Cubs Win Even Though Bellinger Knocked Ball Out of Bart's Hand During Tag Attempt - A Rules Review
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 сен 2024
- Saturday's Pirates-Cubs game ended on a walk-off slide by Cody Bellinger into home plate despite Pittsburgh catcher Joey Bart appearing to tag the runner...only to drop the ball when Bellinger knocked the ball out of Bart's hand. Replay Review confirmed HP Umpire Chris Conroy's safe call. Let's review baseball's interference rule... Report: www.closecalls...
Buy Me a Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
Discord: / discord
Facebook: / closecallsports
Twitter: / closecallsports
You're not going to find common sense in the Official Baseball Rules. IT'S NOT THERE! I TRIED TO FIND IT! SO MANY TIMES! IT DOESN'T EXIST!
The standard for non-batted balls regarding offensive interference is that the act must be intentional or "willful and deliberate" (there are a few exemptions surrounding things like runner's lane, batter's interference, bona fide slide rule, and home plate collision, but this is the standard for garden variety tag plays).
We go over the definition of what a tag is (firm and secure possession, complete control, other requirements, etc.), and find out that this portion of the play...simply isn't reviewable so the Replay Official had no choice but to CONFIRM Conroy's safe call because....after all, the ball was dropped and rolling on the ground before the catcher completed the entire process of the tag.
This was one questionable Cubs catcher caper (confirmed).
I want you in every booth in the League.
They need to be calling Lindsay for the explanations rather than the retired umpires.
I definitely would love to see a broadcast reference a CCS video at some point like they've done to Jomboy.
@edibleapeman, exactly right. Now, to get Lin cloned . . .
I don't even get the confusion over this. It was clearly not intentional. So even if not reviewable, that safe call stands. I also don't see the anger over the rule. I think that is a GOOD rule. You can't just have "Any time the runner causes the ball to be dropped, it is an out." or else you would have fielders who barely have control of the ball dropping it on a normal tag play getting an out call that is clearly not deserved.
Transfer is the confusion
@@closethockeyfan5284 But as she says...this is not a transfer case. He has the ball in his bare hand the entire time. And impact of the slide caused his arms to swing around. And the legal unintentional contact caused it to come out.
@@closethockeyfan5284
Transfer is only in the acct of making a subsequent throw. Transfer is not a consideration here.
Coach is just trying to WIN
The infield fly rule comes to mind...
Not even a questionable call. It was unintentional, it's not like he did an A-Rod and punched it out of his glove.
A-Rod's was so obviously intentional that they overturned the call without even having the ability to replay it back then.
That’s not the argument. He had the ball secured with both hands. Made the tag. Tried to show the ball and get the out call so he can relay it to 3rd to prevent the runner from advancing.
Agree. The runner's not even looking at where the ball is when it hits his hand
@@Dommy_B You're assuming and mind-reading in your last sentence, I believe
@@Alboalt I mean it’s a pretty safe assumption he is a professional and knew the situation.
Any time I see a Pirate catcher excellently receiving a throw that is a little wide to the first-base side and diving to make that tag, it reminds me of the play where Spanky LaValliere took the throw from Bonds and Sid Bream just barely made it to the plate. Look at those two plays side-by-side, and it both are text-book examples of how good catchers do what they can with errant throws. Taylor's throw beat Cody, but the accuracy was inches off. That's how close the game can be at times.
Wonderful breakdown.
Common sense says shows the runner did not intentionally knock the ball out of the catchers hand. Good call by the umpire
All the catcher had to do was wait a little longer before trying to show he had the ball. It looks like he rushes it into his hand to try to show the ump he has it. Probably just excitement from making a big play.
Additionally, I like the explanation of having to be blind to non-reviewable portions of the replay. Judgment of intention is never going to be reviewable because slow motion makes everything look intentional.
He didnt try to show he had the ball. He was holding it with his right hand inside the glove and his hands came apart as he rolled over.
@@richpaul6806 Then he shoulda left it in his glove. If that ball is gloved it doesn't pop out. Which is better at retaining a baseball? Your giant ass catcher's glove designed for exactly that purpose or your bare hand?
@@Sicaughtik Both together. This has long been the proper way for the catcher to make a tag. Catcher just aren't usually doing a barrel roll when they are making the tag.
When the tag out at the plate is done with less than two outs and other runners on base, the catcher shows the ball to the umpire to establish an immediate safe / out call. Reason being, the fielders then know how to position themselves regarding the remaining base runners.
