This is a tailor-made "call stands". There's being a homer, and there's being whatever these broadcast announcers were being. There's no way that gets overturned.
@@macgroober1396His foot started hovering after he clipped the edge of the plate. If you think I’m wrong about that, please tell us where, out of all the angles shown, it’s obvious that his lead foot never touched the plate. (There are none, so the call stands.)
Appreciate your neutral view, Linds. It's one of those "not enough to overturn" situations. It's just not clear whether the foot caught the plate or not, so I can't really argue against either being called out or safe on the field. I guess you have to go with safe in this case.
The umpire also missed a clear ball four to Jose Abreu earlier in the inning and then Abreu ended up striking out. If the bases are loaded there instead of runners at 1st and 2nd, this is a non issue.
Silly conclusion you are making. Do you think the pitcher throws the same pitches, same exact speed and location, if Abreu had walked? Real baseball is not Strat-o-Matic. Every play is influenced by the previous plays. This is like those morons who get mad when a runner steals 2nd but is called out. And then the next batter hits a home run and they say the umpires cost their team an extra run. As if a pitcher pitching from the windup with nobody on base will throw the same pitch as he would from the stretch with a runner on 2nd. Or like a football fan who gets mad at his team's kicker for missing a 26 yard field goal in the 2nd quarter of a game they lose 21-20. Sure...it doesn't matter that the other team was running out the clock on their last possession, taking a knee 3 times when they were inside the 20. Surely they would have done that even if they were down 23-21, right? They wouldn't have tried for a game winning field goal themselves!
Yep, as a Rangers' fan I cannot honestly and conclusively say for sure that the runner missed the plate. I have to concede from the one angle that it is possible that his foot hit the corner of the plate before popping up, therefore insufficient evidence to overturn ... though I wish they had anyway lol
Great evaluation, as always! I agree with the call standing. One angle looks like the corner of the plate caused the foot to rise, but the other angles don’t confirm that.
Going frame by frame from the view from the outfield camera alone I would confirm the call; all of the other angles just show that his foot came up at, or possibly just prior to, home plate. As a result I think you rule "call stands", however had he been out I think there was enough to overturn that call.
I agree with you completely it does look like he never touched the plate but unfortunately the call on the field was safe I think the frustration from the rangers announcers comes from the fact that we’ve been screwed over by replay all season
even if the foot didn't hit, the followup knee looks like it did just ahead of the tag (as the above camera view looks like the catchers glove hit the ground first before tagging the runner after the knee touched)
Good use of the wedge allowed the plate umpire to make the call based on his vision as the play developed. His angle is alot better than any camera angle provided.
To me, the center field shot at .25x speed makes it look like the foot only bounces up as it touches the corner of the plate. I believe it was the correct call.
thats what I see, at worst its a call stands, at best its confirmed. I bet if you ask the ump he didnt even focus on the foot bouncing off the plate, he just seen foot go across plate before guy was tagged.
I slowed it down on here and to me it looked like his foot came up because it hit the dirt and actually came up right before he “would’ve” touched home plate.
It is definitely hard to turn over. The one angle looked like the front toe hit the edge of the plate when it kicked up though. I would have let it stand and called him safe due to a lack of evidence to overturn.
@@mloerch1Well not ever. You seen those videos of the 1997 NLCS with Eric Gregg as the home plate umpire? Now THAT was the worst strike and ball calls ever
This is one of those situations where replay can only screw things up. He’s safe. By a pretty good margin in fact. I don’t really care if his foot popped up or not. He beat the throw - he is safe. But with slow motion and tons of cameras, we can make a call that defies 100 years or precedent. He is safe. Good night.
@@davidroman1654 of course he does, but for the entire history of baseball until five minutes ago, he was safe and no one questioned it. the plate is flat (or on some fields, below the plane), sometimes the area in the batter’s box is dug out and it causes your foot to pop up a little. on replay, he would be called out. but it goes against the fabric of the game.
And not only that, it removes the joy and exuberance of an amazing ending. Everyone gets to stand around and cheer what some dudes in NY watched on a screen. It's bad drama.
Very close play. Even with different angles it’s very tough to see if his foot or even calf touch the plate. I’d say call stands as Safe. Just not enough to overturn
It's usually more "nouveau" teams that have these types of announcers. Fan bases aren't that big, loyal or knowledgeable on the whole so this plays better. Totally subjective opinion not based on anything but impressions, but I cannot be convinced otherwise.
Hard to confirm the moment of the tag. I think his left knee might have reached the plate before the tag. So safe regardless of whether right foot got the plate. I also think every umpire, in real time, is going to call that safe even if slightly above the plate.
There’s no chance Dan Bellino would’ve been able to see the point at which the foot came up (if it did, I still can’t tell) in real time with the speed at which it happened. I’m not even sure he even knew the foot came up at all. Based on his angle and view, and what he could’ve known at that moment, the initial safe call was absolutely the correct call to make at that time. For the review, no camera angle or combination of camera angles is definitive either way. Even after slowing it down and rewatching it several times, it’s almost impossible to tell if the foot came up before or after tagging home plate. Further more, it’s also unclear if the runners knee made it to the plate before the tag was actually applied, from the camera angles provided. Based on both of those facts, the call standing (neither confirmed, nor overturned) is the correct call.
