The No-No Thread

[Dipre]

For a precedent to exist, it must be set.

[BoSox21]

Jon Heyman said on Twitter the commish's office will release some kind of statement regarding this today.

[suns]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5246454

[yankees228]

There's a sentiment around here that these umpires miss calls because they go for the theatrical, game changing call, while throwing accuracy out the window. This may or may not happen, but it certainly wasn't the case in this instance. Joyce was devastated, even going into the clubhouse to apologize to Galarraga. I feel equally bad for both Joyce and Galarraga.

[yankees228]

Fangraphs has an interesting and progressive take on the situation (which was also the first thing I mentioned when it happened).

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/galarragas-loss-could-be-our-gain/

[a700hitter]

There's a sentiment around here that these umpires miss calls because they go for the theatrical' date=' game changing call, while throwing accuracy out the window. This may or may not happen, but it certainly wasn't the case in this instance. Joyce was devastated, even going into the clubhouse to apologize to Galarraga. I feel equally bad for both Joyce and Galarraga.[/quote']Anything close there goes to the pitcher in that situation. Joyce can't deny that the play was close even as he made the call on the field. I think he was embarrassed and remorseful afterward, but IMO at the time he knew he was making a big call that was going to cause an argument. I'm going to take note of this guy Joyce after this to see if he has the let's call it the "Center Stage" syndrome.

[rhet]

A replay official in a booth somewhere should be able to overrule calls on the field. College football moves along just fine with it.

[yankees228]

Anything close there goes to the pitcher in that situation. Joyce can't deny that the play was close even as he made the call on the field. I think he was embarrassed and remorseful afterward' date=' but IMO at the time he knew he was making a big call that was going to cause an argument. I'm going to take note of this guy Joyce after this to see if he has the let's call it the "Center Stage" syndrome.[/quote']

 

Either way it's nothing more than speculation, but when you look at the way Joyce handled the situation immediately after the game ended (while still on the field) and how he acted in subsequent interviews, I tend to believe him. Additionally, while managers and players have gone out of their way to talk about how poor a job umpires like CB Bucknor and Angel Hernandez do, every manager and player (not just from the Tigers) that I've heard speak about Joyce after this incident has said nothing short of calling him an excellent umpire. Based on the facts, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[yeszir]

I do feel bad for Joyce, for the record.

[suns]

I do feel bad for Joyce' date=' for the record.[/quote']

 

Jim Joyce is going to feel bad when the stadium announcers for the tigers announce his name for umpires today at the game.

[a700hitter]

Either way it's nothing more than speculation' date=' but when you look at the way Joyce handled the situation immediately after the game ended (while still on the field) and how he acted in subsequent interviews, I tend to believe him. Additionally, while managers and players have gone out of their way to talk about how poor a job umpires like CB Bucknor and Angel Hernandez do, every manager and player (not just from the Tigers) that I've heard speak about Joyce after this incident has said nothing short of calling him an excellent umpire. Based on the facts, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.[/quote']You are right to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I'm going to have my eye on him.

[yankees228]

You are right to give him the benefit of the doubt' date=' but I'm going to have my eye on him.[/quote']

 

Haha fair enough.

[BoSox21]

I refuse to chalk this one up to the "umpires trying to be the show" argument. I really believe Joyce knew the magnitude of the call he was about to make and that somehow threw off his judgement. To his defense, and I know they're trained to make this call, the bang-bang play as first and being forced to make the call immediately has always seemed to be one of the most difficult calls to make in the refereeing of any sport.

 

I'm just really not sure how anyone could think Joyce blew the call on purpose to ruin Galarraga's perfect game. It's like saying Steve Bartman purposely wanted to take the out away from Moises Alou.

[ORS]

I agree that in this case Joyce didn't appear to be putting himself into the spotlight, so my comment, in this thread for this situation, was unwarranted.

 

That said, the interpretation of the point to mean that they are blowing calls "on purpose" is incorrect. I don't think anyone who, like me, is tired of the umps injecting themselves into the show thinks they intentionally call it wrong. I think the issue we see is that their apparent desire to be a part of the show impacts their judgment, leading them toward making the "big call", whether it be right or wrong.

[a700hitter]

I refuse to chalk this one up to the "umpires trying to be the show" argument. I really believe Joyce knew the magnitude of the call he was about to make and that somehow threw off his judgement. To his defense, and I know they're trained to make this call, the bang-bang play as first and being forced to make the call immediately has always seemed to be one of the most difficult calls to make in the refereeing of any sport.

 

I'm just really not sure how anyone could think Joyce blew the call on purpose to ruin Galarraga's perfect game. It's like saying Steve Bartman purposely wanted to take the out away from Moises Alou.

