Quote: Originally Posted By Arte on 6/04/2010Um, tec... kermit was being sarcastic..

I haven't had my caffeine yet.

then have some quicklike

Quote: Originally Posted By Arte on 6/04/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/04/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By Arte on 6/04/2010

Well I'll let you mull what I understand and don't understand for a while.

People will always remember this game as the perfect game that got taken away by a bad call. I don't think you can disagree with that. But note the preface...a perfect game. He did pitch a perfect game. He stepped on first with posession of the ball before the runner got there for the 27th consecutive out. That can not be denied and ever taken away from him. The subsequent error by the umpire is unfortunate but reversible if someone with the authority and the backbone chose to do so. But that will apparently not happen. And that is unfortunate.

Sports can teach important life lessons. The way Gallaraga and Joyce handled this are commendable examples of appropriate behavior. Too bad we can't add the lesson that when authority acknowledges an error, they not only work to ensure it doesn't happen again, they actually correct the error itself.




I beg to differ. The scorebook says he gave up a hit.

To be clearer, it was a perfect game for about a second until Joyce shocked the world and called him safe..

Well no, not really. Since there was never an out call, there never was a perfect game. Not even for a second.

while my sentiment is they should reverse the call, bud made the 'right' decision. the umps call stands. everybody knows galarraga pitched a perfect game, he got a corvette, joyce weeped bitterly. this perfect game will live in infamy for the rest of our lifetimes because of the controversy and because we were alive when it happened.

I agree 100% with Sergei... The game will give Galarraga more fame than just a "regular" perfect game would... he's getting pub on all kinds of non-sports shows, and every time in the future a pitcher throws a perfecto, the announcers will say "There's the 22nd perfect game... well, 23rd, if you count Galarraga's, which was really a perfect game, but not officially"...

At this point, what else is there to say? All angles have been beaten into the ground. Bad call, tragedy, apology, class, more class, nice story, no reversal... done. Only thing to discuss is how MLB will institute instant replay, and how soon.

I thought of something that I haven't heard yet, even if it is slightly silly

It wasn't a "perfect game" because the ump made an error ... many a pitcher has lost a perfect game due to an error made by one of his fielders ... in this case, it was the ump that made the error ... both things are events that are not able to be controlled by the pitcher

and I know the point is a bit silly because the fielders are part of the pitcher's team and the ump is an objective official, but it does put an interesting twist on it

NOT REALLY

I was actually surprised (and pleased) Selig did not reverse the call. I assumed he would fold so everyone could feel good about themselves.

I don't think anyone has mentioned Ernie Shore, who was actually credited with a perfect game, under less than perfect circumstances, and later, decades later had the distinction taken away



1981 official Baseball Record Book
says about this game played in Boston on June 23, 1917:

" Shore's performance is classified as a perfect game even though he did not start the game. George (Babe) Ruth, Boston's starting pitcher, was removed by umpire Clarence (Brick) Owens after giving up a base on balls to Ray Morgan, the first batter. Shore, without warming up, took Ruth's place. Morgan was retired trying to steal second. From then on, Shore faced 26 batters, with none reaching base."

i don't get it. why was babe removed by the umpire?

Arguing ball four, I believe

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by Jtpsops on 6/04/2010 Arguing ball four, I believe

And then Ruth punched the umpire. Ah, those were the days......

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 6/03/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By Arte on 6/03/2010

Quote: Originally posted by tecwrg on 6/03/2010

A decision to overturn an umpire's judgement call cannot be made in a vacuum, just to create a "feel good" moment. There would be ramifications if this were to occur.

Just because YOU do not "buy this prescedent (sic) argument" doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. You've got to look at the big picture.

Define the ramifications. And please keep the rhetorical speculation to a minimum.

Having the commissioner's office overturn an umpire's judgement call?

If you do it for this call (which had no effect on the final outcome of the game), then you would need to start doing it for other games where a bad call may indeed have affected the outcome of the game. Like the Twins/Mariners game last night, as kneeneighbor pointed out.

HEY. hey hey hey hey. that game is off limits

Quote: Originally Posted By inkdskn on 6/03/2010
Devil's advocate:

IIRC, the pine-tar incident was not an 'interpretation of the rules;' it was a clearly-defined rule that Brett broke. However, the rule was dumb as hell - it was very old, and had to do with keeping cleaner balls in play...

Devil's advocate:

Ray Chapman disagrees. it's a good rule. cleaner balls are undoctored balls are balls with predictable trajectories

Quote: Originally Posted By inkdskn on 6/03/2010
Plus, how long is an average game? Three hours? Even if IR reviews lasted 15 minutes in a game (and let's face it, that's a loooong time), that's - gasp - about 8% of the game w/o replay, and is like 7.5% of the 'extended' game. The argument for making the games 'too long' is total BS.

wrong

3 hrs is my limit

if you bring in instant replay you have to shave 15 minutes off the game by other means

something like "the batter may not leave the batters box once entered" would do it for me