They (NYC) overturned a call at the plate in tonight’s came in the Astros-Rangers game. There was no way it was overwhelming or definitive evidence to do so. Seems like the can’t get it right consistently.
Umpires got the call right. There’s some angles where it looked like he did, there’s others where he didn’t. There wasn’t enough to overturn it so it is what it is. I think his heel barely and I mean oh so slightly touched the plate.
Somewhere between 0:40 and 0:41 it appears the runner's toe clips the corner of the plate and causes his toe to pop up. But as others say, there isn't anything clear that overturns the call of the person standing within 6-10' of the play. The ruling stands.
It’s blatantly obvious that his foot hit the corner of the plate and popped up. It’s mind boggling the amount of disgruntled rangers fans that magically see something different.
The center field cam at 1:59 of your video shows the foot popping up just before the plate. But it's gotta be frozen at the exact moment, and you can't see the black of the plate. I think call has to stand. If called OUT on the field, that call would have stood as well.
The runner's foot didn't touch home. His whole leg came up from bouncing off the dirt. If you go frame by frame at 1:29, you can see his foot coming off the ground and not have any movement from contact with home plate.
That's a tough one. From the sideview it appears the cleat pops up before the plate, and from the head on view it looks like the cleat comes down after the plate. After seeing all the angles I'm 80% out, but I can't be 100% so I guess the call stands.
I would like to have seen just a bit more in one of those angles - did the runner's knee get to the plate before the tag? If so, that makes the foot bounce unimportant. Without that, I'm with NY - call stands. Can't confirm. Can't overturn.
I'd say that he's more likely out than safe based on the replays because I don't think his foot touched the plate. However, I don't know how sure you have to be to overturn the call on the field.
His foot hitting the plate is what made it pop up. It’s so clear from the replays. Not to mention his reaction after coming up from his slide. He knew he got it.
I agree that after looking at all of the angles (especially the outfield side), we can be maybe 80% sure that the foot popped up from hitting the plate. I don't necessarily trust a player's own reaction, though, and I wouldn't go so far to say that the video would have been deemed conclusive to overturn the call if the ump said it was out.
Insufficient evidence to overturn the call on the field. I can't tell because of the flying dirt, but it looks like his knee might have caught the corner of the plate before the tag as well.
I think that angle in front of home plate is clear imo that the lead foot missed home plate where the other angles you couldn’t tell for sure. But you can’t tell if his back knee touched home plate before he got tagged.
If I don’t know what the call on the field is and I have to make a guess about what happened, I’m leaning towards an out based on the centerfield angle at 1:30 : I don’t think the toe ever touches the plate. But there’s no way I have enough to overturn a safe call here, so I’d also come back with stands. And for what it’s worth, it’s a totally fair safe call by Bellino too because he had every reason to believe the lead foot touched the plate.
Please remember that local broadcasters are approved and/or paid by the team. Telling the fans what they want to hear is far more important than objectivity. This is a far better "call stands" than the play last year that was upheld despite it being physically impossible for the runner's front leg to have touched home plate. The umpires also did a nice job of realizing that the play would be challenged. That has not always been the case.
This isnt entirely true. The Astros broadcast is constantly being fair praising both sides and calling out the Astros when they make mistakes. Even in this game the broadcasters were talking about how the Astros pitchers couldn't throw a strike.
Easy safe call in live action, in a world where sports do not exist to be adjudicated with 480 frames per second video in 4K resolution with optional TV zoom: The runner's foot beat the throw and tag to the plate by a wide margin. In a world where replay exists to get every aspect of the game analyzed down to the atom: Inconclusive. It would not have surprised me if New York had overturned this, were it possible to tell definitively if the knee touched the flat plate before the tag. The foot sure looked up over the plate and not touching, and I've called my fair share of correct calls over the years that looked "blown" from the stands and dugouts for this exact reason. We've seen weirder overturns. Good....no, GREAT "call stands" from NY. If I still played, and I had magically developed the talent to play in a modern league advanced enough to have HD replay, I'd slide headfirst into the plate every time because it's easy to get your palm on the dish sliding at full bore, but a lot harder to get your heel down on it. This is a great play to demonstrate how replay is killing the sport of baseball, not just in the Bigs, but at lower levels too. Instead of accepting that baseball is an imperfect game with imperfect rules & design played by imperfect humans and officiated by imperfect humans, we're arguing about a safe/out call where the runner was 18 inches past the front edge of the base before the tag even got there. That mentality trickles down to the lower levels all the way to Pony ball and below. This isn't what replay was supposed to be for: replay was supposed to ensure that the Gross Miss never goes uncorrected, like with Jim Joyce in Galarraga's imperfect game.
Upon first view, it appeared to me the foot started coming up before reaching the corner of the plate, so I thought it should be overturned (just like the Rangers announcers). But with the benefit of looking again in slow motion at different angles, I have to agree with Lindsay: call stands.
It appears that, from the umpire's view, the lead foot hits the edge of the plate and pops up. The replay seems to show that. With no convincing evidence otherwise, the call stands. Good call.