But he had another play he needed to quickly make with another runner on the bases.
I don't get the controversy here. I don't see any evidence that the runner deliberately knocked the ball out of the catcher's hand.
You, my friend, seem to have both functioning eyes and a functioning brain. It seems a lot of Pirates fans can't say the same for themselves.
@@millville444we root for the Pirates man. Of course there is no functioning brain cells if we support a team owned by one of the worst owners in professional sports.
@@MrGgffggffggff
TOM Excuse me, everybody, this is Jake Taylor. Jake is a professional baseball player.
JACK What team do you play for, Jake?
TAYLOR The [Pirates].
CLAIRE Here in [Pittsburgh]? I didn't know they still had a team.
TAYLOR Yeh, we have uniforms and everything. It's really great.
The controversy is sparked by not knowing the rules and thinking common sense is the standard.
The controversy is because folks are not aware that knowing out must be intentional. I was not aware until I saw this video.
I don't think it's definitive the tag was in time anyway.
I swear, she explains things so well and does not give random opinions to verify what she is saying. This is done so well.
They should have you on the broadcasts like Mike Pereira for the NFL to explain the rules
One of my favorite seasons of NFL commentary was Dennis Miller in the booth. When some obscure rule was applied for a penalty, the regular team knew the rule and wouldn't bring it up. Miller would be confused and ask, and they'd explain it in pretty good detail.
Lindsay would be the opposite, of course, adding a person to the booth that knows the rules, and then has to tell them anyway even when they think they don't need to ask...
She would need to cut down her explanation to 30 seconds. Which would be a "challenge".
You couldn't be more correct.
So she can incorrectly explain things, and miss very obvious things people can see? So yeah, just like the NFL.
Cant deny that, although i will say that football’s rules are far less esoteric, bizarre, and irrational than baseball’s. Most of the officiating controversy in football comes down to missed or blown call which cant be reviewed or calls made correctly on rules people don’t like (whats a catch or sacking a QB). Much of the time in baseball, nobody really knows or understands the rules, including the players, managers, announcers, and even the umps, or have conflicting rules where one has to decide which rule applies in which circumstance. Thats where Lindsay does such a great job.
Nice breakdown, as always. I was watching live, instantly wanted clarification glad you could inform
We were at the game yesterday and even in real time it was hard to tell. Thank you for this great explanation!
It should also be noted that catcher's are taught, whenever possible, to grab the ball with his bare hand after fielding the ball and then wrap his glove around his bare hand. When the tag was made the ball was in his bare hand. There was no transfer.
At 1:50 the left hand touches the toe of the boot, but the ball is in the right hand, so I'm not entirely sure this should count as a tag. Can you only ever tag a player with one hand ("or with their hand or glove holding the ball)? Or can you bring your other hand over the hand with the ball (ie, bring your bare hand over the ball in the glove) and then count that as well?
A ball in the throwing hand touching the inside of the glove makes the entire glove a taggable surface. It was the proper way for a catcher to make a tag if possible for a long time because its the best way to prevent it getting knock out in a collision.
And yet it was knocked out due to collision...😮
This is a very clear example of the limits on what can be reviewed should be eliminated! Anything that happens in an MLB game should be reviewable! Right now balls and strikes are not reviewable but they are reviewable in the Minor Leagues. Soon, if not next year, that system will be in the MLB! If the rules committee can change that “hard and fast” rule, then other changes should be made as well!
Great video and thank you for covering this play and explaining it so well and in-depth!
I think mlb have made increasing the pace of play a priority and will fight against anything that could potentially slow down the game. I think they will go to balls and strikes being 100% called by the computer before they let them be reviewable.
Yeah...that's all we need. Let's grind the game to a halt on EVERY close play! THAT'LL get fans back watching! They love sitting around for several minutes watching players standing around for several minutes watching umpires standing around for several minutes And for what? This would still have been safe. And SHOULD be safe. IT is idiotic to suggest that any time a ball is dropped due to the tag being applied it should be still out. The catcher clearly didn't have good control of the ball. The runner did not even remotely intentionally do it. That is safe by the rules all day and should be safe by the rules all day.
Reviewing balls and strikes makes sense because it's an objective standard (did the ball hit the strike zone). Judgment calls, especially those that require intent, are always going to be more difficult to get reviewable status.
This play is a perfect example. Was it intentional? Maybe, but you could also argue the catcher moved the ball into the sliding player path.
