7/1 vs Angels

[Spudboy]

Farrell, Buchholz and Panda for New Jersey's state debt?

 

Lol.

[Kimmi]

I'm with you Emp. No one other than you has pointed out that we did not see the initial point of contact ( although I assume that it was on top of the wall ). And as you said, the kid just stuck his arm out and the ball was there ( apparently out of bounds if that matters ). It's not like the fan leaned over the wall and grabbed it from the field of play. There is as much evidence to suggest the ball was out of bounds when the fan snagged it as not. I'm no expert on these rules and am too f***ing lazy to research any further. I think they made the correct call.

 

To me, it looked like the ball was in fair territory at the moment the boy grabbed it, but it might have been the camera angle we were given.

 

Either way, I'm not complaining, but I do think we caught a huge break there.

 

BTW, this is an excellent example of how one run games are decided more by randomness/luck than they are by skill. Nava smoked that ball and it really didn't look like it would be high enough to bounce over the wall. It was a lucky bounce for us, bad bounce for the Angels that might have decided that game. There are numerous incidents like these that occur every game, though most of them are not as obvious.

[a700hitter]

To me, it looked like the ball was in fair territory at the moment the boy grabbed it, but it might have been the camera angle we were given.

 

Either way, I'm not complaining, but I do think we caught a huge break there.

 

BTW, this is an excellent example of how one run games are decided more by randomness/luck than they are by skill. Nava smoked that ball and it really didn't look like it would be high enough to bounce over the wall. It was a lucky bounce for us, bad bounce for the Angels that might have decided that game. There are numerous incidents like these that occur every game, though most of them are not as obvious.

Give credit where it is due. It was kimmi mojo that it was called a ground rule double.

[Emp9]

I'm with you Emp. No one other than you has pointed out that we did not see the initial point of contact ( although I assume that it was on top of the wall ). And as you said, the kid just stuck his arm out and the ball was there ( apparently out of bounds if that matters ). It's not like the fan leaned over the wall and grabbed it from the field of play. There is as much evidence to suggest the ball was out of bounds when the fan snagged it as not. I'm no expert on these rules and am too f***ing lazy to research any further. I think they made the correct call.

 

If it hit the red, on what Remy said it bounced twice, then that would be part of the seats/stands and should be a ground rule double. Not saying it did, it's a tough call though.

[a700hitter]

If it hit the red, on what Remy said it bounced twice, then that would be part of the seats/stands and should be a ground rule double. Not saying it did, it's a tough call though.

I was wondering about the ground rule on that -- there is the green part of the wall and the red part. It did look like it hit the red part at least once. Usually physics would dictate that when the ball hits the red portion that it would go into the stands. That ball was spinning like crazy and it did not. Now, that I know the ground rule, I think it was clearly the right call. There is no way that the ump could have seen that detail live, so we were very lucky that he did not call fan interference right away. The video evidence might not have been enough to overturn it.

[Emp9]

I was wondering about the ground rule on that -- there is the green part of the wall and the red part. It did look like it hit the red part at least once. Usually physics would dictate that when the ball hits the red portion that it would go into the stands. That ball was spinning like crazy and it did not. Now, that I know the ground rule, I think it was clearly the right call. There is no way that the ump could have seen that detail live, so we were very lucky that he did not call fan interference right away. The video evidence might not have been enough to overturn it.

 

I can't see the 2nd bounce but somehow how it did bounce up and just hitting the green padding (especially at the angle it did) seems unlikely for that to happen without a 2nd bounce. IDK. Thats the spookiest RF corner in baseball in my opinion.