Man I love hearing both broadcasting teams perspective. Blum and TK made it seem like the safe was obvious; that’s funny. Looks like the heel was down and barely touched. Even if it didn’t it looked like his knee on his other leg still touched before the tag.
The Rangers broadcast was being mad annoying and the Astros broadcast made it seem like it was an obvious safe. But the Astros broadcast was more bearable. The Rangers broadcast was acting like 5 year olds when they get their head stuck on an idea lmao
I'm an Astro fan. At full speed I thought he might have missed the plate. Several replay angles looked that way to me. But the angle looks like his heal caught the edge of the plate causing his leg to pop up. From that one angle I do not see conclusive evidence to overturn.
As the narrator said, his front foot hit the plate and popped up, SAFE! His foot doesn't have to stay in contact with the plate like it does on a slide at 2nd and 3rd. Ruling on the field stand, runner is safe!
like you said the front toe part of his shoe taps the corner of the plate and is subsequently knocked up and off the plate for the rest of the slide but I think he got in at the very beginning and its just a tap, but that counts
In real time he looked clearly safe. In slow motion it looks clearly like he missed the plate, but that's with microanalyzing, and other people will have very different opinions. That's a clear call stands and a good job all around by the umps and for once, the replay center did a good job.
Textbook Call Stands. In addition to your comment about the foot popping up possibly because of "catching" the plate, you also don't get a view with daylight under his heel as it drags through. I'm not convinced that it was touching, but there's not a view that conclusively shows it wasn't touching. Therefore, call stands.
Call stands for me. While I “think” the plate caused the foot to pop up, you just can’t tell 100% either way. I didn’t slow it down but it’s possible his knee on the trailing foot got the plate before the tag so if you look at that closely it naught become a Call Confirmed
Looks like the runner's foot popped up from hitting the edge of the plate. Also, it looks like the left knee may have gotten to the plate before the tag was applied.
To me at 1:59 it looks like his toe bounce off the black part of home plate. Everyone is looking just at the white part. All of it counts as the plate.
As an Astros fan…Tuckers foot obviously bounced up. The question would be if the bounce was caused by striking the outside edge of plate, which cannot be seen from any camera angel. The umpire had the best view and called safe so the call would stand. Getting upset at that call is ludicrous.
The call should stand. It is hard to tell whether the foot touched the base or not, so even by the letter of the law the call is questionable either way. However, by the spirit of the law, he clearly had his foot over the plate long before he was tagged.
I think he's out, but I'm ok with the call standing. That angle from the outfield camera, I'm about 99.9% sure his foot bounces before and never makes contact with the plate and he is tagged on the knee before it can slide over the plate.
I'd be forced to rule it inconclusive. I cannot see him missing home plate in the frames where it is absolutely possible the PU saw him touching it. This should never be overturned. That does not mean it's definitively correct (or incorrect either) - it's simply indisputable given the available video. We should assume the MLB umpire made the correct call, as they do in 90-99% of these ultra-tricky situations, which is impressive.
To me, it looks like the foot did come up and did not make contact with the plate BUT it's unclear whether the runner's knee slid over the plate before the catcher's tag was applied to the same knee. Therefore, I have "call stands". If the catcher's tag clearly occurred before the knee crossed the plate, I would have had an out here
I am a big believer in the thought that if the Umpire is in the correct position (as he was here) then it should take unrefutable evidence to overturn. Stands is the correct call.
I think u just got to trust the umpire with the call like u said the had the perfect view that we just won't get during a replay. Unless we can get cameras on the umpires head that's the right call
The call on the field stands. It seems the foot touches the plate, but I can't be sure. That's the solely definition of not being able to a definite conclusion.
this is a case of the PU having a better view than any of the replay angles. Either way he could have called it would have come back as "call stands" as there's not enough conclusive evidence to overturn.
Good segment. There's a lot to see and think about with this play. The fact that you are neutral and not in favor of either team winning makes your point of making this segment perfect. I personally think poorly and inconsistently called balls and strikes effect the outcome of games to a far greater degree than plays like this do. All these new rules this year in baseball and yet the most egregious of all the problems, consistent and accurate called strikes and balls from behind the plate, still persists. Sorry Blue, ya'll gotta go. Everyone uses their phone for everything from : controlling your lights, alarm, thermostat, music, security cameras, blinds/window coverings...the list goes on and on. It's time to lean on the crutch, that is the lazy convenience of technology, for automated pitch calling assistance too. Can't wait to download the new silverware app so I can eat with my phone too. Woo hoo!!
Technology is great except when it does work. As inaccurate as human umpires calling balls/strikes may be (and believe me, the less experienced umpires are far worse than what you see in the majors) at least the human isn't just going to up and stop working like we've seen happen with the stupid tv box at least a handful of times in the middle of a game. Lean on technology all you want but I wouldn't trust my life to a machine. I've seen younger (not graded) umpires call pitches at kids' head strikes, consistency and accuracy come with time but even then, humans won't be perfect. Sure we could have the computer help with calling balls and strike (challenge system anyone?) but even the current pitch tracking tech has inaccuracies hence the margin of error so I don't see the human umps going anywhere soon.