Judgment calls can also look different to different observers. 1B umpire sees a balk but replay official disagrees, who is right (provided there was some type of motion to instigate the balk call)?
The purpose of replay is to confirm or overturn the decision on the field based on the evidence available, not necessarily to reofficiate the play correctly.
I would definitely challenge everything to stop the pitcher. I called time and you didn’t grant it? Challenge. The clock wasn’t fast enough for me. Challenge. The sky is too cloudy challenge. Each at bat would be 10 hours long
Even if the interference call was reviewable, it wouldn't have made a difference because the contact was NOT willful or deliberate. Now, do you also want to change the rule that all interference should result in an out? Because that would be a horrible rule change and would only be reverted once fielders start to 'claim' interference in order to get a free out. Also slowing the game down to a crawl by making every play reviewable would be agonizing and would directly counter the entire idea of the pitch clock.
I'm happy I actually knew this ruling! Generally when I see the ball on the ground I'm assuming it's safe.
Bart rolled his arm into Bellinger. It was the perfect storm of unintentional
2 things make this an easy safe for me.
1. Not interference he's not even looking at the ball or doing any swiping motion. It's incidental.
2. The catcher did a poor job of keeping the ball in possession to begin with. The tag knocked his hand holding the ball out of his glove and he probably already started losing possession there. The hand hitting the ball finished it off.
I'm not sure I agree with this. "Long enough to prove that they have complete control" doesn't require any particular length of time. In the small fraction of a second between when the tag was applied and when the ball was knocked out, it was 100% clear that Bart had complete control of the ball. That was "long enough to prove..."
I don't agree. Surviving the tag is a part of the play. You can't have control until the play is over.
to me it looks like he tagged him out with the ball in the mitt with both hands before he reached the plate, and successfully controlled it, but took the ball out of the glove too soon while the runner was still sliding to show he had the ball, and then it got knocked out. He should have waited til the slide was over to move his hand. I would like to hear if the catcher spoke to the press after the game.
He’s allowed incidental contact. Always has been with plays at the plate… except you used to even be able to hit the catcher like a freight train. Safe was the correct call.
The best part of this description - ??? - She said " there's no common sense in baseball" - I love it.
This rule book from MLB reminds me of the ALCS of 2004 between NYY and Boston Red Sox, when the Yankees R1 A-Rod knocking out the baseball of Red Sox pitcher Bronson Arroyo at first base, and umps ruled he was out.
Correct, that play was willful and deliberate and met the criteria for being ruled interference.
That was CLEARLY wilful and deliberate.
@@fifiwoof1969 how was that deliberate he is sliding and has his arm up like most slides do the catcher moves the ball into his path and drops the ball if you can explain how its willful i will take this back
Because it was intentional.
@@calebrowe2004 Clearly talking about the Arod play dude
Amazing breakdown! be sure to tag all you Pittsburgh friends.
That was awesome, what you just did.
Awful breakdown, she misses the tag in the toe, which invalidates everything else she said.
I'm not entirely confident the tag was before the toe hit the plate anyways. The ball wasn't in the glove, it was in his other hand which touches his leg later.
Exactly, tagging with the glove that doesn’t have the ball in it doesn’t count as a tag. And that’s what I initially thought happened.
Thanks for confirming my suspicion. As I watched it initially I thought "why does it matter when he tagged with an empty glove?"
Who tags out with ball in throwing hand? Bellinger couldn't haven't known the ball was palmed. Inadvertent contact at best
Your explanations are AWESOME. Great coverage.
Straight up judgment call. Could have gone either way. The ump determined the ball drop contact was unintentional, and the catcher didn't hold on long enough to complete the tag. I think he did, regardless of why the ball was subsequently dropped. Review ump deferred to the judgment of the field ump and declined to overrule.
The momentum of the play was nowhere near over (which yes i understand isn't the rule book language, but is essentially how it is judged).The only way you can have an out here is if you think it was in the transfer, and I don't think there's any reasonable argument to say this was a transfer.
I hear ya, but if the drop did occur during transfer and the runner would have been deemed out, then that would be acknowledgment that the tag had been completed and the play was over prior to the ball coming loose. But because it was contact with the runner dislogging the ball after the tag, that same tag was not considered completed. The catcher had made the tag and disengaged initial contact with control of the ball. Seeing it in slow motion makes that clear. But in real time, it would be much harder to make that distinction. So it's understandable why the call on the field was that Bellinger was safe.
