when I umped, I made it a point to be fair and accurate.
 
2014-04-05 10:21:01 AM

Krymson Tyde: Man On A Mission: Krymson Tyde: What's more important, getting it right or getting the game over faster?

C) Having umpires that can farking count.

Of course it would be better if people didn't ever make mistakes, but that's never going to happen.


Lower the bar much?

It's not like remembering how to apply Rule 754, subsection G. It's farking balls and strikes. A major league umpire who is so incompetent to forget how to do that needs to be demoted to Single A until he can prove he's able to remember the single most important part of his job.
 
2014-04-05 10:22:09 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?

It's not official.


How about the official scorer?
 
2014-04-05 10:25:34 AM

ImperialHazman: cameroncrazy1984: Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?

It's not official.

How about the official scorer?


They might not keep the count in real-time.
 
2014-04-05 10:28:46 AM

ImperialHazman: cameroncrazy1984: Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?

It's not official.

How about the official scorer?


It would still take time to call up to the booth and get an answer (in fact it has happened before).
 
2014-04-05 10:30:34 AM

cameroncrazy1984: ImperialHazman: cameroncrazy1984: Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?

It's not official.

How about the official scorer?

They might not keep the count in real-time.


Point taken but I have to figure he's sitting there with a scorebook. I guess it's possible even that isn't official until it's reviewed and turned in post game. Calls do get changed after the fact on occasion.
 
2014-04-05 10:30:39 AM
Umpiring is a lot harder than it looks.  Try it some time and see how your sorry ass does.
 
2014-04-05 10:34:15 AM
What I really don't understand is why it takes ANY time at all to do a replay?  I mean, I get that you might have to watch it a few times, zoom in, get a different angle - but, you could have ME sit up in the booth and watch TV, and I could give a thumbs up or thumbs down within about 15 seconds (at max).  Why do they have to tote a tiny CRT monitor onto the field and have the umps huddle around it?  Just have a guy, who, like, that's what he does.
 
2014-04-05 10:52:48 AM
Baseball sucks.

Always has, always will.
 
2014-04-05 10:56:45 AM

Renob: What I really don't understand is why it takes ANY time at all to do a replay?  I mean, I get that you might have to watch it a few times, zoom in, get a different angle - but, you could have ME sit up in the booth and watch TV, and I could give a thumbs up or thumbs down within about 15 seconds (at max).  Why do they have to tote a tiny CRT monitor onto the field and have the umps huddle around it?  Just have a guy, who, like, that's what he does.


Michael Kay was droning on and on (as he is wont to do) during the review and said the reason it took so long is they (MLB home office in NYC, all reviews are done there, not from the field, and the umps communicate with the review guy via headset) had to review each pitch of the at-bat (including time between pitches, throws to first, etc).

..not that I'm buying that as YES was able to spool up every pitch of the at-bat in like 30 seconds
 
2014-04-05 10:58:45 AM
I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often.
 
2014-04-05 11:00:16 AM
I came to berate subby for being an idiot but I see that has already been taken care of handily so... carry on.
 
2014-04-05 11:12:46 AM

Mid_mo_mad_man: They must be Big Eight officials. Who else could lose count of such a low number ?


First thing that came to my mind as well.

+1 for great minds.
 
2014-04-05 11:17:19 AM

softshoes: Mid_mo_mad_man: They must be Big Eight officials. Who else could lose count of such a low number ?

First thing that came to my mind as well.

+1 for great minds.


And that's why we don't trust the scoreboard (or the chain gang in that situation).
 
2014-04-05 11:21:47 AM

jmr61: Baseball sucks.

Always has, always will.


Fact.
 
2014-04-05 11:29:13 AM
This will happen on occasion. Always has, always will. The scoreboard also isn't reliable, I have seen it screwed up far more often than umpires.

If the next pitch was a ball, how much time would it have taken when the manahger came out to argue it?

The challenge system is dumb, and most people who support replay would agree with that. There should be an ump in New York wantching every play of the game, in real time communication with the field umpires who could have corrected this in moments.

That it took three minutes to review that is terrible, the TV team could do it in 30 seconds. It shouls have been maybe a minute from the decision to review to the resumption of play.
 
2014-04-05 11:32:10 AM

Krymson Tyde: lack of warmth: Arkanaut: Wouldn't the scoreboard keep track of the count?

Doesn't the umps carry a count indicator in their pouch, found at any sports store or department for a few dollars?  They are only $2.99, I still have mine.  I bought my own ump gear years ago, the indicator was the cheapest and easiest to get.  Stores that don't sell shin guards and other protective gear sells indicators.

Did you never question your count? I umpired for 6 years, during that time I had a few occasions when I asked myself whether or not I turned the dial on a ball or strike.


In my experience as a player the more common screw up was forgetting to reset the clicker after an at bat.

Once ball 4 for me was a wild pitch that pegged the ump and there was a play at the plate. The next guy got a 1 pitch walk.
 
2014-04-05 12:57:02 PM
Oh no!!! Slowing down a baseball game!! How do we adjust!!!????
 
2014-04-05 01:08:46 PM

litespeed74: Oh no!!! Slowing down a baseball game!! How do we adjust!!!????


The average MLB game is shorter than the average NFL game in length, and according to a recent study, has more "action" (18 minutes for MLB as compared to 11 for NFL).
 
2014-04-05 01:15:52 PM
I'm still pissed at the replay in yesterday's Nats/Braves game. Desmond got a inside the park homer that was a guaranteed triple until Upton threw his hands up to say the ball was "lodged" under the left field fence. Replay showed it obviously wasn't and they still called it a ground rule double. Bullshiat call cost the Nats the game. It should have at least gone into extra innings.
 
2014-04-05 01:16:19 PM
Any possibility this was a protest by the ump?
 
2014-04-05 01:31:24 PM
Between this and the shiat show Sean Barber put on with the Mariners/A's the other day, I'm coming around to the "robot umpire" idea.
 
2014-04-05 01:43:47 PM
Better they take a little longer and get it right.
 
2014-04-05 02:08:08 PM
I was at the game. The scoreboard count was correct (but unofficial). The fans weren't informed of what was going on other than the scoreboard display said it was a 'replay challenge'.  But yeah, it seemed even longer than 3 minutes, especially in the 9th inning.
 
2014-04-05 05:22:00 PM
galleryplus.ebayimg.com

/and just like that I've put umpires out of business...
 
2014-04-05 10:03:57 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2014-04-06 01:19:58 AM
Even if you were right, that would be one plus one plus two plus one, not one plus two plus one plus one.
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report