@@ericwildfong Yeah I agree about tech. Technology is never going to be perfect. But we are already dealing with imperfection as it is now. At the very least, automated calls on balls and strikes won't have personal vendettas, payback and grudges that certain umps have against certain players, teams and situational ego power trip calls by umps that are prevalent in the game. Invariably, certain situations seem to call for predictably subjective and inaccurate calls just because umps aren't held accountable for inaccuracies and the age old line of bs, "It's just part of the game." Home team calls and a more forgiving strike zone for pitchers when throwing pitches on a 3-0 count to name just a few. Nothing will ever be perfect for sure. But the amount of money made by the league, it's owners and the players should provide plenty of funds to pay for a system that is more consistent and less prone to subjectivity and intentional ego power trip calls. We lean on tech for almost everything under the sun now. Why not baseball?
@@Chubbydippin We're dealing with inaccuracies because humans are bound to make mistakes, its the nature of being human. I can't speak for the MLB umps (or other umps in general) but when I was doing it, I was far from perfect but I tried my best to be fair, and consistent. It took me at least a couple years to become really consistent and all the while I had coaches barking at me about it. And that was without any sort of internal grading system either. But lets suppose we go with your solution and implement a 100% automated ball/strike system (think trackman but more accurate). How do you propose to handle A) when the system just stops working for seemingly no reason (like when the tv box disappears), and B) the fact the zone is 3d? A lot of the tracking tech that exists right now I believe only captures the ball at the front of the zone, and doesn't consider the 3d zone correctly. I'm not saying don't lean on tech for baseball, just maybe a 100% automated ball/strike system isn't the greatest idea.
His foot popped up because it hit something, the only thing there to hit was home plate. Regardless, per the rule, call on the field stands is the correct call. The Arlington Rangers broadcast should be ashamed of that homerism
This wasn't a challenge. This review was immediately initiated by the umpiring crew. As an aside though the rules regarding challenges need to be tightened. Because the rules say you only get to lose one challenge and then you can't challenge anymore. And they also say that you cannot challenge after the 6th inning. But they allow umpires to review any play at their discretion regardless of whether they independently initiate the review or a review was requested by a team that has no ability to challenge under the rules. And in practice this makes the limitations on the ability to challenge non existent, because umpires literally always agree to review a play when requested.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
This is a tailor-made "call stands". There's being a homer, and there's being whatever these broadcast announcers were being. There's no way that gets overturned.
Typical rangers' broadcasters.
@@reaverofjillsandwiches So we're just going to ignore the angle that shows the runners foot hovering over the plate?
@@macgroober1396His foot started hovering after he clipped the edge of the plate. If you think I’m wrong about that, please tell us where, out of all the angles shown, it’s obvious that his lead foot never touched the plate. (There are none, so the call stands.)
I'm a Rangers fan and this is the correct take. Call stands.
@@macgroober1396 It's inconclusive. There can be absolutely no doubt that he missed the plate in order for it to be overturned.
Appreciate your neutral view, Linds. It's one of those "not enough to overturn" situations. It's just not clear whether the foot caught the plate or not, so I can't really argue against either being called out or safe on the field. I guess you have to go with safe in this case.
1:58 his foot touched the bag. He's safe.
The umpire also missed a clear ball four to Jose Abreu earlier in the inning and then Abreu ended up striking out. If the bases are loaded there instead of runners at 1st and 2nd, this is a non issue.
Exactly what I thought
100%
Facts
Silly conclusion you are making. Do you think the pitcher throws the same pitches, same exact speed and location, if Abreu had walked? Real baseball is not Strat-o-Matic. Every play is influenced by the previous plays.
This is like those morons who get mad when a runner steals 2nd but is called out. And then the next batter hits a home run and they say the umpires cost their team an extra run. As if a pitcher pitching from the windup with nobody on base will throw the same pitch as he would from the stretch with a runner on 2nd.
Or like a football fan who gets mad at his team's kicker for missing a 26 yard field goal in the 2nd quarter of a game they lose 21-20. Sure...it doesn't matter that the other team was running out the clock on their last possession, taking a knee 3 times when they were inside the 20. Surely they would have done that even if they were down 23-21, right? They wouldn't have tried for a game winning field goal themselves!
Yep, as a Rangers' fan I cannot honestly and conclusively say for sure that the runner missed the plate. I have to concede from the one angle that it is possible that his foot hit the corner of the plate before popping up, therefore insufficient evidence to overturn ... though I wish they had anyway lol
I am an astros fan and I think he was out.
@@bryanb5895 Astros fan too, and I thought it was an out.
Astros fan here and he was safe by a mile Jonah Heim sucks
The play was reviewed and he was called safe so stop everyone. MLB said he was safe.
Inconclusive? Foot never touched the plate. Was on the rise just before starting to pass over the plate. Other foot missed too.
Great evaluation, as always! I agree with the call standing. One angle looks like the corner of the plate caused the foot to rise, but the other angles don’t confirm that.
I think at 1:30 from that centre field camera it looks like ankle is down on the plate. Either way, call stands.
Going frame by frame from the view from the outfield camera alone I would confirm the call; all of the other angles just show that his foot came up at, or possibly just prior to, home plate. As a result I think you rule "call stands", however had he been out I think there was enough to overturn that call.