@@Zippy994 I get what you're saying, and it's something I've thought about before. It's kinda a hole in the rules. However, it is there. If he's not attempting to make a throw, he's gotta survive the tag. If he's trying to take it out to make a throw, he doesn't. I wouldn't mind the rule being changed to make it make sense, but as it's written this is not an out
What an excellent and thorough explanation! Thanks Linds, yet again you’ve proven yourself the rules guru.
Oooh, that intentional/unintentional requirement for interference kind of speaks to a play that happened to me recently in an adult rec game.
Runners on 3rd & 1st, 1 out. Ball put in play softly to shortstop (I think? Not too relevant). Runner from 3rd comes home, throw to the catcher hits him in the feet *after* he has crossed home, on a throw that came from behind his back. Call on the field was interference, runner from 3rd was called out, runner from 1st placed at second and BR at 1st - but that's where they were and neither was attempting to advance.
Cannot "unscore" R3. And unless R3 intentionally kicked the ball (which sounds impossible from your writeup), he cannot be called out for INT.
@@tomn4993
That was my thought too - run counts, if there was a legitimate interference call it would be an out called on the runner where a play was possible (e.g. if the kick was intentional and R2 broke for 3B, then there's a call and R2 would be out)
He never tagged him to begin with. He took the ball out of his glove immediately after catching it and before he ever lunged toward the runner. He tagged the runner with his glove but the ball was not in his glove at that point, it was in his throwing hand. He did eventually make contact with the runner with the ball in his throwing hand, but that was well after the runner touched the plate.
Great job and it looks to me like Shelton accepted the result after talking to the umpires!
BEAUTIFULLY explained - thanks Lindsay.
Hey Chicago what do you say the cubs are going to win today!
Safe! hold the ball
And, as a broadcaster myself, that analysis was embarrassing. In the immortal words of Warner Wolf, KNOW THE RULES!
Looks unintentional, so I actually agree with the out call because dropping on transfer doesn't apply here, if it did, then we can question
what a terrible throw to the plate too
Agreed lol I didn't even notice it until you pointed it out. He wasn't even deep when he caught it, he was nearly at the cusp of the infield. If it was a good throw, Bellinger would have been out by a country mile.
haha. yeah no kidding@@millville444
lol yeah, no kidding.@@millville444
I don’t understand why you think this isn’t common sense. It’s common sense that the catcher has to maintain control of the ball thru the entire tag/collision. Common sense to me anyway. I don’t see any intentional act by the baserunner here, so he’s safe and it certainly makes sense to me. And I could care less about either of these teams, so I’m not biased.
Catcher clearly held the ball after the tag was applied. It was knocked out later, after the tag is complete. In a different sport, this would be equivalent to a goalie making a save, then getting his glove slashed by the attacking player. Sure the puck is in the net, but the puck was frozen. That act would be goalie interference and a goal would not be awarded
Basically, the catcher should not have taken the ball out of the glove so early. If he holds onto it longer, the runner is out. Bart, you messed up.
Good thing replay wasn’t a thing when Kit Keller knocked the ball away from Dottie Hinson. Penny Marshall would need to rewrite the entire end of A League of Their Own.
That was similar to the Buck ejection vs Cincy in 2023.
One of the few times i disagree Lindsay. I think common sense is telling me safe. You have to make the play to get the out.
Youre likely coming at this from a pure baseball perspective, in a land where the drop third strike rule makes complete sense and isn’t just a rule seemingly left in the game for no real reason. In most sports, this act would not go in favor or the slider. It would be treated such as a goalie making the save, then being ran over by the attacking player. Sure the puck is in the net, but that’s because the attacking player hit the goalie causing the puck to be loose.
Common sense says the runner is safe. It's the catchers job to hold onto the ball, the runner didn't intentionally hit it out of the possession of the catcher, hence...the tag wasn't made as the ball was dropped...run scores.
It's a very simple call.
The baseball rulebook does not say he is safe. It’s just written in a way that the call can’t definitively be wrong. Holding onto the ball long enough seems to be a complete judgment call. A catcher taking the ball out of his glove and showing it to the umpire not being long enough seems silly to me but hey I guess they aren’t technically wrong.
There's no circumstance where I thought this runner was out. Take away the home plate collision rule, I.E. a catcher catches a ball, and the runner trucks him, old school....and the ball pops out. Runner is safe. Slide into 2nd, where the foot hits the ball and glove, as the tag is applied.. .runner is safe. This is the same thing. There's no question.