No one is saying that Joyce was intentionally trying to ruin the perfect game. It's just that some umps have an unfortunate tendency of making big calls in crucial situations that affect the outcome of the game. In the last Super Bowl, watch the replay of Manning's INT and you will see that he was clearly blocked in the back away from the play on the INT return. He was not in a position to make the tackle and technically it would have been a correct call to throw a flag for an illegal block, but it was a good non-call by the official. If he had thrown the flag there, he could have affected the outcome of the game unnecessarily. Joyce showed poor judgment. He should have known the context and significance of the play, and on anything close his right hand should have gone up. He didn't do that. What he did went beyond a missed call. It was overall bad judgment.

[BoSox21]

I definitely see your point and agree. That's why I think the magnitude of the call negatively affected his judgment.

[yankees228]

No one is saying that Joyce was intentionally trying to ruin the perfect game. It's just that some umps have an unfortunate tendency of making big calls in crucial situations that affect the outcome of the game. In the last Super Bowl' date=' watch the replay of Manning's INT and you will see that he was clearly blocked in the back away from the play on the INT return. He was not in a position to make the tackle and technically it would have been a correct call to throw a flag for an illegal block, but it was a good non-call by the official. If he had thrown the flag there, he could have affected the outcome of the game unnecessarily. Joyce showed poor judgment. He should have known the context and significance of the play, and on anything close his right hand should have gone up. He didn't do that. What he did went beyond a missed call. It was overall bad judgment.[/quote']

 

I completely disagree with the idea that anything close should automatically go to the pitcher. The umpires should not let the moment influence their call, as that would directly hinder the integrity of the game, in my opinion. If the umpire believes the runner is out, call him out. If the umpire believes the runner is safe, call him safe.

[ryan44]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5248118

 

Selig says he won't reverse the call, although I'm sure this doesn't surprise many people, if anyone.

[ryan44]

I completely disagree with the idea that anything close should automatically go to the pitcher. The umpires should not let the moment influence their call' date=' as that would directly hinder the integrity of the game, in my opinion. If the umpire believes the runner is out, call him out. If the umpire believes the runner is safe, call him safe.[/quote']

Completely agree. People have talked about changing the call because it would save "the integrity of the game." Well, if you're going to have umpires looking the other way on close calls purely because of the moment as opposed to going by the actual rules and what they see/hear, you're also ruining the integrity of the game.

[a700hitter]

I completely disagree with the idea that anything close should automatically go to the pitcher. The umpires should not let the moment influence their call' date=' as that would directly hinder the integrity of the game, in my opinion. If the umpire believes the runner is out, call him out. If the umpire believes the runner is safe, call him safe.[/quote']If he errs on the side of the pitcher, the repercussions would have been much less. I think there is a story about Larsen's perfect game. it ended on a check swing. I don't remember if it was after the pitch or before that the ump told the batter, Dale Mitchell that anything close was going to be a strike. The last pitch in that game was high and outside. There was no controversy on that strike call.

[a700hitter]

Completely agree. People have talked about changing the call because it would save "the integrity of the game." Well' date=' if you're going to have umpires looking the other way on close calls purely because of the moment as opposed to going by the actual rules and what they see/hear, you're also ruining the integrity of the game.[/quote']It happens every game where the umps look the other way-- the automatic called strike with a 3-0 count. The players know that it is coming, so no one complains. The neighborhood play at second base is another example. Umpiring is far from a pristine practice where everything is done by the book. I don't remember a single game where the real strike zone has been enforced. A lot of calls are made based on the situation. I am sure that every player on that field expected any close call to go to the pitcher in the 9th inning, and none would have complained. I am talking about close plays, not a play that is clearly one way or the other to the naked eye.

[Dipre]

Curt Schilling's take on the incident:

 

Missed perfection hurts pitcher and umpire

 

By Curt Schilling

ESPN

 

Umpires … Yeah, they're human.

 

Lord knows I had my share of disputes, and I'll be first in line to say there are umpires in the big leagues who have no business being there. I do believe they should be held to a standard, a major league standard in all aspects of everything they do.

 

Having said that, I watched in horror Wednesday night as Armando Galarraga lost a perfect game because of a blown call by umpire Jim Joyce. My heart broke for two reasons. First off, the kid did it. He threw a perfect game that was ruined by a bad call.

 

The second reason was Jim Joyce does not -- and will not -- deserve 99 percent of the stupid things people will say about him in the coming days. Jim Joyce is, and always has been, an exceptional umpire and a fantastic guy. I had my run-ins with him; not often, but we did.

 

"I don't blame them a bit or anything that was said," Joyce said. "I would've said it myself if I had been Galarraga. I would've been the first person in my face, and he never said a word to me."

 

Joyce is a rare bird for this reason. He'll be the first to admit, as he did Wednesday, when he makes a mistake. He's a damn good umpire, incredibly consistent, which wins him votes with hitters and pitchers, but most of all accountable. That's the one thing so many young umpires have failed, and continue to fail to realize. We gripe a lot, too much sometimes, as players. Hitters gripe about strikes, pitchers gripe about balls.

 

Too many umpires fail to realize the quickest way to shut a player up is to admit when you are wrong. What can I do when an umpire says "Yep, missed it"?