1:30 it's pretty damned clear. His foot is being bounced up by the back corner of the home plate. Not much doubt about it.
We park our cars in the same garage my friend. That’s the exact same conclusion I came to. 👍
By replay rules, the call stands as safe. If it was just make a call based on the replays, I'd say out.
I agree with you completely it does look like he never touched the plate but unfortunately the call on the field was safe I think the frustration from the rangers announcers comes from the fact that we’ve been screwed over by replay all season
Your videos are great! Not one second of unnecessary fluff. Bravo!!!
even if the foot didn't hit, the followup knee looks like it did just ahead of the tag (as the above camera view looks like the catchers glove hit the ground first before tagging the runner after the knee touched)
Based on everything I saw after further review the ruling on the field STANDS as called
Good use of the wedge allowed the plate umpire to make the call based on his vision as the play developed. His angle is alot better than any camera angle provided.
Still a 50/50 call.
To me, the center field shot at .25x speed makes it look like the foot only bounces up as it touches the corner of the plate. I believe it was the correct call.
thats what I see, at worst its a call stands, at best its confirmed. I bet if you ask the ump he didnt even focus on the foot bouncing off the plate, he just seen foot go across plate before guy was tagged.
Same
I thinks his foot came up because his heel hit the plate and I see nothing that convices me otherwise. Call standing is correct imo
Looked to me like his foot came up because his toe hit the plate.
Yeah I can only see it as his foot popping up because it hit the plate
I slowed it down on here and to me it looked like his foot came up because it hit the dirt and actually came up right before he “would’ve” touched home plate.
Umpires got the call right
It is definitely hard to turn over. The one angle looked like the front toe hit the edge of the plate when it kicked up though. I would have let it stand and called him safe due to a lack of evidence to overturn.
His right heel hits the front edge of the plate. This is what caused his leg and foot to pop up
ANOTHER gem. Thanks Lindsay.
Can't wait for the next Q & A with you and Tmac.
No mention of the contender for season’s worst called-strike during the Abreu at bat?
YES! I totally agree! Worse called strike EVER
@@mloerch1Well not ever. You seen those videos of the 1997 NLCS with Eric Gregg as the home plate umpire? Now THAT was the worst strike and ball calls ever
This is one of those situations where replay can only screw things up. He’s safe. By a pretty good margin in fact. I don’t really care if his foot popped up or not. He beat the throw - he is safe. But with slow motion and tons of cameras, we can make a call that defies 100 years or precedent. He is safe. Good night.
I hate when “technically correct” becomes bad for the game.
Beating the throw isn’t always a safe. But I get what you mean. He was safe
@@davidroman1654 of course he does, but for the entire history of baseball until five minutes ago, he was safe and no one questioned it. the plate is flat (or on some fields, below the plane), sometimes the area in the batter’s box is dug out and it causes your foot to pop up a little. on replay, he would be called out. but it goes against the fabric of the game.
And not only that, it removes the joy and exuberance of an amazing ending. Everyone gets to stand around and cheer what some dudes in NY watched on a screen. It's bad drama.
That foot was clearly on the ground and took off a bit as it hit the mound's edge before the tag. It's a good call.
To my eye,the view at 1:59 it looked like his leg bounced on the dirt before the plate
Agree. Replay is inconclusive, so let the call stand.
Yeah, it's a "call stands", but I think he's out. If you look at the side view, it looks like the foot comes up BEFORE the plate.
He was safe by a mile...wasn't even close. I don't know HOW you can watch this and not think his foot at least grazzed the plate or hit an edge.
I disagree but your opinion is duly noted.
Very close play. Even with different angles it’s very tough to see if his foot or even calf touch the plate. I’d say call stands as Safe. Just not enough to overturn
Broadcasters like this annoy me lol. I’m glad my Reds broadcasters are usually as non biased as you could ask for!!
It's usually more "nouveau" teams that have these types of announcers. Fan bases aren't that big, loyal or knowledgeable on the whole so this plays better.
Totally subjective opinion not based on anything but impressions, but I cannot be convinced otherwise.
Rangers commentators are the worst.
Hard to confirm the moment of the tag. I think his left knee might have reached the plate before the tag. So safe regardless of whether right foot got the plate.
I also think every umpire, in real time, is going to call that safe even if slightly above the plate.
Jankowski should’ve never stopped to let the ball get to him in right field. He should’ve been charging all the way, especially given the situation
There’s no chance Dan Bellino would’ve been able to see the point at which the foot came up (if it did, I still can’t tell) in real time with the speed at which it happened. I’m not even sure he even knew the foot came up at all. Based on his angle and view, and what he could’ve known at that moment, the initial safe call was absolutely the correct call to make at that time.
For the review, no camera angle or combination of camera angles is definitive either way. Even after slowing it down and rewatching it several times, it’s almost impossible to tell if the foot came up before or after tagging home plate. Further more, it’s also unclear if the runners knee made it to the plate before the tag was actually applied, from the camera angles provided. Based on both of those facts, the call standing (neither confirmed, nor overturned) is the correct call.
If those are the only angles I would go with call stands.