It's not exactly the same thing, because in those instances the tag is what knocks the ball loose. The same contact between the ball-in-hand and the runner that would put the runner out knocks the ball loose. That's a clear cut example of the simultaneously dropped ball rule.
Here, it's secondary contact after the tag contact is completed. The ball was still clearly in control of the catcher between the tag and the secondary contact. You can still fit it in to the immediately following part of the rule, but in my opinion the long enough to show complete control over the ball portion of the rule is satisfied here. But the pros clearly disagree with me
This is a good call. Otherwise a collision would always be intentional and thus the runner would be out 10/10 times.
Catcher needs to keep it in the glove! And CF needs a better throw
Based on the rules. If the catcher had made a throwing motion to second base when he dropped the ball instead of nothing would the ruling change then? Just always pretend you were going to throw the ball so the tag would be adjudged to have been made.
THIS is why you rage with ball in glove and not with ball in hand.
Common sense tells me the runner is safe. The "willful and deliberate" standard in these cases is subjective but reasonable. A-Rod was guilty of interference in the 2004 playoff game against the Red Sox; Bellinger was not in this case. I don’t want changes to the rule book to make Bellinger guilty of interference. I also think the “willful and deliberate” call needs to be made on the field and not in the booth. The rule is basically requiring one to get in the head of the player and, being closest, the ump is in the best position to do that.
In 1978, Raiders QB Kenny Stabler was guilty of deliberately fumbling the ball - an illegal act then and now -- and allowing the ball to be advanced by other Raiders for a game-winning touchdown over the Chargers. The refs were wrong in not calling the intentional fumble but the NFL overreacted by adding a new rule, restricted to the last two minutes of each half, that prohibits a fumbled ball - intentional or not-- to be advanced by any offensive player other than the person who fumbled it. The Holy Roller Rule later resulted in calls that would lead to the Packers (2014) and Chargers (2020; poor Chargers, victims of the Holy Roller and Holy Roller Rule!) losing games they likely would have won, even though the fumbles that were advanced were, unlike Stabler’s, clearly not deliberate.
Also, we know for a FACT that Belli was the sole reason the ball was knocked out, a little earlier in the game, Bart dolphin dove at Ian Happ in a rundown with the ball solely in his barehand fell on it and the ball never moved. Barts grip strength is insane.
Apparently it isn’t all that strong after all.
This play is no different than of the fielder loses the ball after taging the runner anywhere else on their body.
Seems pretty clear cut. Painfully obvious it wasn’t intentional, catcher had only a brief moment of control after the tag before the ball came out, and it wasn’t even really clear if the catcher tagged him before he touched the plate.
I guess the teaching point for all MLB players is to not show the umpire the ball, just let him assume you have it if he doesn't see it on the ground.
This feels like an invitation to try and dislodge the ball with a home plate collision, something they were working to remove from the game. I can't find the wording in the rule books that made that play illegal, but surely this is the exact same thing?
And with replay, we can call a runner out if he comes off for the bag for frame of the video, but we can't call a runner out after seeing a tag and seeing the ball held firmly in the tagger's hand for a few frames?
Such a dumb rule. But no one will see that, and no changes will be made.
I 100% believed and said the runner was safe when I saw this. Slide hard on purpose to get that ball to come out.
Can easily find half a dozen videos of runners knocking the ball out of the first baseman's glove, not an uncommon thing.
exactly, there's been numerous plays at first where a throw puts the glove in the path of the base runner and the ball beats the base runner however, the first basemen could not complete the catch as the runner also hit the glove. i dont see how this play at home is any different
@@andymiller6474 Because it's not at first base, it's at the plate. There are rules for a reason, you can choose to not like them but they are there for the purpose of adding a level of decency to the game. This play is a safe call, has been a safe call, and should always be a safe call.
@@millville444and u sir are completely wrong….learn the rules
The rule should require possession of the ball for a 'moment' *EITHER* before or after the play. But if you are holding the ball solidly well before the play, the out should be instantaneous on contact.
Only if it's a bang-bang catch-tag should there be a requirement after the play to have possession of the ball.
It's the same as the debated reception rule in NFL, I can see the need to clarify the rule. In this case, there was a replay angle that seemed to show the first tag landing on Bellinger's knee after he was safe. It looked pretty clear to me at the time that Bart didn't get the tag on his toe, so it probably didn't matter.
