Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
7 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I don't know, seems like ball-strike review could take all of 30 seconds. Either it's in their box or it's not. Isn't that how it's happening right now in the minors?

I don't know.  I haven't seen any minor league games the last couple of years.  I hope the reviews are quick.  The reviews they have now in the majors often drag on too long.  Football reviews are the worst.  In the rare cases which I watch games, It seems like every big play at the end of a game needs to be reviewed.   

Posted
11 minutes ago, chasfh said:

They might probably just be able to use that same angle we see in replays of them, and they could at least overturn the easy ones. The Bryce Harper swing, that would have been an easy overturn. Anything that's right on the line, not enough evidence to overturn, just like play reviews today.

There needs to be a line in the rulebook for it to be overturnable. There is no halfway rule, no wrist break rule. All that stuff is third hand hearsay passed down. The rule is umpire judgment, which makes it a difficult one for an umpire like Angel who completely lacks it.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I don't know.  I haven't seen any minor league games the last couple of years.  I hope the reviews are quick.  The reviews they have now in the majors often drag on too long.  Football reviews are the worst.  In the rare cases which I watch games, It seems like every big play at the end of a game needs to be reviewed.   

 

  • Like 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, chasfh said:

They might probably just be able to use that same angle we see in replays of them, and they could at least overturn the easy ones. The Bryce Harper swing, that would have been an easy overturn. Anything that's right on the line, not enough evidence to overturn, just like play reviews today.

Angel could have claimed that he read 'intent' in Harper's overall actions and it wouldn't matter that his bat stayed back as far as it did, because that criteria is nowhere in the rule. That why it's a dumb rule. They should just define the swing as the bat crossing the plate, maybe with something about the wrist angle, and be done with it. But they never have. On the other side, the 'inverse' of the rule, where a guy's bat crosses the plate when he is bailing out at a pitch thrown at him and he takes a called strike for his effort to save his noggin to me is an even dumber application of a bad set of rules.

Posted
7 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I don't know.  I haven't seen any minor league games the last couple of years.  I hope the reviews are quick.  The reviews they have now in the majors often drag on too long.  Football reviews are the worst.  In the rare cases which I watch games, It seems like every big play at the end of a game needs to be reviewed.   

I went to a MudHen's game when challenge was in effect. It went very fast. At first I had no idea what was initiating the challenges - it was the batter tapping on the top of his head. It's much less intrusive than the way they do replay. You could miss the whole process if you were eating a hot dog.

  • Like 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I went to a MudHen's game when challenge was in effect. It went very fast. At first I had no idea what was initiating the challenges - it was the batter tapping on the top of his head. It's much less intrusive than the way they do replay. You could miss the whole process if you were eating a hot dog.

Agree.  The challenge system adds very little time.

I thought there was a rule about check swings such that swinging past a line across the plate parallel to the front of the plate was a swing, but stopping before that was a check / nonswing?.  Maybe there isn't such a rule.  Anyway, that's the rule I was thinking of as a part of a reviewable challenge.

Posted
31 minutes ago, casimir said:

I thought there was a rule about check swings such that swinging past a line across the plate parallel to the front of the plate was a swing, but stopping before that was a check / nonswing?.  Maybe there isn't such a rule.  Anyway, that's the rule I was thinking of as a part of a reviewable challenge.

I've looked for anything about this more than once and never found anything more than it's the Umpires judgement whether the batter offered. The rule book offers no guidance on what a swing is. Conventional practice has coalesced around the bat crossing the plate, or angle of the wrist but none of that is actually in the book.

https://theathletic.com/354170/2018/05/15/whats-the-rulebook-definition-of-a-swing-in-baseball-there-isnt-one-but-there-should-be/

  • Like 2
Posted

The call by a base umpire correlates so well to the bat crossing the midpoint line versus not that they might as well just codify it, and maybe, instead of appealing to the umpire, appeal to the camera.

  • Like 1
Posted

Not a prediction, but I can envision Kapler coming into the Tigers organization in a coaching capacity, at least for a year, to help him get back on his feet to interview for open managing gigs.

Posted
27 minutes ago, RandyMarsh said:

Kapler needs to be our strength and conditioning coach.

He dabbles in pseudoscience; I'd keep him away from there. The new staff seems to be doing pretty well in this regard after Harris cleaned that house. I could see him as a special assistant as somebody else mentioned. Maybe add him to the broadcast mix.

Posted
1 hour ago, chasfh said:

Not a prediction, but I can envision Kapler coming into the Tigers organization in a coaching capacity, at least for a year, to help him get back on his feet to interview for open managing gigs.

Giants' problem isn't too unlike the Tigers' - they don't hit. How of much of that you can ever lay at a manager's door remains an open question.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

Didn’t hurt Kirk, Bo or Deion

Well, the end of Bo's career was set on a football field. But actually I meant more that the science for the training methods for each has probably diverged in recent years.

Posted
1 minute ago, Tiger337 said:

The family wanted to keep the cancer diagnosis private, but dbag Schilling revealed it anyway. 

RIP Tim Wakefield.

yeah what an arsehole..... seems like not too long ago he was on the air doing a game on NESN

Posted
2 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

The family wanted to keep the cancer diagnosis private, but dbag Schilling revealed it anyway. 

RIP Tim Wakefield.

I saw that too. Sigh... It's too bad the Wakefields couldn't keep it private. He seemed like one of the ones I'd like to have on my team, not just for talent but for personality, too.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...