It looks as though he caught the plate, as Tucker's foot clears dirt off the plate before the tag. Don't think Bellino missed that call
If I were making a call in isolation, that's out. But I don't think you can overturn the live call.
They (NYC) overturned a call at the plate in tonight’s came in the Astros-Rangers game. There was no way it was overwhelming or definitive evidence to do so. Seems like the can’t get it right consistently.
Lived in Ft. Worth for years, now live in the Beaumont, TX area, so I 'root' for both clubs, you have to call the runner safe.
Umpires got the call right. There’s some angles where it looked like he did, there’s others where he didn’t. There wasn’t enough to overturn it so it is what it is. I think his heel barely and I mean oh so slightly touched the plate.
Somewhere between 0:40 and 0:41 it appears the runner's toe clips the corner of the plate and causes his toe to pop up. But as others say, there isn't anything clear that overturns the call of the person standing within 6-10' of the play. The ruling stands.
It’s blatantly obvious that his foot hit the corner of the plate and popped up. It’s mind boggling the amount of disgruntled rangers fans that magically see something different.
The center field cam at 1:59 of your video shows the foot popping up just before the plate. But it's gotta be frozen at the exact moment, and you can't see the black of the plate. I think call has to stand. If called OUT on the field, that call would have stood as well.
Even if he was put, this makes up for the terrible call against Abreu that would have been bases loaded no outs in the 9th
Looks to me like his heel hit the edge of the plate and popped up just before the tag. Pretty solid safe for me.
He was SAFE🤘🏼
The runner's foot didn't touch home. His whole leg came up from bouncing off the dirt. If you go frame by frame at 1:29, you can see his foot coming off the ground and not have any movement from contact with home plate.
His foot popped up because it hit the corner of the plate
That's a tough one. From the sideview it appears the cleat pops up before the plate, and from the head on view it looks like the cleat comes down after the plate. After seeing all the angles I'm 80% out, but I can't be 100% so I guess the call stands.
Looks more like hitting the corner of the plate popped his foot into the air.
@@Korijenkins1414from the front on view it doesn’t look like he hit the corner of the plate too me
I would like to have seen just a bit more in one of those angles - did the runner's knee get to the plate before the tag? If so, that makes the foot bounce unimportant. Without that, I'm with NY - call stands. Can't confirm. Can't overturn.
I'd say that he's more likely out than safe based on the replays because I don't think his foot touched the plate. However, I don't know how sure you have to be to overturn the call on the field.
His foot hitting the plate is what made it pop up. It’s so clear from the replays. Not to mention his reaction after coming up from his slide. He knew he got it.
I agree that after looking at all of the angles (especially the outfield side), we can be maybe 80% sure that the foot popped up from hitting the plate. I don't necessarily trust a player's own reaction, though, and I wouldn't go so far to say that the video would have been deemed conclusive to overturn the call if the ump said it was out.
It's not clear that's why the call "stands". Had he been called out it would have stayed that way too.
His foot was up before the plate lol
@@bvldr Prove it
How can his foot pop up from the plate if it clearly never hit the plate.
Asterisks get their way again
Call Stands, but personally think it's an out. That side view very much looks to me like it popped up first, but it's just not conclusive.
It was a close play. Could have gone either way.
Tucker’s foot hit the edge of the plate. It popped up. End of story.
Insufficient evidence to overturn the call on the field. I can't tell because of the flying dirt, but it looks like his knee might have caught the corner of the plate before the tag as well.
I'm glad it was close, because that "WHAT!?" is meme-tier.
I don't think they could reverse that call. One of the few that would be inconclusive after looking at it, even at those angles.
If you can’t reverse this you can’t reverse the semien call at home either
I think that angle in front of home plate is clear imo that the lead foot missed home plate where the other angles you couldn’t tell for sure. But you can’t tell if his back knee touched home plate before he got tagged.
If I don’t know what the call on the field is and I have to make a guess about what happened, I’m leaning towards an out based on the centerfield angle at 1:30 : I don’t think the toe ever touches the plate. But there’s no way I have enough to overturn a safe call here, so I’d also come back with stands. And for what it’s worth, it’s a totally fair safe call by Bellino too because he had every reason to believe the lead foot touched the plate.
Please remember that local broadcasters are approved and/or paid by the team. Telling the fans what they want to hear is far more important than objectivity. This is a far better "call stands" than the play last year that was upheld despite it being physically impossible for the runner's front leg to have touched home plate. The umpires also did a nice job of realizing that the play would be challenged. That has not always been the case.
This isnt entirely true. The Astros broadcast is constantly being fair praising both sides and calling out the Astros when they make mistakes. Even in this game the broadcasters were talking about how the Astros pitchers couldn't throw a strike.
Easy safe call in live action, in a world where sports do not exist to be adjudicated with 480 frames per second video in 4K resolution with optional TV zoom: The runner's foot beat the throw and tag to the plate by a wide margin.
In a world where replay exists to get every aspect of the game analyzed down to the atom: Inconclusive. It would not have surprised me if New York had overturned this, were it possible to tell definitively if the knee touched the flat plate before the tag. The foot sure looked up over the plate and not touching, and I've called my fair share of correct calls over the years that looked "blown" from the stands and dugouts for this exact reason. We've seen weirder overturns. Good....no, GREAT "call stands" from NY. If I still played, and I had magically developed the talent to play in a modern league advanced enough to have HD replay, I'd slide headfirst into the plate every time because it's easy to get your palm on the dish sliding at full bore, but a lot harder to get your heel down on it.