@@The_triple_fool baseball refs also need to explain the call over the PA so we know. But the rule as explained in the video is dumb regardless of what happened in this specific case.
The one thing I hate seeing in this video is Pirates manager holding up his hand and waiting to see if he should challenge. Game is over if you don’t, so why are u waiting to hear if you should. Just challenge immediately.
I understand announcers pulling for their team but man try not to be so biased! I think the reds announcers do a great job at calling what they see but sadly they aren’t watchable right now! 😢
I don't know how the Pirates announcers are normally, but I sort of get it when it's a game ender like this.
Reds announcers might be now but when old man Brennaman was there he was the biggest homer/whiner in the league!!
There are so many things going on with this play! There is one thing that I was wondering about: At the end of the play, the ball is in his bare hand. Did he tag Bellinger with a mitt + bare hand combination, or was it mitt only (with the ball being only in his bare hand). If it's the latter, he's safe no matter what else happens, and we have slightly less controversy. But since this was never brought up anywhere that I can see, I have to assume it was mitt + bare hand (holding the ball), which would have been a legal tag if the ball hadn't been dropped. I just can't actually see that anywhere in the replay.
I think if the catcher is showing the umpire the ball, then he is out. I don't think it was intentional interference by the runner.
A case can be made that the catcher actually reached out to his right to tag Bellinger on the wrist, and so HE caused the collision that resulted in the ball being dropped.
In what would could you make that case?
I disagree. Common sense to me says if you can't even hang onto the ball, absent a deliberate attempt by the runner to dislodge it, then you don't get the out. Hang onto the ball. How hard is this?
That's a very good point and is precisely the reason for the safe call and confirmation of it by the replay team.
Not only is it not intentional, his foot crossed home plate before his hand hit the ball...he's safe..plays dead...game over
The slow mo definitively shows there's no question that Bart completed his catch cleanly with two hands and was in the process of lifting the ball from his mitt to show the ump he had maintained control from A) the catch and B) throughout the tag. That much is undeniable. And you'd have to be a homer hack to assert otherwise. Sure, Bart could have just happened to have had a seizure at the moment of the tag that caused him to remove the ball and lift it skywards. Or some other nonsensical claim. Bart is clearly in the process of presenting the ball to the ump as controlled...just like every fielder does on a bang-bang play. It's just bad luck on the timing. He's of course under no obligation to display control of the ball immediately. Had he just waited half a second longer, this aspect is moot (but other aspects remain). But thems the breaks.
This is not only a silly ruling but also a silly rule. You can clearly see in the replay that the catcher had complete control of the ball at the time of the tag AND after, as his hand is fully visible with control of the ball as he is pulling it out to show the umpire (again, AFTER the tag was made). How long does one have to maintain control of the ball after the tag is put on AND REMOVED while still having control? Assuming the tag was made in time, Bellinger should be out as soon as the tag is made and the ball is clearly seen in the bare hand with complete control. Nothing after that should matter. This is all moot if the tag was made after he touched the plate and would therefore be safe. Absolute silliness. She is right, there is no common sense in baseball.
Othet lop hole rule book clean out call call out . Should let challenge everything till do get problems like this .
There is no difference if the runner hit the catcher's glove or in this case his hand during the collision must have control of the ball.
Cub fan here....didn't even realize that was the controversy. To me me got his foot in before the tag...just barely but the foot came up shortly after. So if the ruling would have been there...I think the call stands...not confirmed. Interesting rule to say the least. I think they got this call right ...just not for the right purpose
As a Cub fan, I saw the same thing. One replay angle seemed to definitively show the tag missing Bellinger's toe, landing on his knee after he's safe. Could have been confirmed on that basis in my opinion.
catcher removed caught ball from glove, then runner unintentionally made some contact. Does book imply "intentionally knocks ball out of glove?)
I think he tapped the plate with his toe prior to the tag.
@closecallsports My question is why does the HP ump move to his left when he was in perfect position to make a call? And Interference should be reviewable but that will never happen.
While I do think interference should be reviewed, it wouldn't matter because the interference was unintentional so it would still be safe. You can tell when you watch the play at normal game speed.
Could one make the argument that the catcher did have the ball firmly and securely in his hand long enough for the umpire to see it? It looked like he had control well after the tag was made.
That is 100% a no. He showed the ball for a fraction of a second before it was unintentionally knocked out. The call is safe every day of the week.