 

The answer? Nothing. The great ones, Steve Palermo, Ed Rapuano, Jim Joyce, to name a few, do that, and always have. Frank Pulli didn't admit it much, but often enough that you never got too mad.

 

Calling it the biggest call of his career, Joyce said, "I just cost that kid a perfect game. I thought he beat the throw. I was convinced he beat the throw, until I saw the replay."

 

Umpires have been in the news far too much lately. The incident with Bill Hohn, who tossed Roy Oswalt over the weekend, was a shining example of what's wrong with umpires. Too many are trying to be the game, instead of umpire the game. Angel Hernandez did it on Tuesday night in the ninth inning in Toronto. He did make the right call, but there is a right way and wrong way to handle it. Angel was always good to me, and I respected him, but I always thought his confrontational attitude got him more detractors than he deserved as well as pushed him into more arguments.

 

Joe West? Same thing. Despite what some say, the guy is a good umpire. Smaller strike zone than I would have liked, but Joe was always consistent -- strike one was strike three. His attitude and demeanor get him into more arguments than his calls, I think.

 

So yeah, Jim Joyce made a call Wednesday he'll never forget, for all the wrong reasons, he changed history I guess. But I would ask you, if you know baseball, to trust me when I tell you NO ONE feels worse than he does right now, not even Armando Galarraga, I give you my word on that.

 

He seems to concur with ORS's point that umpires seem to be too fond of the spotlight lately.

[BoSox21]

I get that there are too many umpires putting themselves in the spotlight lately but what I don't get is why this continues to be brought up in this case. This is one situation there's no way the umpire would want his name associated with. There's a difference between Bill Hohn/Joe West and Jim Joyce. A big difference.

 

EDIT: Further to my point earlier about this getting more mainstream notoriety than an actual perfect game, the poll on CNN.com right now is something to the effect of "Should MLB credit Armando Galarraga with a perfect game?" . There was never anything about "Should Roy Halladay now be considered among the greatest pitchers of all-time?"

[a700hitter]

I get that there are too many umpires putting themselves in the spotlight lately but what I don't get is why this continues to be brought up in this case. This is one situation there's no way the umpire would want his name associated with. There's a difference between Bill Hohn/Joe West and Jim Joyce. A big difference.

 

EDIT: Further to my point earlier about this getting more mainstream notoriety than an actual perfect game, the poll on CNN.com right now is something to the effect of "Should MLB credit Armando Galarraga with a perfect game?" . There was never anything about "Should Roy Halladay now be considered among the greatest pitchers of all-time?"

A Jim Joyce groupie. Ughh!

[BoSox21]

If that's what I'm gonna be categorized as, then sure. I was very sympathetic to Joyce pretty much as soon as I saw how apologetic he was. But then again, I also think this should be the final straw for implementing instant replay for everything but balls and strikes.

[a700hitter]

If that's what I'm gonna be categorized as' date=' then sure. I was very sympathetic to Joyce pretty much as soon as I saw how apologetic he was. But then again, I also think this should be the final straw for implementing instant replay for everything but balls and strikes.[/quote']It was a joke.

[See Red]

Instant replay sucks. It sucks in the NFL, it would suck in Major League Baseball.

 

You can't go back and overturn the call because it sets an awful, awful precedent. The Twins lost a game yesterday because of a blown call at second base -- if you overturn the Galarraga call don't you have to overturn that call and replay the game from there? Don't you have to change the Don Denkinger call?

[yankees228]

Instant replay sucks. It sucks in the NFL, it would suck in Major League Baseball.

 

You can't go back and overturn the call because it sets an awful, awful precedent. The Twins lost a game yesterday because of a blown call at second base -- if you overturn the Galarraga call don't you have to overturn that call and replay the game from there? Don't you have to change the Don Denkinger call?

 

Why does instant replay suck in the NFL, and why would it suck in MLB?

[italstallianion]

Instant replay sucks. It sucks in the NFL, it would suck in Major League Baseball.

 

You can't go back and overturn the call because it sets an awful, awful precedent. The Twins lost a game yesterday because of a blown call at second base -- if you overturn the Galarraga call don't you have to overturn that call and replay the game from there? Don't you have to change the Don Denkinger call?

 

 

The only thing I don't disagree with here is your signature. You make it sound like overturning those other bad calls is a bad thing. Instant replay is great in the NFL and it has the potential to be great here. It just isn't being harnessed to its potential. I think that you need to go back and overturn a horrible call because it seds a great precendent. One of accuracy. You can't have games decided and history disturbed because of bad calls.

[rhet]

Instant replay sucks. It sucks in the NFL, it would suck in Major League Baseball.

 

You can't go back and overturn the call because it sets an awful, awful precedent. The Twins lost a game yesterday because of a blown call at second base -- if you overturn the Galarraga call don't you have to overturn that call and replay the game from there? Don't you have to change the Don Denkinger call?

 

This is the only instance where we know exactly how a call affected the outcome of a game. That's because the game was over if the proper call was made. So yes, this call should have been reversed. It would set no undue precedent.