This is a great play to demonstrate how replay is killing the sport of baseball, not just in the Bigs, but at lower levels too. Instead of accepting that baseball is an imperfect game with imperfect rules & design played by imperfect humans and officiated by imperfect humans, we're arguing about a safe/out call where the runner was 18 inches past the front edge of the base before the tag even got there. That mentality trickles down to the lower levels all the way to Pony ball and below. This isn't what replay was supposed to be for: replay was supposed to ensure that the Gross Miss never goes uncorrected, like with Jim Joyce in Galarraga's imperfect game.
Your last sentence completely nails it
@@hatorihanzo92 Thank you for patiently waiting for the conclusion to my TED talk.
Absolutely agree with you. Great comment
Upon first view, it appeared to me the foot started coming up before reaching the corner of the plate, so I thought it should be overturned (just like the Rangers announcers). But with the benefit of looking again in slow motion at different angles, I have to agree with Lindsay: call stands.
It appears that, from the umpire's view, the lead foot hits the edge of the plate and pops up. The replay seems to show that. With no convincing evidence otherwise, the call stands. Good call.
Man I love hearing both broadcasting teams perspective. Blum and TK made it seem like the safe was obvious; that’s funny.
Looks like the heel was down and barely touched. Even if it didn’t it looked like his knee on his other leg still touched before the tag.
Rangers broadcast was more ridiculous…
The Rangers broadcast was being mad annoying and the Astros broadcast made it seem like it was an obvious safe. But the Astros broadcast was more bearable. The Rangers broadcast was acting like 5 year olds when they get their head stuck on an idea lmao
I'm an Astro fan. At full speed I thought he might have missed the plate. Several replay angles looked that way to me. But the angle looks like his heal caught the edge of the plate causing his leg to pop up. From that one angle I do not see conclusive evidence to overturn.
I think he was out, but you gotta go with stands
As the narrator said, his front foot hit the plate and popped up, SAFE! His foot doesn't have to stay in contact with the plate like it does on a slide at 2nd and 3rd. Ruling on the field stand, runner is safe!
Please cover the Semien slide from the next game!
like you said the front toe part of his shoe taps the corner of the plate and is subsequently knocked up and off the plate for the rest of the slide but I think he got in at the very beginning and its just a tap, but that counts
I agree with the call it hard to say if the he did actually touch the plate but it looks like the heel of the lead foot did come down before the tag
I don’t think he touched the plate. But that means call stands.
In real time he looked clearly safe. In slow motion it looks clearly like he missed the plate, but that's with microanalyzing, and other people will have very different opinions. That's a clear call stands and a good job all around by the umps and for once, the replay center did a good job.
Textbook Call Stands. In addition to your comment about the foot popping up possibly because of "catching" the plate, you also don't get a view with daylight under his heel as it drags through. I'm not convinced that it was touching, but there's not a view that conclusively shows it wasn't touching. Therefore, call stands.
Call stands for me. While I “think” the plate caused the foot to pop up, you just can’t tell 100% either way. I didn’t slow it down but it’s possible his knee on the trailing foot got the plate before the tag so if you look at that closely it naught become a Call Confirmed
Looks like the runner's foot popped up from hitting the edge of the plate. Also, it looks like the left knee may have gotten to the plate before the tag was applied.
I saw the heel hit the edge of the plate causing the foot to pop up. This happened before the tag so I say it should have been confirmed. He was safe.
I don't see anything conclusive to overturn either.
To me at 1:59 it looks like his toe bounce off the black part of home plate. Everyone is looking just at the white part. All of it counts as the plate.
As an Astros fan…Tuckers foot obviously bounced up. The question would be if the bounce was caused by striking the outside edge of plate, which cannot be seen from any camera angel. The umpire had the best view and called safe so the call would stand. Getting upset at that call is ludicrous.
My first impression was his lead foot bounced off the edge of the plate, but the video needed to be closer to confirm.
I have to assume the cleat popped up because it hit the plate, there's no video evidence seen here to overturn that assumption.
The call should stand. It is hard to tell whether the foot touched the base or not, so even by the letter of the law the call is questionable either way. However, by the spirit of the law, he clearly had his foot over the plate long before he was tagged.
I think he's out, but I'm ok with the call standing. That angle from the outfield camera, I'm about 99.9% sure his foot bounces before and never makes contact with the plate and he is tagged on the knee before it can slide over the plate.
If you stop the video at 1:59 you can see the foot make contact with home plate.
Yah, what are people looking at, to me this one just seems so easy.
I'd be forced to rule it inconclusive. I cannot see him missing home plate in the frames where it is absolutely possible the PU saw him touching it. This should never be overturned. That does not mean it's definitively correct (or incorrect either) - it's simply indisputable given the available video. We should assume the MLB umpire made the correct call, as they do in 90-99% of these ultra-tricky situations, which is impressive.
How can anyone get upset? Textbook call stands play.