This is the problem with slow motion. When things happen in a fraction of a second, they look far more “intentional” when slowed down. The ump got this one right
The pirate announcers are such homers
Either everything is reviewable or nothing is reviewable. Not sure there is a point in having a review if you're going to omit half of the scenarios where it is useful.
I disagree. The rules in baseball are primarily common sense, moreso than most sports.
High fiving the opposing team
Safe
It was a close play. Could have gone either way. The call was made and we move on.
Now that was a Close Call...sports!
The call is"Safe" because his FOOT was there FIRST.
great vid!
Hot out of the oven video!
I still don't think the call is overturned even if the ball isn't knocked out. Was there clear evidence his foot didn't touch?
Well the umpire calling safe then pointing to the ball indicates the safe call is the result of the ball being knocked out. It appears the umpire was about to call out until he saw the ball was no longer in the catchers possession.
I highly doubt there was clear and conclusive evidence. Cubs fans saying he got in before the tag, Pirates fans saying the catcher tagged him on the foot, it's not clear or conclusive either way. The call on the field would have stood.
Interference not being reviewable is not ok. There is no possible reason on earth an interference play should not be subject to review. Just another example of how umpires are ruining a perfectly good sport by making things arbitrarily unreviewable. Fire the umps and fire anybody associated with putting the pitch clock in place.
That is one totally ridiculous comment. Umpires are not ruining the sport. They do not make the rules, they enforce them.
I see every indication that this wasn't willful & deliberate interference (no deviation of the hand from his slide motion, and doesn't appear to be an unnatural hand position like the Judge example). Doesn't look questionable at all to me.
Technically correct is NOT the best kind of correct. The best and worst part of baseball is the rulebook, which makes this channel equally wonderful and infuriating.
I just hate seeing a great play taken away from the catcher! Even though it was called correctly.
Actually, a more accurate throw to the plate would've got the runner out by plenty. That's baseball.
I actually think this is logical. If a runner is stealing a base or on a hit is trying for a double and in either case, slides into the bag while the fielder puts his glove down in front of the bag causing the runner's foot to contact the glove, and then the ball comes out - the runner is safe! This is the same exact play! The runner slides, contact is made, as his slide is completed, the ball comes out. Cut & dried to me, I'd call it the same way on my field. As to intentional, no way it's intentional - he's not even looking at the catcher's hand! He is simply sliding through home plate and their hands collide.
5:21 watch bellinger's pants. pretty clearly got tagged on the shin well before the ball was 'accidentally' knocked out. 100% out.
As a Cubs fan I do agree with you
Bellinger didn't purposely knock the ball out of his hand like ARod did to Arroyo.
That’s not at all definitive. His pant leg could easily be moving due to the fact that his leg is hitting the ground.
Nice try. The contact from Bellinger was unintentional, at least that's obvious to anyone with a working brain and eyes. Accept the loss.
Tagged on the toe, the leg, and the balls, still somehow now out. Fuck baseball.
Why is this even a discussion? His foot beat the tag and glove was empty. Then the ball comes out all simultaneously.
Safe, now move on with your lives
Common sense is that the catcher dropped the ball, so he didn’t make a tag
More clear and convincing evidence that MLB doesn't want to use replay to make accurate calls. (As if past years haven't shown that clearly enough). Change it back to boundary plays only...
As i always say, baseball is about getting the call “correct”, never about getting the correct call.
Big market teams like the Cubs will always get the calls, especially at home, and when it’s bottom of 9th and umpires are tired.
Chris conroy has been BRUTAL his entire career. Isn’t he the guy where his wife was talking all kinds of trash on social media?
Easy out call. Catcher clearly held the ball long enough to establish control by literally tagging the runner and removing the ball from the glove, while in control of the ball and showing that he had maintained the ball. It was only at that point (after those three acts occurred [tag, controlled removal and display]) that the ball was dislodged from the catcher's hand. The ball was clearly not dropped "simultaneously" with the tag nor "immediately following" the tag. Immediate means "instant"/"without lapse of time". While the "Transfer" rule may not technically matter, the act of the "transfer" under control is evidence of control and an additional event occurring after the tag.
There is no “long enough” rule, the control must be maintained throughout the entirety of the play and voluntarily removed by the defensive player. Cody was still sliding when the ball came out because of incidental contact with his arm/ball. Runner safe, catcher did not need to show the ump the ball
@@gregmatyas4272 Read the rule. There is no "throughout the play" or "till the end of the play" language in the rule. In fact the play is over when the tag is applied in accordance with the rule. He applied the tag and voluntarily removed the ball from the glove. It was after he voluntarily removed the ball and displayed it that the ball was knocked out of his hand. My use of the phrase "long enough" was simply to summarize that the catcher completed the tag in compliance with the rule (meaning that he did not drop the ball simultaneously with the tag or "immediately" afterwards - that's all that is required by the language of the rule). I took you step by step as to how and why. The catcher does not have to get up with the ball in his hand and walk into the dugout with it.
@@douglassepic9030 I didn’t say he had to walk to the dugout with it (especially since there would have only been 2 outs), I was simply saying that the play isn’t over until he either shows the ump the ball in his glove with posession and/or voluntarily removes the ball from his glove and possesses it in his hand. Bellinger was still sliding and catcher dropped the ball, runner did not intentionally hit the ball out of his hand, runner is safe by rule.
@@gregmatyas4272 How did he not voluntarily remove the ball from the glove? It's out of the glove. It's visible to the umpire. After it becomes visible, the ball is knocked out of his hand. To me it doesn't matter whether it's intentional or accidental. That's really not part of the argument.
@@douglassepic9030 ok I’ll clarify, he must maintain control through the entire play, whether it’s in his glove or bare hand etc, Cody was sliding and due to incidental contact the ball came out of his hand, he did not voluntarily “drop” it. Had Cody slapped it out of his hand then by all means that changes things. (Remember a few years ago ARod slapped the ball out of the defender’s glove…obv he was out)
You are 100% wrong for multiple reasons. The replay clearly showed the tag getting Bellinger before he touched home on his toe, as it snaps back from making contacting with Bart’s glove. At that point the tag is made and completed, Bellinger is out, unless the ball comes out there, and it did not.
And the ball being held up is not part of the tag, no one should be able to argue that with a straight face. That means the the drop wasn’t simultaneous or immediately after the contact. By rule he is out. If that is a drop then every transfer at second should be too, because you can’t say the caught and controlled the throw.
There is no “long enough” on maintaining control/posession…you are required to hold the ball through the entirety of the play and voluntarily remove it from your glove while maintaining posession, there was no “transfer” because he wasn’t going to try, from his back, to make a throw on the batter/runner.
"long enough" is literally in the definition central to getting this play correct. "long enough to prove that they have complete control of the ball"
@@davidsorensen2116 agree, I was trying to get him to understand that it’s not like it’s 2 seconds or 4 seconds or …., it’s complete control throughout the entirety of the play however long that may take. Catcher dropped the ball due to incidental contact with Bellinger during his slide, runner safe, game over
@@gregmatyas4272 See, the problem is you are adding "throughout the entirety of the play," which may be accurate to how the rule is interpreted but not to how it is written. Now, I'm not a baseball expert, and the pros certainly disagree with my analysis, but to me, him rolling over with the ball firmly in hand was "long enough to prove that he had complete control of the ball" through the tag. Afterwards, there's an incidental secondary contact that knocks the ball out.
When I read the complete rule, as an admittedly naive individual, it seems to me the rule means the fielder has to control the ball through the tag, and the ball coming out simultaneously or immediately following the tag indicates that he didn't actually have control over the ball during the tag. Here, the catcher clearly had control through the tag and it was subsequent action that removed the ball from his control.
@@davidsorensen2116 I completely understand your logic as to why you feel he should be out and I think part of the issue is when the play is shown in slow motion yes it indeed looks like the catcher has had the ball “forever” when in fact as we know it’s all quick and simultaneous which is why the umpire doesn’t call the out immediately if/when Cody is tagged, he has to and is trained to take the time to a) make sure of the tag and b) the defender maintains possession until the play is dead/over…..it looks indeed in the beginning that the ump is getting ready to make an out call but then when he sees the ball rolling on the ground he calls him safe, as he should because in his mind nobody has the ball. Again slow motion replay really makes the play look like anything but the bang bang play that it was.
I umpired for 15+ years up through college/semi pro levels and all I can say is thank goodness we didn’t have to deal with booth reviews and challenges etc
You can't knock the ball out of the catcher's hand. It's in the rule book and the umpire along with the replay judge. Pittsburgh Pirates got hosed on that play. That's why Chicago Cubs get away with it again. She has No idea with what she's talking about.
You are so wrong…the rule is you cannot intentionally and willfully knock the ball out, Bellinger did not intentionally hit/slap/poke the ball out of Bart’s weak ass hand….the safest place for that ball would have been in his glove, no reason to take it out