To me, it looks like the foot did come up and did not make contact with the plate BUT it's unclear whether the runner's knee slid over the plate before the catcher's tag was applied to the same knee. Therefore, I have "call stands". If the catcher's tag clearly occurred before the knee crossed the plate, I would have had an out here
Foot gets lifted by the black edge of the plate. If it counts as plate then call on field is correct
From the one angle it looks like foot never touched but not enough evidence. Call on field is confirmed runner is safe.
Call stands; not confirmed. As you said, there is not enough evidence to confirm.
Looks like his foot missed the plate, but call stands is the correct call. There's no conclusive shot to prove it one way or the other.
I am a big believer in the thought that if the Umpire is in the correct position (as he was here) then it should take unrefutable evidence to overturn. Stands is the correct call.
This is the Sid Bream slide from the Bonds' throw home ...
I think u just got to trust the umpire with the call like u said the had the perfect view that we just won't get during a replay. Unless we can get cameras on the umpires head that's the right call
The call on the field stands. It seems the foot touches the plate, but I can't be sure. That's the solely definition of not being able to a definite conclusion.
Super informed and awesome analysis, as always. Cheers!
It is not conclusive and it does look like the foot popped up because it hit the plate.
this is a case of the PU having a better view than any of the replay angles. Either way he could have called it would have come back as "call stands" as there's not enough conclusive evidence to overturn.
0:26 when foot clearly hits the ground for first time abd it pop up well before the plate
Good segment. There's a lot to see and think about with this play. The fact that you are neutral and not in favor of either team winning makes your point of making this segment perfect. I personally think poorly and inconsistently called balls and strikes effect the outcome of games to a far greater degree than plays like this do. All these new rules this year in baseball and yet the most egregious of all the problems, consistent and accurate called strikes and balls from behind the plate, still persists. Sorry Blue, ya'll gotta go. Everyone uses their phone for everything from : controlling your lights, alarm, thermostat, music, security cameras, blinds/window coverings...the list goes on and on. It's time to lean on the crutch, that is the lazy convenience of technology, for automated pitch calling assistance too. Can't wait to download the new silverware app so I can eat with my phone too. Woo hoo!!
Technology is great except when it does work. As inaccurate as human umpires calling balls/strikes may be (and believe me, the less experienced umpires are far worse than what you see in the majors) at least the human isn't just going to up and stop working like we've seen happen with the stupid tv box at least a handful of times in the middle of a game. Lean on technology all you want but I wouldn't trust my life to a machine. I've seen younger (not graded) umpires call pitches at kids' head strikes, consistency and accuracy come with time but even then, humans won't be perfect. Sure we could have the computer help with calling balls and strike (challenge system anyone?) but even the current pitch tracking tech has inaccuracies hence the margin of error so I don't see the human umps going anywhere soon.
@@ericwildfong Yeah I agree about tech. Technology is never going to be perfect. But we are already dealing with imperfection as it is now. At the very least, automated calls on balls and strikes won't have personal vendettas, payback and grudges that certain umps have against certain players, teams and situational ego power trip calls by umps that are prevalent in the game. Invariably, certain situations seem to call for predictably subjective and inaccurate calls just because umps aren't held accountable for inaccuracies and the age old line of bs, "It's just part of the game." Home team calls and a more forgiving strike zone for pitchers when throwing pitches on a 3-0 count to name just a few. Nothing will ever be perfect for sure. But the amount of money made by the league, it's owners and the players should provide plenty of funds to pay for a system that is more consistent and less prone to subjectivity and intentional ego power trip calls. We lean on tech for almost everything under the sun now. Why not baseball?
@@Chubbydippin We're dealing with inaccuracies because humans are bound to make mistakes, its the nature of being human. I can't speak for the MLB umps (or other umps in general) but when I was doing it, I was far from perfect but I tried my best to be fair, and consistent. It took me at least a couple years to become really consistent and all the while I had coaches barking at me about it. And that was without any sort of internal grading system either. But lets suppose we go with your solution and implement a 100% automated ball/strike system (think trackman but more accurate). How do you propose to handle A) when the system just stops working for seemingly no reason (like when the tv box disappears), and B) the fact the zone is 3d? A lot of the tracking tech that exists right now I believe only captures the ball at the front of the zone, and doesn't consider the 3d zone correctly. I'm not saying don't lean on tech for baseball, just maybe a 100% automated ball/strike system isn't the greatest idea.
Drop the Marcus semien video
His foot popped up because it hit something, the only thing there to hit was home plate. Regardless, per the rule, call on the field stands is the correct call. The Arlington Rangers broadcast should be ashamed of that homerism
This wasn't a challenge. This review was immediately initiated by the umpiring crew.
As an aside though the rules regarding challenges need to be tightened. Because the rules say you only get to lose one challenge and then you can't challenge anymore. And they also say that you cannot challenge after the 6th inning. But they allow umpires to review any play at their discretion regardless of whether they independently initiate the review or a review was requested by a team that has no ability to challenge under the rules. And in practice this makes the limitations on the ability to challenge non existent, because umpires literally always agree to review a play when requested.
In general even if you don't like the call from the umpire just accept it and move on.